Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Michael Jackson and JImmy Savile...


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 30-01-2013, 23:01
Aries_123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,229
I find some of the robust defenders of michael jackson not only deluded but pretty sick.
thank god people are actually waking up to these sick pedos like savile and wacko.....unfortunately for saviles and jacksons victims their word alone wasnt good enough for the authorities...perhaps in the future people will listen far more carefully to the victims story.
difference is after MJ's death no 'victims' have come forward to say the've been abused and he was tried in a court of law and found NOT guilty
Aries_123 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 31-01-2013, 01:04
Tal'shiar
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,434
difference is after MJ's death no 'victims' have come forward to say the've been abused and he was tried in a court of law and found NOT guilty
THe first trial he settled out of court though didn't he? and the second he was found not guilty yes.

Jimmy was never even taken to court, so buy your reasoning, Jimmy is innocent. I hope to see you defending him as he has NEVER even been charged with any abuse crimes, thus he is innocent.

Jacko most likely was inappropriate with kids, too much evidence proves a lot of strange things went on with him and children.

But his fans will always defend him, he is like Jesus, reason, logic, evidence, doesnt matter as his fans will never accept it.

Not that it matters anyway, he is dead so nothing will happen.
Tal'shiar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 17:51
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
THe first trial he settled out of court though didn't he? and the second he was found not guilty yes.

Jacko most likely was inappropriate with kids, too much evidence proves a lot of strange things went on with him and children.

But his fans will always defend him, he is like Jesus, reason, logic, evidence, doesnt matter as his fans will never accept it.

Not that it matters anyway, he is dead so nothing will happen.
So much ignorance on this thread that needs to be cleared up.

The story behind the first allegations is that the father of Jordy Chandler, Evan, was a failing screenwriter who was desperate to make it in Hollywood and saw his son's friendship with MJ as an opportunity to extort money to fund his amibtions. The boys father was manipulative and controlling (hence why he didn't even have custody of Jordy) and managed to coerce his son (by drugging him) into going along with these allegations, which he initially vehemently denied.

If MJ was innocent then why did he pay them loads of money, people ask?

First of all, when Evan Chandler convinced Jordy to make these accusations, he filed a civil lawsuit against Michael Jackson. So instead of reporting it to the police like any normal parent seeking justice would, he got the "nastiest son of a *****" lawyers (Evan's own words) he could and sued him for money. Now ask yourself, if you thought your child had been molested, would you call the police or a lawyer? This was inevitably leaked to the press and it became a media circus. The police obviously started their own investigations and began flying around the world interviewing countless different people that MJ knew to see the allegations were consistent with anyone else. Paedophiles rarely have just one victim after all.

After months of investigations, interviewing over 30 children connected to Jackson and convening two grand juries, the cops had so far found no evidence to even merit arresting Jackson, let alone charging him with a crime. So the civil trial (for money) was trundling closer and closer, while criminal charges were no where near fruition. If the civil trial went ahead it would've been a violation of Jackson's constitutional right not to self incriminate. In other words, by testifying in the civil trial, he would've exposed his entire defence strategy to prosecutors and allowed lawyers to form criminal charges around anything he said. He would risk not having a fair trial. The only way he could guarantee himself a completely fair trial in a criminal court would be to get rid of the lawsuit. (There was actually a change in California law to stop this happening again as a direct result of this case).

There were also other reasons for settling. Namely, MJ's health had seriously deteriorated because of a demerol addiction he'd acquired to deal with the stress and also the strong possibility of it harming his future earning power had the trials gone on for years.
In the end, court documents prove the following:

1. Jackson opposed settling and that it wasn't an admission of guilt.
2. The money was infact negotiated and paid by his insurance carrier.
3. The Chandlers were in no way prevented from testifying in any possible criminal trial.

The police eventually dropped the case through lack of evidence. They spent millions interviewing over 200 witnesses and none of them corroborated with the Chandler's claims. When Jordy Chandler was 16 he gained legal emancipation from his parents and never spoke to them again because of what they put him through.

So there was no 'pay off'.

But i guess you guys already knew all of this before comparing him to Jimmy Saville, right?
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:00
maninthequeue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,292
difference is after MJ's death no 'victims' have come forward to say the've been abused and he was tried in a court of law and found NOT guilty
Wrong! The big difference is in the USA the estate of the deceased can sue for defamation, unlike in the UK. Plus the penalties for "wrongly" accusing a dead person are more likely to result in a prison sentence and certainly a heavier fine. So in America it is far better to accuse somebody whilst they are alive.
maninthequeue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:01
Big Boy Barry
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Barry's Manor
Posts: 22,490
No comparison whatsoever

