MichaelJackson5 said:

Goddess4Real said:

Wow in my class today the lecturer used that very example you have described as an argument often used by the prosecution in date rape cases, when defending their clients or the recent census debacle where the site was shut down due to the hackers....and one of the commentators used that example to highlight the government's incompetance.

[Edited 8/10/16 18:59pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 19:01pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 19:06pm]

The Gavin Arvizzo case is cut and dry for me with regards to MJ's innocence. The Chandler case is not because $20 million is a huge sum of money to settle, even today, let along 23 years ago.

That amount of money is enough to live comfortably for 4-5 lifetimes. The settlement was a dumb decision by MJ and Johnny Cochrane. They should have fought it out in a civil court. But nobody's ever going to know the truth except Jordy himself and possibly June.

I totally agree with you about the settlement being a huge mistake.....and on face value I too would have said f*ck you I will fight this is court, and IMO the 2005 trial would have never happened and MJ would still be here. However, not everything is black and white when it comes to the the US justice system, and the behind the scenes jostling of family, friends, business associates, sponsors, record labels and lawyers which all played a role in his decision to settle. Both families were GRIFTERS who took advantage of MJ's Anne Frank view of the world (that everyone is good at heart especially children).....and that is MJ's biggest flaw, he never developed a good bullshit detector and was subborn, and thus learnt the hard way that when come to $$$$$$$ people will kill, lie, steal and cheat for it. The only difference between the Chanliers and the Arvizo's are their approaches and the change in the law which meant criminal trial before a civil one! http://www.allforloveblog.com/?cat=20

[Edited 8/10/16 20:30pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 20:39pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 20:41pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 20:42pm]

Goddess4Real said:

MichaelJackson5 said:

The Gavin Arvizzo case is cut and dry for me with regards to MJ's innocence. The Chandler case is not because $20 million is a huge sum of money to settle, even today, let along 23 years ago.

That amount of money is enough to live comfortably for 4-5 lifetimes. The settlement was a dumb decision by MJ and Johnny Cochrane. They should have fought it out in a civil court. But nobody's ever going to know the truth except Jordy himself and possibly June.

I totally agree with you about the settlement being a huge mistake.....and on face value I too would have said f*ck you I will fight this is court, and IMO the 2005 trial would have never happened and MJ would still be here. However, not everything is black and white when it comes to the the US justice system, and the behind the scenes jostling of family, friends, business associates, sponsors, record labels and lawyers which all played a role in his decision to settle. Both families were GRIFTERS who took advantage of MJ's Anne Frank view of the world (that everyone is good at heart especially children).....and that is MJ's biggest flaw, he never developed a good bullshit detector and was subborn, and thus learnt the hard way that when come to $$$$$$$ people will kill, lie, steal and cheat for it. The only difference between the Chanliers and the Arvizo's are their approaches and the change in the law which meant criminal trial before a civil one! http://www.allforloveblog.com/?cat=20

[Edited 8/10/16 20:30pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 20:39pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 20:41pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 20:42pm]

The Chandler case should have gone to the civil courts. MJ's reputation and future as a major recording superstar in America was in jeopardy here. Ultimately, the choice to settle was up to one person: MJ. And there are detractors or former fans who will never forget how he handled the 93 allegations.

You'd think after that, MJ would have stayed the hell away from sleeping with kids. But he insisted on continuing his lifestyle which ultimately lead to the Arvizzo trial. He even told Ed Bradley on 60 Minutes before the Arvizzo trial that he saw nothing wrong with an adult man in his 40s sleeping with little kids. He said the same thing to Bashir which is what brough about the 2005 trial to begin with.

If this was a neighbor down the street having kids over to sleep, you know we'd all notify the authorities cause it's abnormal behavior. The only reason most fans accept it is because he's MJ. But being a celebrity doesn't put you above the law or the boundaries of acceptable social behavior.

Another thing is that MJ has never been in a real relationship with a woman. MJ turned down Brooke Shields, Tatum O' Neal, Maureen McCormick; he could have had Sheryl Crow if he wanted during the Bad tour. Prince would have humped the brains out of those chicks.

MJ turned down Brooke Shields, Tatum O' Neal, Maureen McCormick; he could have had Sheryl Crow if he wanted during the Bad tour. Prince would have humped the brains out of those chicks.

