New topic
PrintableCloudbuster said: As DavidEye has said on another thread "If Michael is guilty of commiting crimes, then prove it and lock him up."
He's a free man. However, if it turns out that MJ is indeed a paedophile then I'll be the first to say that I got it wrong. Until then I'll believe he's innocent. Well all that exists so far is the fact that $26m was paid to make allegations go away, that points to a guilty man more than an innocent man in my eyes. No chance of any guilt ever being legally proven or help being sought by a near certifiably insane, rich superstar who stays within his own compound surrounded by "yes men", so just keep the blind faith I guess.  | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Marrk said: Essence said: Cloudbuster said: The basic fact is this: If Michael had been found guilty then he would've gone to prison. Settlement or no settlement. Which is why (and I repeat) the criminal investigation was persued beyond the settlement. And they found NOTHING.
Clearly i consider myself a fan of Michael Jackson. You consider yourself a fan of a paedophile. [This message was edited Sun Feb 9 11:31:25 PST 2003 by Cloudbuster] I consider myself a "fan" in the casual, musical sense of following a paedophile's music. You seem a literal "fan" as in fanatical blinded to any and everything remotely implying "The King Of Pop's" failings. your statement is plainly ridiculous not to mention false, slanderous and bang out of order. No, I gave a personal evaluation of my feelings towards MJ, never once did I claim these feelings as universal fact. As such my statement is plainly non-ridiculous, not to mention true, non-slanderous and well in order. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: No, I gave a personal evaluation of my feelings towards MJ, never once did I claim these feelings as universal fact. As such my statement is plainly non-ridiculous, not to mention true, non-slanderous and well in order.
So how can you consider a personal evaluation true and non-slanderous in the face of a lack of "universal fact", as you so put it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Cloudbuster said: Essence said: No, I gave a personal evaluation of my feelings towards MJ, never once did I claim these feelings as universal fact. As such my statement is plainly non-ridiculous, not to mention true, non-slanderous and well in order.
So how can you consider a personal evaluation true and non-slanderous in the face of a lack of "universal fact", as you so put it. You misunderstand, it's simply "true" that I made the statement and thus could never be displayed as false. "Cloudbuster, Papaa and Marrk are fanatically defensive regarding Michael Jackson" speaks of universal fact rather than personal opinion. "I consider Cloudbuster, Papaa and Markk to be fantically defensive..." would just another opinion from little old me. This all said I'd love to be sued on slander charges by MJ. Would be so much fun raking over all the case like on this thread here. That said I'm not arrogant enough to talk up my opinion as fact. This thread is simply the other side to GQ's version of events, right from the official source... Jordan himself. No emotional "FUCK THE MEDIA! MJ IS THE KING! LEAVE HIM ALONE! EVERYONE IS AGAINST HIM! HE'S JUST THE SLIGHTLY ECCENTRIC, CHARMING PETER PAN OF POP! JORDY CHANDLER WILL BURN IN HELL!" rhetoric. I've seen people on this very board cuss out a 13 year old boy who was bribed with $26m to stop child abuse claims. He's also received death threats etc etc. Surely his voice deserves to be heard in terms of fair debate, albeit by contract literally silenced now. Impartiality should always be offered up even when it regards your precious "King Of Pop". | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. "It's better 2 B hated 4 what U R than 2 B loved 4 what U R not."
My IQ is 139, what's yours? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: The GQ article critiqued the court statement yet it still stood and in effect was worth $26m in settlement fees.
If I chose to accuse MJ of abuse when I was a child, I'd be laughed out of court because it would be false and have no foundation. This is because Jordy Chandler was able to describe Michael Jackson's naked body down to intimate details, was he? truly? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: The GQ article critiqued the court statement yet it still stood and in effect was worth $26m in settlement fees.
If I chose to accuse MJ of abuse when I was a child, I'd be laughed out of court because it would be false and have no foundation. This is because Jordy Chandler was able to describe Michael Jackson's naked body down to intimate details, was he? truly? Yes right down to variations in skin shade. Don't forget Jordan accounts the first time they were naked together in the bath following their sexual contact in the darkness of bed. It is generally accepted it's hardcore evidence like this which led to the quick massive payoff for "silence" instead of have it all played out in court. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: The GQ article critiqued the court statement yet it still stood and in effect was worth $26m in settlement fees.
If I chose to accuse MJ of abuse when I was a child, I'd be laughed out of court because it would be false and have no foundation. This is because Jordy Chandler was able to describe Michael Jackson's naked body down to intimate details, was he? truly? Yes right down to variations in skin shade. Oh right. You were there were you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: The GQ article critiqued the court statement yet it still stood and in effect was worth $26m in settlement fees.