MJ, investigated and found guilty of nothing

Savile, enormous amounts of complaints, decades apart, with similar stories.
Big Boy Barry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:10
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
Wrong! The big difference is in the USA the estate of the deceased can sue for defamation, unlike in the UK. Plus the penalties for "wrongly" accusing a dead person are more likely to result in a prison sentence and certainly a heavier fine. So in America it is far better to accuse somebody whilst they are alive.
What was wrong about the post you quoted? No one has come forward since he died and he was indeed found not guilty.
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:18
white
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 7
No comparison whatsoever

MJ, investigated and found guilty of nothing

Savile, enormous amounts of complaints, decades apart, with similar stories.
Exactly. Its like comparing Hitler and a politician suspected of misconduct. Nothing to compare really
white is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:21
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
Or were paid off by the family
There was no 'pay off' as i've explained above.
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:29
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
http://www.mjfacts.info/

Here you gos. These aren't opinions ~they're carefully researched facts. Michael Jackson fans are too emotionally invested and can't see things clearly, but outsiders can and that's why Michael Jackson was known as the world's most famous paedophile. I think Jimmy Savile may have just overtaken him but it depends how far his fame extended.
You're extremely deluded if you believe he was guilty. Instead of just posting links to another website and making ad hominem attacks, why don't you tell us in detail the reasons why you think he was a paedophile? And i'm talking about that little thing called evidence.
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:45
belive940
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 32,437
So much ignorance on this thread that needs to be cleared up.

The story behind the first allegations is that the father of Jordy Chandler, Evan, was a failing screenwriter who was desperate to make it in Hollywood and saw his son's friendship with MJ as an opportunity to extort money to fund his amibtions. The boys father was manipulative and controlling (hence why he didn't even have custody of Jordy) and managed to coerce his son (by drugging him) into going along with these allegations, which he initially vehemently denied.

If MJ was innocent then why did he pay them loads of money, people ask?

First of all, when Evan Chandler convinced Jordy to make these accusations, he filed a civil lawsuit against Michael Jackson. So instead of reporting it to the police like any normal parent seeking justice would, he got the "nastiest son of a *****" lawyers (Evan's own words) he could and sued him for money. Now ask yourself, if you thought your child had been molested, would you call the police or a lawyer? This was inevitably leaked to the press and it became a media circus. The police obviously started their own investigations and began flying around the world interviewing countless different people that MJ knew to see the allegations were consistent with anyone else. Paedophiles rarely have just one victim after all.

After months of investigations, interviewing over 30 children connected to Jackson and convening two grand juries, the cops had so far found no evidence to even merit arresting Jackson, let alone charging him with a crime. So the civil trial (for money) was trundling closer and closer, while criminal charges were no where near fruition. If the civil trial went ahead it would've been a violation of Jackson's constitutional right not to self incriminate. In other words, by testifying in the civil trial, he would've exposed his entire defence strategy to prosecutors and allowed lawyers to form criminal charges around anything he said. He would risk not having a fair trial. The only way he could guarantee himself a completely fair trial in a criminal court would be to get rid of the lawsuit. (There was actually a change in California law to stop this happening again as a direct result of this case).

There were also other reasons for settling. Namely, MJ's health had seriously deteriorated because of a demerol addiction he'd acquired to deal with the stress and also the strong possibility of it harming his future earning power had the trials gone on for years.
In the end, court documents prove the following:

1. Jackson opposed settling and that it wasn't an admission of guilt.
2. The money was infact negotiated and paid by his insurance carrier.
3. The Chandlers were in no way prevented from testifying in any possible criminal trial.

The police eventually dropped the case through lack of evidence. They spent millions interviewing over 200 witnesses and none of them corroborated with the Chandler's claims. When Jordy Chandler was 16 he gained legal emancipation from his parents and never spoke to them again because of what they put him through.

So there was no 'pay off'.