Oh hell no now you have gone too far Prince had better taste than those women; from Sheila E to Kim Bassinger to Nona Gaye and the OG Vanity of course IMO we may all have our differences of opinion etc but Prince had better taste in women than any other rock star's wives or girlfriends........that is a fact!

Women on the Power of Prince http://nymag.com/thecut/2...rince.html

.

[Edited 8/10/16 22:23pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 22:27pm]

^ LOLThats because its not a real MJ fan ... but I do agree Prince had better taste in women.

mjscarousal said:

I do agree Prince had better taste in women.

Of course Prince had better taste in women.......even 2 members of Motley Crue dated his exe's because they had been with him hello! And those are the ones we know about and for people here who are thinking Vanity??? what heck is pic of her doing on this thread? Does everything have to be about her?? Well she attended the premiere of Thriller in 1983 with Eddie Murphy and here is a pic

[Edited 8/10/16 23:39pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 23:46pm]

[Edited 8/10/16 23:47pm]

[Edited 8/11/16 0:20am]

Another thing is that MJ has never been in a real relationship with a woman.

Try telling that to Shana Mangatal who is releasing a book on MJ's B'day called "Michael & Me" apparently its the greatest story since Romeo & Juliet https://twitter.com/ImSha...th_replies IMO her book should be in the FICTION section. It must be true after all she has soap, caps and watches from Neverland and Shaq will vouch for her

[Edited 8/11/16 0:15am]

Goddess4Real said:

Another thing is that MJ has never been in a real relationship with a woman.

Try telling that to Shana Mangatal who is releasing a book on MJ's B'day called "Michael & Me" apparently its the greatest story since Romeo & Juliet https://twitter.com/ImSha...th_replies IMO her book should be in the FICTION section. It must be true after all she has soap, caps and watches from Neverland and Shaq will vouch for her

[Edited 8/11/16 0:15am]

MJ has a lot of nutty fans all over the world and on the internet so this woman doesn't surprise me.

There is a thread about Shana Mantangle or what ever the hell her bizarre ass name is, and the opinions there are that she is just another deluded groupie clutching at something she didn't have. She claims that her and Michael were pretty much a married couple and he loved her for years.

.

Needless to say I am sure we are all weary of every other odd person who enncountered Michael saying they are doing a book. The amount of hack journalism and literary pablum written about Michael since his death could fill a Library.

Adorecream said:

MichaelJackson5 said:

Goddess4Real said:

Try telling that to Shana Mangatal who is releasing a book on MJ's B'day called "Michael & Me" apparently its the greatest story since Romeo & Juliet https://twitter.com/ImSha...th_replies IMO her book should be in the FICTION section. It must be true after all she has soap, caps and watches from Neverland and Shaq will vouch for her

[Edited 8/11/16 0:15am]

MJ has a lot of nutty fans all over the world and on the internet so this woman doesn't surprise me.

Right up there with the Prince "Penguin" story.

Adorecream said:

There is a thread about Shana Mantangle or what ever the hell her bizarre ass name is, and the opinions there are that she is just another deluded groupie clutching at something she didn't have. She claims that her and Michael were pretty much a married couple and he loved her for years.

.

Needless to say I am sure we are all weary of every other odd person who enncountered Michael saying they are doing a book. The amount of hack journalism and literary pablum written about Michael since his death could fill a Library.

I remember reading claims after MJ passed that his "real" relationship was with his children's nanny who was with them for years... Wasn't her name Grace? Wonder if she ever wrote a book...

MichaelJackson5 said:

purplethunder3121 said:

ML2016 said:

purplethunder3121 said:

I remember reading claims after MJ passed that his "real" relationship was with his children's nanny who was with them for years... Wasn't her name Grace? Wonder if she ever wrote a book...

Nope. Grace had a huge crush on him but MJ wasn't interested. MJ just wasn't interested in women. Lisa Marie has talked about how he loved her and how their, err, romance was a great love story. She says that because that is what she wants to believe in. It's all in her head. If MJ really loved her- or had any interest in her at all- he would not disappear for 6 weeks during the marriage. And if they indeed had sex, it was like a teacher and student thing, Lisa being the teacher, MJ being the lost boy learning about adults.

J. Randy Taraborelli is probably right when he claimed MJ was asexual. The dude has no feelings for women. He loved hanging out with little kids and having them in his bed though. I think his development was arrested around the age of 10. He was truly a man-child, forever caught in his so-called lost childhood.

