DS Forums

 
 

Gary Glitter is number 9 on amazon rock


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-02-2015, 11:48
hazydayz
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,700
They don't have any proof Jackson did those things.
hazydayz is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 05-02-2015, 22:28
Rijowhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ITV Central: West
Posts: 811
What is spot on is that MJ slept with kids...fact! and that is just not right regardless if anything sexual took place or not, and there is no justification for it whatsoever.
Yes I should probably have chosen my words a bit better. I agree it's not normal, though none of MJ's life was...HIStory (see what I did there...) was one of the most tragic of all showbiz stories. As a previous poster said though that doesn't mean anything sexual happened. Innocent until proven guilty and all that...I couldn't support anyone found guilty of such a crime...

Which leads us back to Paul Gadd...***shakes head***. I still can't believe people are buying his music despite being found guilty years ago somewhere else. This verdict today should vindicate the general public not buying his music.
Rijowhite is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 00:49
rfonzo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,640
Assuming you're referring to Michael Jackson, bit of a difference, given with the first allegations Jordy Chandler supposedly later admitted he was lying and was legally emancipated from his parents, his dad who supposedly coached him on what to say later killing himself. With the second round of allegations he was found innocent on all counts.

Worth a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_Chandler

Glitter was not.
That is exactly what i thinking. Looking back at Michael Jackson's life and the way he isolated himself from society it seems unlikely he engaged in any sexual offending of minors. You look at Gary Glitter and his pal Jimmy Savill, they prowled on the backstage on shows, children's homes, hospitals etc to prey on their victims at any given opportunity.
rfonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 03:49
dee123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 22,431
And??? If people aren't mature enough to separate the man from the music, that's not my problem.
dee123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 08:24
eugenespeed
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: HEED ARMY!!!!!
Posts: 32,063
No he didn't, unless you have any proof.

While we're on the subject, Glitter hasn't ever been convicted of f*cking a kid either.
He has now.
eugenespeed is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 08:37
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,724
Well no he still hasn't actually. But he's still an abhorrent human being and I hope he rots in jail.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 08:40
eugenespeed
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: HEED ARMY!!!!!
Posts: 32,063
Well no he still hasn't actually. But he's still an abhorrent human being and I hope he rots in jail.
The 70-year-old former singer - real name Paul Gadd - was convicted of attempted rape, four counts of indecent assault and one of having sex with a girl under the age of 13.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31153633
eugenespeed is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 08:43
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,724
I stand corrected. I thought he was not guilty of all the sex charges, clearly not.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 08:44
eugenespeed
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: HEED ARMY!!!!!
Posts: 32,063
I stand corrected. I thought he was not guilty of all the sex charges, clearly not.
You were right with one thing you said, hope he does rot.
eugenespeed is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 08:46
james_mason1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 167
They don't have any proof Jackson did those things.
Maybe not,but its still obvious that he was a child rapist.
james_mason1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 08:53
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,724
Maybe not,but its still obvious that he was a child rapist.
Oh give over, it's not obvious at all. Where is the evidence? And don't say 'he slept in the same bed as kids', that's pathetic and is not evidence.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 09:30
Soupietwist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 781
Oh give over, it's not obvious at all. Where is the evidence? And don't say 'he slept in the same bed as kids', that's pathetic and is not evidence.
It was in 1999 that Glitter stupidly took his computer to be fixed leaving his collection of child porn on it. Yesterday 16 years later he was finally sentenced - as and you found out you could claim he didn't rape children in the laws eyes, now finally 2 says after your post you can't.
It's taken a massive overhaul of the laws, and a new task force setup in the wake of the Jimmy Savale scandal, for this to happen.

Jacko was much more powerful than Glitter and with the greatest respect the US law system is way more ******* than the UK. Remenber this is a country where the law 'decided' OJ wasn't guilty.
Soupietwist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 11:12
NewWorldMan
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,190
Looking back at Michael Jackson's life and the way he isolated himself from society it seems unlikely he engaged in any sexual offending of minors.
I think it's quite possible that MJ, being so weird, could actually have had kids "sleep over" while actually doing nothing sexual to them.
NewWorldMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 12:17
David_Crowley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 5
People still buy Wackos music and he f*cked kids as well.
Considering he was acquitted of all charges, your claim of "he f*cked kids" is completely wrong.
David_Crowley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 13:02
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,724
It was in 1999 that Glitter stupidly took his computer to be fixed leaving his collection of child porn on it. Yesterday 16 years later he was finally sentenced - as and you found out you could claim he didn't rape children in the laws eyes, now finally 2 says after your post you can't.
It's taken a massive overhaul of the laws, and a new task force setup in the wake of the Jimmy Savale scandal, for this to happen.

Jacko was much more powerful than Glitter and with the greatest respect the US law system is way more ******* than the UK. Remenber this is a country where the law 'decided' OJ wasn't guilty.
So your basis for Jackson f*cking kids is that the law in the U.S. is a bit slow? Fantastic.

As for O.J. there are miscarriages of justice in every country, I could give you a big list of miscarriages in the U.K.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 13:37
Soupietwist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 781
So your basis for Jackson f*cking kids is that the law in the U.S. is a bit slow? Fantastic.
Two days ago you posted 'Glitter hasn't ever been convicted of f*cking a kid either.'

I'm not saying Jackson had sex with children, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if he did.
Soupietwist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 13:40
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,724
Two days ago you posted 'Glitter hasn't ever been convicted of f*cking a kid either.'

I'm not saying Jackson had sex with children, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if he did.
How is that relevant exactly?
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 17:38
EyeballEyeball
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 477
Considering he was acquitted of all charges, your claim of "he f*cked kids" is completely wrong.
Paying of your rape victims doesn't make you innocent.
EyeballEyeball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2015, 21:19
walterwhite
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,724
Paying of your rape victims doesn't make you innocent.
I think the word you are looking for is 'alleged'. And yes, he was found not guilty, whatever you say.
walterwhite is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 19:32.