If I chose to accuse MJ of abuse when I was a child, I'd be laughed out of court because it would be false and have no foundation. This is because Jordy Chandler was able to describe Michael Jackson's naked body down to intimate details, was he? truly? Yes right down to variations in skin shade. Don't forget Jordan accounts the first time they were naked together in the bath following their sexual contact in the darkness of bed. It is generally accepted it's hardcore evidence like this which led to the quick massive payoff for "silence" instead of have it all played out in court. Right, but we have no corroboration that Chandler's descriptions are accurate. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Cloudbuster said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: The GQ article critiqued the court statement yet it still stood and in effect was worth $26m in settlement fees.
If I chose to accuse MJ of abuse when I was a child, I'd be laughed out of court because it would be false and have no foundation. This is because Jordy Chandler was able to describe Michael Jackson's naked body down to intimate details, was he? truly? Yes right down to variations in skin shade. Oh right. You were there were you. You still haven't offered up real evidence why Jordan's allegations were worth a freakishly large $26m while I've offered up all the available info as to why I believe them so. I personally supsect Jackson's sexual behaviour to be criminal, with a lot of suspicious conjecture at least to back it up, he may of course be innocent. Guilt seems inonceicvable to many here due pigheadedness over his stardom so I assume you were there to be so damned certain this was just an amazingly orchestrated design on MJ's millions. No impartiality being offered at all just word for word reciting of the Neverland Hall of Fame GQ article. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. The amazing case of the surefire innocent man who out of kindness hooked the false claimant up with $26m? He truly is a wonderful human being. If Chandler had zero evidence to even garner a criminal trial don't you think his bargaining space would be limited? A busfare home and a packet of candy would be maximum offering from Jackson's top lawyers. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. The amazing case of the surefire innocent man who out of kindness hooked the false claimant up with $26m? He truly is a wonderful human being. If Chandler had zero evidence to even garner a criminal trial don't you think his bargaining space would be limited? A busfare home and a packet of candy would be maximum offering from Jackson's top lawyers. not really. Chandler had already proven that he could ruin Michael Jackson's career and child abuse is nearly impossible to defend oneself against. i have some somewhat insider knowledge that the Chandler legal team was about to say that Michael had "done something on" the boy though there was no evidence of it nor was it mentioned in Jordan's description of what happened to him. that's when Jackson settled. it was too disgusting and really sinking the whole thing to a new level of the circus that it already was. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I agree no one really knows if MJ is guilty or not. And of course all points of view should b brought in2 the discussion. Unfortunately, u will have to admit the GQ story is about the only article in the media that focused on MJ's side of the storty. I agree the pay-off looks bad, but as i xplained (and u agreed), there also r two sides to that also.
Anyway, as u said, without the testimony of the boy, there wasn't anything left of the charges (even after very xtensive investigation). Every person is different of course, but with a 'standard' paedophile, there would've been other evidence. Most people would agree that one shouldn't b locked away only bcause of one testimony. Moreover this testimony has been 'tested' (the investigation of mj's body), and no confirmation for it was found (no arrestation, not even charges). If u read the GQ article, u'll c the father had different motives 4 his actions (custody of the child, money). If u look at the outcome of the investigations, u'll c that, even with Chandler's testimony, a conviction would've been very unlikely. And i think the correct conclusion of this all is that OR a) MJ is guilty, and got away with it bcause he payed is way out of it OR b) MJ is not guilty, but was blackmailed, was convicted by the media and the rest of the world in an issue that 4 him has always been the most important, the wellbeeing of children. i admit that we cannot rule out option a), but from what we know option b) is much more likely to be true, and i there4 think the guy deserves some sympathy 4 what he has been thru. "It's better 2 B hated 4 what U R than 2 B loved 4 what U R not."
My IQ is 139, what's yours? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. The amazing case of the surefire innocent man who out of kindness hooked the false claimant up with $26m? He truly is a wonderful human being. If Chandler had zero evidence to even garner a criminal trial don't you think his bargaining space would be limited? A busfare home and a packet of candy would be maximum offering from Jackson's top lawyers. not really. Chandler had already proven that he could ruin Michael Jackson's career and child abuse is nearly impossible to defend oneself against. i have some somewhat insider knowledge that the Chandler legal team was about to say that Michael had "done something on" the boy though there was no evidence of it nor was it mentioned in Jordan's description of what happened to him. that's when Jackson settled. it was too disgusting and really sinking the whole thing to a new level of the circus that it already was. I understand your point of view but again if child abuse is hard to defend, Jackson doesn't want a criminal case and Chandler was a false claimant why doesn't every boy who ever met MJ step up and claim their $26m? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
SpcMs said: I agree no one really knows if MJ is guilty or not. And of course all points of view should b brought in2 the discussion. Unfortunately, u will have to admit the GQ story is about the only article in the media that focused on MJ's side of the storty. I agree the pay-off looks bad, but as i xplained (and u agreed), there also r two sides to that also.