But i guess you guys already knew all of this before comparing him to Jimmy Saville, right?
Excellent post here, someone at last with a bit of compassion and sense. When I heard about Saville, it became obvious to me that M.J. Must have been innocent because where were all his " victims " I thought they would have come flying out of the woodwork for a story to make a quick fortune. Oh no we can leave that to his greedy vile family who are still trying to make money out of him, He was hounded in life, those accusations contributed towards his death I have no doubt about that,a lot of people have his blood on their hands, surely there must come a time when he can be left alone? Please.
belive940 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 19:51
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
Excellent post here, someone at last with a bit of compassion and sense. When I heard about Saville, it became obvious to me that M.J. Must have been innocent because where were all his " victims " I thought they would have come flying out of the woodwork for a story to make a quick fortune. Oh no we can leave that to his greedy vile family who are still trying to make money out of him, He was hounded in life, those accusations contributed towards his death I have no doubt about that,a lot of people have his blood on their hands, surely there must come a time when he can be left alone? Please.
Thanks... But 'greedy, vile family'? Please explain what you mean by that. Although they didn't always see eye to eye, just like any family, Michael still loved them dearly.
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 20:09
Betty Britain
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,556
Excellent post here, someone at last with a bit of compassion and sense. When I heard about Saville, it became obvious to me that M.J. Must have been innocent because where were all his " victims " I thought they would have come flying out of the woodwork for a story to make a quick fortune. Oh no we can leave that to his greedy vile family who are still trying to make money out of him, He was hounded in life, those accusations contributed towards his death I have no doubt about that,a lot of people have his blood on their hands, surely there must come a time when he can be left alone? Please.
Drug abuse killed Michael Jackson.. We all have our own opinions on the child abuse accusations .. But it's pointless discussing hem as the man is dead.. I do agree it's time to leave him alone ...
Betty Britain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 20:13
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
Drug abuse killed Michael Jackson.. We all have our own opinions on the child abuse accusations .. But it's pointless discussing hem as the man is dead.. I do agree it's time to leave him alone ...
An incompetant doctor killed Michael Jackson. It was proven in Conrad Murray's trial that he wasn't addicted to anything before his death and that the drug that killed him isn't addictive either.
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 20:21
L-una
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
So much ignorance on this thread that needs to be cleared up.

The story behind the first allegations is that the father of Jordy Chandler, Evan, was a failing screenwriter who was desperate to make it in Hollywood and saw his son's friendship with MJ as an opportunity to extort money to fund his amibtions. The boys father was manipulative and controlling (hence why he didn't even have custody of Jordy) and managed to coerce his son (by drugging him) into going along with these allegations, which he initially vehemently denied.

If MJ was innocent then why did he pay them loads of money, people ask?

First of all, when Evan Chandler convinced Jordy to make these accusations, he filed a civil lawsuit against Michael Jackson. So instead of reporting it to the police like any normal parent seeking justice would, he got the "nastiest son of a *****" lawyers (Evan's own words) he could and sued him for money. Now ask yourself, if you thought your child had been molested, would you call the police or a lawyer? This was inevitably leaked to the press and it became a media circus. The police obviously started their own investigations and began flying around the world interviewing countless different people that MJ knew to see the allegations were consistent with anyone else. Paedophiles rarely have just one victim after all.

After months of investigations, interviewing over 30 children connected to Jackson and convening two grand juries, the cops had so far found no evidence to even merit arresting Jackson, let alone charging him with a crime. So the civil trial (for money) was trundling closer and closer, while criminal charges were no where near fruition. If the civil trial went ahead it would've been a violation of Jackson's constitutional right not to self incriminate. In other words, by testifying in the civil trial, he would've exposed his entire defence strategy to prosecutors and allowed lawyers to form criminal charges around anything he said. He would risk not having a fair trial. The only way he could guarantee himself a completely fair trial in a criminal court would be to get rid of the lawsuit. (There was actually a change in California law to stop this happening again as a direct result of this case).

There were also other reasons for settling. Namely, MJ's health had seriously deteriorated because of a demerol addiction he'd acquired to deal with the stress and also the strong possibility of it harming his future earning power had the trials gone on for years.
In the end, court documents prove the following:

1. Jackson opposed settling and that it wasn't an admission of guilt.
2. The money was infact negotiated and paid by his insurance carrier.
3. The Chandlers were in no way prevented from testifying in any possible criminal trial.

The police eventually dropped the case through lack of evidence. They spent millions interviewing over 200 witnesses and none of them corroborated with the Chandler's claims. When Jordy Chandler was 16 he gained legal emancipation from his parents and never spoke to them again because of what they put him through.

So there was no 'pay off'.

But i guess you guys already knew all of this before comparing him to Jimmy Saville, right?
A great post,a lot of information that I didn't know.Particularly interesting that Jordy sought emancipation from his parents.

It's good to see that the facts support that he was an innocent man.

Regarding Savile,it's quite clear that many complaints were made about him while he was still alive which all fell on deaf ears and remained univestigated.

The difference betwen the two is that MJ was investigated and was exonerated.Had Savile ever been the subject of any sort of proper investigation the result would have been very different I believe.

Anyway thanks for the info.
L-una is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 20:23
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
A great post,a lot of information that I didn't know.Particularly interesting that Jordy sought emancipation from his parents.

It's good to see that the facts support that he was an innocent man.

Regarding Savile,it's quite clear that many complaints were made about him while he was still alive which all fell on deaf ears and remained univestigated.

The difference betwen the two is that MJ was investigated and was exonerated.Had Savile ever been the subject of any sort of proper investigation the result would have been very different I believe.