ML2016 said:

MichaelJackson5 said:

The Chandler case should have gone to the civil courts. MJ's reputation and future as a major recording superstar in America was in jeopardy here. Ultimately, the choice to settle was up to one person: MJ. And there are detractors or former fans who will never forget how he handled the 93 allegations.

You'd think after that, MJ would have stayed the hell away from sleeping with kids. But he insisted on continuing his lifestyle which ultimately lead to the Arvizzo trial. He even told Ed Bradley on 60 Minutes before the Arvizzo trial that he saw nothing wrong with an adult man in his 40s sleeping with little kids. He said the same thing to Bashir which is what brough about the 2005 trial to begin with.

If this was a neighbor down the street having kids over to sleep, you know we'd all notify the authorities cause it's abnormal behavior. The only reason most fans accept it is because he's MJ. But being a celebrity doesn't put you above the law or the boundaries of acceptable social behavior.

Another thing is that MJ has never been in a real relationship with a woman. MJ turned down Brooke Shields, Tatum O' Neal, Maureen McCormick; he could have had Sheryl Crow if he wanted during the Bad tour. Prince would have humped the brains out of those chicks.

You claim June knows thw truth about the 93 allegations. I doubt it. She hasn't spoken to her son since she lost custody of him, something to which she admitted in her testimony. I don't believe MJ did anything to Jordy for six reasons: 1. There were 3 witnesses ready to testify during the trial claiming Jordy told them nothing happened. 2. MJ could have paid off the Chandlers WAY before the case was made public. Evan had asked him for money and movie scripts to keep shut numerous times. MJ didn't concede. 3. Evan was constantly badgering MJ for money, demanding for example that he pay him a guest house or whatever it was. 4. Jordy refused to testify in court. June's testimony was a mess and Raymund ran like a coward and used the shield law to avoid testifying. 5. Pretty much every kid who met MJ was interviewd by the police in 93. Agressively interview. The police used all types of dirty strategies and none of the kids said they were molested. Why would MJ just molest one kid? 6. I don't think sex entered MJ's delluded world.

And what about the money MJ paid to his maid Blanca Francia who claimed she saw MJ doing things with her son? What's the story or rationale behind that one?

Dangerous was when MJ wanted to be viewed as a sexual artist like Prince but it failed because by 1991 he looked nothing like the man on the cover of Thriller and more like a female or transgender person. It's impossible to fake sexuality when he really had no genuine sexual desires for women.

bboy87 said:

okay....but what did you think of the article?

I didn't mind the songs but I would have changed some of the tracklisting positions....ie. not have all the uptempo songs bunched together. But that's just me. The article itself seemed like a cut and paste job.....but then again so do a lot of articles/reviews on that site.

[Edited 8/13/16 6:59am]

[Edited 8/13/16 7:06am]

[Edited 8/13/16 7:07am]

MichaelJackson5 said:

^^^Wow, dude, it might be time to get away from the computer, go outside, and take a walk in some fresh air.

Goddess4Real said:

thedoorkeeper said:

I really regret that MJ & Prince didn't work together in some way. Maybe not a duet but MJ recording a Prince penned song. I know Prince offered songs to MJ which he turned down. I wish Prince would have invited MJ to Paisley Park & the two of them would go thru songs in Prince's vault until they found a song that MJ would record. Unfortunately that's just a fantasy.

Michael had been to Paisley Park, but, to my knowledge, nothing creative came of it. Just like several of their meetings together in studios, what was said between them was kept between them.

OK, to follow up on my thread that the mod locked - we know that Prince recorded his own improved version of MJ's Bad, adn sent it to MJ. SO even if this evrsion isn't in the Vault, it was in the possession of MJ and no doubt QUincy Jones heard it and had a copy...it's out there, somewhere!

not allot to talk about these days...

we been on this prince vs MJ talk for the past 4 months lollllllll

wasn't this much talk about their "rivalry" in real time when it was actually taking place....

the well has run dry......

Really wish the mods did a better job in moderating this sticky. To bad the mods hate MJ.

bboy87 said:

The well hasn't run dry, the problem is that people would rather rehash the same stuff over and over and over. It's been like that since the "MJ sticky" began not directed at Conor, the info about Prince doing his own version of Bad is new and hilarious [Edited 8/14/16 12:45pm]

the well hasn't run dry? lolllllll

it's ova....

that OTW documentary was all she wrote......curtains