Anyway, as u said, without the testimony of the boy, there wasn't anything left of the charges (even after very xtensive investigation). Every person is different of course, but with a 'standard' paedophile, there would've been other evidence. Most people would agree that one shouldn't b locked away only bcause of one testimony. Moreover this testimony has been 'tested' (the investigation of mj's body), and no confirmation for it was found (no arrestation, not even charges). If u read the GQ article, u'll c the father had different motives 4 his actions (custody of the child, money). If u look at the outcome of the investigations, u'll c that, even with Chandler's testimony, a conviction would've been very unlikely. And i think the correct conclusion of this all is that OR a) MJ is guilty, and got away with it bcause he payed is way out of it OR b) MJ is not guilty, but was blackmailed, was convicted by the media and the rest of the world in an issue that 4 him has always been the most important, the wellbeeing of children. i admit that we cannot rule out option a), but from what we know option b) is much more likely to be true, and i there4 think the guy deserves some sympathy 4 what he has been thru. First of all of course it's a good thing MJ's side was argued in the GQ article, for objectivities sake if nothing else. It shouldn't however be taken as the sole gospel truth on the whole incident. 
He doesn't fit the typical "Paedophile" stereotype because he has the support net to buy silence and close his dealings off from the outside world perhaps? Also I'm sure Chandler's father may be a cunning, evil man but that doesn't win you $26m per se, has to be something special in his son's evidence. A less less globally-important, inconsequential showbiz version of the West Vs Iraq if you will, Sadamm Hussein is hard to defend as a human being yet is war on Iraq by virtue the right thing? I love the non-conformist and will always root for the unjustly opressed yet consider him questionable in this respect. For all my suspicions on his being criminal I would never downplay the damage he has suffered through childhood and a surreal career. Would rather hope he seeks help to deal with his issues regarding young boys instead of throwing money at every problem... [This message was edited Sun Feb 9 14:20:18 PST 2003 by Essence] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. The amazing case of the surefire innocent man who out of kindness hooked the false claimant up with $26m? He truly is a wonderful human being. If Chandler had zero evidence to even garner a criminal trial don't you think his bargaining space would be limited? A busfare home and a packet of candy would be maximum offering from Jackson's top lawyers. not really. Chandler had already proven that he could ruin Michael Jackson's career and child abuse is nearly impossible to defend oneself against. i have some somewhat insider knowledge that the Chandler legal team was about to say that Michael had "done something on" the boy though there was no evidence of it nor was it mentioned in Jordan's description of what happened to him. that's when Jackson settled. it was too disgusting and really sinking the whole thing to a new level of the circus that it already was. I understand your point of view but again if child abuse is hard to defend, Jackson doesn't want a criminal case and Chandler was a false claimant why doesn't every boy who ever met MJ step up and claim their $26m? Jordan Chandler didn't want to either. His father pressured/brainwashed him into it for extortion purposes. MJ is incredibly lucky that this is the only parent to try to take advantage of him in this way. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. The amazing case of the surefire innocent man who out of kindness hooked the false claimant up with $26m? He truly is a wonderful human being. If Chandler had zero evidence to even garner a criminal trial don't you think his bargaining space would be limited? A busfare home and a packet of candy would be maximum offering from Jackson's top lawyers. not really. Chandler had already proven that he could ruin Michael Jackson's career and child abuse is nearly impossible to defend oneself against. i have some somewhat insider knowledge that the Chandler legal team was about to say that Michael had "done something on" the boy though there was no evidence of it nor was it mentioned in Jordan's description of what happened to him. that's when Jackson settled. it was too disgusting and really sinking the whole thing to a new level of the circus that it already was. I understand your point of view but again if child abuse is hard to defend, Jackson doesn't want a criminal case and Chandler was a false claimant why doesn't every boy who ever met MJ step up and claim their $26m? Jordan Chandler didn't want to either. His father pressured/brainwashed him into it for extortion purposes. MJ is incredibly lucky that this is the only parent to try to take advantage of him in this way. Come on now, a multi-millionaire superstar will laugh away every type of claim from paternity (Billy Jean) to child abuse every week if not everyday. There is evidence unique to the Chandler case which made it necessary for a gigantic payoff. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence said: SpcMs said: I agree no one really knows if MJ is guilty or not. And of course all points of view should b brought in2 the discussion. Unfortunately, u will have to admit the GQ story is about the only article in the media that focused on MJ's side of the storty. I agree the pay-off looks bad, but as i xplained (and u agreed), there also r two sides to that also.