Anyway thanks for the info.
Thanks The boys father also killed himself a few months after Michael died. Couldn't live with the guilt perhaps?
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 20:49
L-una
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
Thanks The boys father also killed himself a few months after Michael died. Couldn't live with the guilt perhaps?
The lengths some people would go to to get rich quick are extraordinary aren't they?

I've often wondered what it would do to a person to be falsely accused of something so dreadful,added to that the whole media circus and it's no wonder Michael became so fragile.
L-una is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2013, 21:00
tomclarky
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 80
The lengths some people would go to to get rich quick are extraordinary aren't they?

I've often wondered what it would do to a person to be falsely accused of something so dreadful,added to that the whole media circus and it's no wonder Michael became so fragile.
I know, i'm absolutely horrified at the thought of being falsely accused of rape or something similar, just because of my friends and family having to hear about it. I can't imagine what it feels like when the whole world thinks you're guilty.

Michael Jackson wrote a song about that exact subject called 'Money' on his HIStory album.
tomclarky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 07:11
i4u
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,340
Michael Jackson was an extremely deceiteful person who was proven to be so in various courts.

The evidence by Wade Robson's mother in 2005 demonstrated until that trial she was unaware her 7 year old son had spent the night alone in bed with Michael Jackson.

The cases involving a promoter and the later one involing Marc Schaffel proved Michael was a liar.

Michael had a multi-million dollar PR machine to protect him and present him as the victim, it continued to operate after he died.

We know Randy Phillips & Kenny Ortega had deep concerns about Michael Jackson. Only days before Michael died Kenny Ortega detailed physical & mental issues that prevented Michael rehearsing.

In the the ironically titled "This Is It" documentary is there any evidence provided of Michael at the launch having locked himself away and being drunk or footage of Michael being unable to rehearse? See how the PR machine smooths over the cracks.
i4u is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 09:50
L-una
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
Michael Jackson was an extremely deceiteful person who was proven to be so in various courts.

The evidence by Wade Robson's mother in 2005 demonstrated until that trial she was unaware her 7 year old son had spent the night alone in bed with Michael Jackson.

The cases involving a promoter and the later one involing Marc Schaffel proved Michael was a liar.

Michael had a multi-million dollar PR machine to protect him and present him as the victim, it continued to operate after he died.

We know Randy Phillips & Kenny Ortega had deep concerns about Michael Jackson. Only days before Michael died Kenny Ortega detailed physical & mental issues that prevented Michael rehearsing.

In the the ironically titled "This Is It" documentary is there any evidence provided of Michael at the launch having locked himself away and being drunk or footage of Michael being unable to rehearse? See how the PR machine smooths over the cracks.
Here is what I found on Wade Robson.

"He has been a close friend of mine for 20 years," Robson said.

"His music, his movement, his personal words of inspiration and encouragement and his unconditional love will live inside of me forever.

"I will miss him immeasurably, but I know that he is now at peace and enchanting the heavens with a melody and a moonwalk.

"I love you Michael."

Robson's close relationship at a young age with Jackson, and the nights he spent at Jackson's Neverland ranch, did draw controversy and resulted in Robson being called to testify at Jackson's 2005 molestation trial in California.

Robson defended Jackson and rejected the allegations against him.




Doesn't sound like someone who was abused.
L-una is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 10:52
i4u
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,340
Doesn't sound like someone who was abused.
Who said he was abused?
i4u is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 11:25
johartuk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,271
What puzzles me is that MJ paid off Jordy Chandler. Why would he pay $25million to someone he didn't abuse?
johartuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 11:56
jzee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 16,043
And also there is the man who is now a priest, who says he says he said he was not abused by Jackson at the second trial, as he feared people would think he was gay, now as a priest, he feels he had to tell the truth, which is that abuse did occur.
jzee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 14:08
L-una
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
Who said he was abused?
Why bring him up then?
You suggest that he was a liar,I don't see any of your so called points prove that at all.

Your point was that the boy's mother didn't know that her son had slept in the same bed as Jackson.She presumably knew that he was spending the night with Jackson?

But if he was merely sleeping in the same bed as a trusted adult (and she must have trusted him to allow her 7 year old son to stay overnight wouldn't you agree?) what does it matter where he slept?

Your suggestion was that MJ deliberately lied to the parent as to where her son slept.Do you have proof that he misled her or is it just that she didn't realise he'd slept in the same bed.
L-una is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 14:10
L-una
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 179
What puzzles me is that MJ paid off Jordy Chandler. Why would he pay $25million to someone he didn't abuse?
Please see the post a few posts back by tomclarky he clarifies the Jordy Chandler situation.
L-una is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2013, 14:16
pinkpowerranger
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 831
I'm sorry but why was an adult sharing a bed with a child that wasn't his own anyway? If creepy Joe from down the road was inviting children to share his bed would people be so quick to believe it was all innocent?
pinkpowerranger is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:39.