View Single Post
Old 16-10-2012, 08:17
i4u
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,327
The case files stated the mother in question's evidence was actually hilarious. But due to the severity of the accusation it was taken seriously as we'd expect. The media didn't even report the trial properly. I think he was probably asexual and innocent too. He wasn't ever a real sexual person IMO. He was a very special person. If he did it, he'd go down, there surely would be enough evidence. Jordy Chandler even said his father lied, and the kids whose mother sued him said they had meetings about what to say. In court the kids stories were different and varied upon cross examination. It makes perfect sense. Pay someone off to shut up. But they got greedy and wanted more. He had a decent legal team, (I do law at uni) I've seen the amount of uk only files against the media here. It is collosal. I was shocked, (they're all for libel mostly) at the amount. There was a comment made by the father of Jordy saying :' I hate MJ, I'm gonna get that ******'. It's clear he did it out of pure hate.

Jimmy on the other hand...well, he just abused his position. And used charity to cover it up and to get closer to kids.
If your child had been abused is it not likely to say what the father said?

If MJ's relationships were innocent how come the mother of a defence witness did not know her son aged 7 from the first night spent it alone with Michael Jackson in the same bed?

A mother for the prosecution recounted a similar situation in relation to her own son.

Jimmy Savile is said to have targetted 'vunerable' teenagers, Michael Jackson attached himself to a boy described as 'delicate' and another who I believe had a life threatening illness.

We've had people say they did not draw attention to Jimmy Savile's actions for fear of their jobs, Michael Jackson had people directly on his payroll say the wrong thing and your of a job and criminal thug Pellicano wiould be after you.

Why was Marc Schaffeal a gay porn director reinstated at Neverlands and given the task of producing a charity record to make millions for himself, Michael & one other?

People have been accussed of being blind to the rumours about Jimmy Savile, which he dismissed.

Recently we had Kenny Ortega's shocking emails revealed about about the health of Michael Jackson just days before he died, but Kenny then edited the 'This It Is' film which I believe does not have a whiff of Micheal being ill.

If you were a victim and saw how a PR machine could so easily ignore major incidents and sideline anyone who said they'd witness such evenyts, would it not put victims from ever speaking out?
i4u is offline   Reply With Quote