Anyway, as u said, without the testimony of the boy, there wasn't anything left of the charges (even after very xtensive investigation). Every person is different of course, but with a 'standard' paedophile, there would've been other evidence. Most people would agree that one shouldn't b locked away only bcause of one testimony. Moreover this testimony has been 'tested' (the investigation of mj's body), and no confirmation for it was found (no arrestation, not even charges). If u read the GQ article, u'll c the father had different motives 4 his actions (custody of the child, money). If u look at the outcome of the investigations, u'll c that, even with Chandler's testimony, a conviction would've been very unlikely. And i think the correct conclusion of this all is that OR a) MJ is guilty, and got away with it bcause he payed is way out of it OR b) MJ is not guilty, but was blackmailed, was convicted by the media and the rest of the world in an issue that 4 him has always been the most important, the wellbeeing of children. i admit that we cannot rule out option a), but from what we know option b) is much more likely to be true, and i there4 think the guy deserves some sympathy 4 what he has been thru. First of all of course it's a good thing MJ's side was argued in the GQ article, for objectivities sake if nothing else. It shouldn't however be taken as the sole gospel truth on the whole incident.
He doesn't fit the typical "Paedophile" stereotype because he has the support net to buy silence and close his dealings off from the outside world perhaps? Also I'm sure Chandler's father may be a cunning, evil man but that doesn't win you $26m per se, has to be something special in his son's evidence. A less less globally-important, inconsequential showbiz version of the West Vs Iraq if you will, Sadamm Hussein is hard to defend as a human being yet is war on Iraq by virtue the right thing? I love the non-conformist and will always root for the unjustly opressed yet consider him questionable in this respect. For all my suspicions on his being criminal I would never downplay the damage he has suffered through childhood and a surreal career. Would rather hope he seeks help to deal with his issues regarding young boys instead of throwing money at every problem... [This message was edited Sun Feb 9 14:20:18 PST 2003 by Essence] I missed one point, you said he was tried and convicted by the public and media. I would argue the dirt hasn't really stuck all that much, he still get's the big video premieres and respect when a new album drops. Gary Glitter (Convicted of downloading child porn) in contrast is a demonised outcast moving from country to country on the run... the difference between an out of court settlement ("Chandler was all about the money! MJ is innocent!") and a criminal conviction is massive. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
All the above said it has been a welcome irony to find the greatest objectivity from the poster with a Michael Jackson avatar.
Whichever way we may personally lean on the matter and for whatever reasons, this whole topic is a massive grey area and nobody (Including GQ) knows for certain either way, certainly not enough to proclaim innocence. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Essence stop letting your imagination run away with you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
deeplove said: Essence stop letting your imagination run away with you.
Quantify your statement... show evidence of where I spoke in imaginative statement rather than opinion and fact. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
None of it is fact tho its all bull...no-one believes this lame shit!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
deeplove said: None of it is fact tho its all bull...no-one believes this lame shit!!!
Ahhh so enlightening are the words. Thanks for stopping by with this oh so well considered insight into "The $26m Jordan Chandler settlement". 
Shame you weren't MJ's lawyer, you would have saved him $26m. Little Jordy would be laughed away, head bowed in shame... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. The amazing case of the surefire innocent man who out of kindness hooked the false claimant up with $26m? He truly is a wonderful human being. If Chandler had zero evidence to even garner a criminal trial don't you think his bargaining space would be limited? A busfare home and a packet of candy would be maximum offering from Jackson's top lawyers. not really. Chandler had already proven that he could ruin Michael Jackson's career and child abuse is nearly impossible to defend oneself against. i have some somewhat insider knowledge that the Chandler legal team was about to say that Michael had "done something on" the boy though there was no evidence of it nor was it mentioned in Jordan's description of what happened to him. that's when Jackson settled. it was too disgusting and really sinking the whole thing to a new level of the circus that it already was. I understand your point of view but again if child abuse is hard to defend, Jackson doesn't want a criminal case and Chandler was a false claimant why doesn't every boy who ever met MJ step up and claim their $26m? Jordan Chandler didn't want to either. His father pressured/brainwashed him into it for extortion purposes. MJ is incredibly lucky that this is the only parent to try to take advantage of him in this way. Come on now, a multi-millionaire superstar will laugh away every type of claim from paternity (Billy Jean) to child abuse every week if not everyday. There is evidence unique to the Chandler case which made it necessary for a gigantic payoff. the case itself was unique to Jackson, this you fail to realise or recognise.One boys version of events only. For all you know Chandler could have burst into MJ's bathroom or spied through the keyhole to get a look at his dick.  |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Marrk said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: AaronUnlimited said: Essence said: SpcMs said: Essence, as u xplained many eployees said other boys were payed off, many children confirmed they slept with MJ in the same bed or room and MJ would never survive jail time, probably not even a full trial in2 his personal life. Now ask urself these questions:
when so many employees wanted 2 testify on national television for a big check, why was none of them willing to testify in court? when so many children confirmed they slept with Jackson, why haven't there been any other charges? and why do they still defend hem 2 this day? Mj wouldn't b able 2 cope with a full trial, and he saw a secure way out by paying off the family, hardly an admission of guilt, more of weakness since the boy's description was so accurate, and they did a full body investigation of MJ, wouldn't u say that, if it even came close, he would 've been arrested on the spot? although the civil suit was settled out of court, the criminal investigation carried on 4 over a year, including unexpected house searches. What r the chances that u r a pedophile who abuses boys, and there is not one indication of u'r sexual interest in children in your house? if u'r children were abused, would u settle? add this to all the information in the GQ article, and than tell me u still think it is more likely that he actually did it. While I appreciate your calmer demeanour, you'll find that that I've answered most of these points in the above discussions and concluded that I was simply offering the other side of the tale to a stubborn set of "MJ is innocent and beyond reproach while Jordan Chandler is the devil!" opinions. I believe that essentially humans look out for number one, and legal altruism falls by the wayside in the face of self profit, especially when an amount of money so large is offered to personally achieve a life change. That applies for employees, the allegedly abused victims and their families. If my children had been abused, $26m and an assurance no further abuse could ever happen again (i.e. in this case no more sleepovers at Neverland) would surely be tempting. I would have done my upmost to of made sure the abuse didn't happen in the first place of course (i.e. no sleepovers at Neverland. haha). Again I ask why did Jackson pay such a massive amount to this one boy when totally innocent and not attract any similar "fake" cases? There'd be a massive line of greedy claimants (Most/all of whom would obviously be false) wanting their multi-million payoff... What unique powerful claim did Jordan Chandler have above all the ridiculous accusations superstars face (Above the evidence many of you refute)? but if he did it, why no criminal charges? and no one is making Jordan Chandler out to be the devil. just his father and lawyer. No criminal charges because there's no longer a willing witness/victim once silence has been bought. Would be a tricky case to gain a conviction on. trickier still because they dug and dug and dug and turned up with nothing of their own. and Chandler didn't want a criminal trial because, in all likelihood, he'd have never made it to a civil trial because Jackson would've been vindicated. The amazing case of the surefire innocent man who out of kindness hooked the false claimant up with $26m? He truly is a wonderful human being. If Chandler had zero evidence to even garner a criminal trial don't you think his bargaining space would be limited? A busfare home and a packet of candy would be maximum offering from Jackson's top lawyers. not really. Chandler had already proven that he could ruin Michael Jackson's career and child abuse is nearly impossible to defend oneself against. i have some somewhat insider knowledge that the Chandler legal team was about to say that Michael had "done something on" the boy though there was no evidence of it nor was it mentioned in Jordan's description of what happened to him. that's when Jackson settled. it was too disgusting and really sinking the whole thing to a new level of the circus that it already was. I understand your point of view but again if child abuse is hard to defend, Jackson doesn't want a criminal case and Chandler was a false claimant why doesn't every boy who ever met MJ step up and claim their $26m? Jordan Chandler didn't want to either. His father pressured/brainwashed him into it for extortion purposes. MJ is incredibly lucky that this is the only parent to try to take advantage of him in this way. Come on now, a multi-millionaire superstar will laugh away every type of claim from paternity (Billy Jean) to child abuse every week if not everyday. There is evidence unique to the Chandler case which made it necessary for a gigantic payoff. the case itself was unique to Jackson, this you fail to realise or recognise.One boys version of events only. For all you know Chandler could have burst into MJ's bathroom or spied through the keyhole to get a look at his dick. For all you know, he may of seen MJ's dick in a less innocent scenario, when they bathed together.
It's all clear now though, Jordy is the only boy to ever have peeked through the bathroom keyhole and noted MJ's genital descriptions, hence he got a nice $26m for his troubles. Their bedtime encounters were all "charming" with cocoa and cookies for all.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |