Celebrity Death Thread

[Chuck Cunningham]

I'm pissed off because I have to keep flipping channels to find a show that is not MJ related.

As school is over and the business I am in slows down considerably I have to admit I am quite fascinated by all this from a sociological perspective. It is a very interesting case study.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I'm on that train too CGVT. Innocent people don't go paying off millions to keep other people's mouths shut.

You'd be surprised Chuck.

[Panoptes]

You'd be surprised Chuck.

Yep...happens ALL THE TIME.

Time is money

[Malto Marko]

Michael is survived by three children: Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr., Paris Michael Katherine Jackson and Prince "Blanket" Michael Jackson II.

What a tribute to himself. George Foreman is probably the worst when it comes to this.

When children are born, the have their own unique personalities. People that name children after themselves do not give the children an opportunity to be an individual. Their individuality was taken from their ego-building parent(s).

There is certainly more than enough room for that to be explained as him being a mental adolescent who hung around little boys because he was damaged as a youth. There is no proof he was a molestor, and the situations he found himself in can be due to his naivety. While the things that he got into trouble for are certainly situations no sane man at this age should do (and it should cause a red flag) to say he was a sexual deviant is without proof.

Personally, I believe Michael is innocent of being a sexual deviant. He was probably asexual if anything.

Give me a break. You can believe in the tooth fairy too but that does not mean your beliefs have merit.

People got paid huge sums of money for you to be able to say there is not evidence..........

Worship him if you wish but, he was a brilliant performer that like others, let the money and fame go to his head.

He was a nut case, plain and simple.

[Rocky Bleier]

Sad about Farrah. Not sad about the gloved one.

[Deuce]

What a tribute to himself. George Foreman is probably the worst when it comes to this.

When children are born, the have their own unique personalities. People that name children after themselves do not give the children an opportunity to be an individual. Their individuality was taken from their ego-building parent(s).




Give me a break. You can believe in the tooth fairy too but that does not mean your beliefs have merit.

People got paid huge sums of money for you to be able to say there is not evidence..........

Worship him if you wish but, he was a brilliant performer that like others, let the money and fame go to his head.

He was a nut case, plain and simple.

But what if he was emotionally stunted and had the brain and emotional makeup of a 10 year old? That really does not take much imagination to see how things could get misunderstood , especially when money is involved as a potential motivating factor. There really is no proof he got all sexy on them. I can understand this from all POVs, if a kid rells his parent he sipped "Jesus Juice" and slept in the same bed as Michael, I might not be in the mood for to disect all possibilities either.

As far as the lawsuits go, Look at it from the other side, if your child was molested, why would throw out your responsibilty to press charges in a court of law to pursue a civil lawsuit? Can't you do both? It speaks poorly to the character of the people bringing the suit.

[Deuce]

Most asexual people don't have 3 kids, either.

Seriously, I can't remember, but how were those kids concieved?

[-Deborah-]

The guy was obviously quite mentally ill - whether that included child molestation or not.

[FVD]

Seriously, I can't remember, but how were those kids concieved?

I don't know, I wasn't there.

[Panoptes]

Seriously, I can't remember, but how were those kids concieved?

Turkey baster

[Kansas]

Seriously, I can't remember, but how were those kids concieved?

Umm...I'm not sure it would be possible for it to be explained. You would probably actually have had to be there.

[VegasLionFan]

I'm on that train too CGVT. Innocent people don't go paying off millions to keep other people's mouths shut.

I was going to stay out of the MJ threads today, but I saw this comment and couldn't resist. You are absolutely wrong, Chuck. Working in the risk management side of the casino industry, I see people and corporations who are completely innocent pay off others just to make things go away all the time. It's called an out of court settlement, and they happen whenever someone who is either innocent or guilty of something wishes to avoid the possibility that they will end up paying more in the long run.

Has anyone ever thought about the other side? If someone diddled my daughter, there would be NO AMOUNT OF MONEY that could make me stop pursuing charges all the way through the system, or shut my mouth for that matter. I find it a bit strange that all of the folks who claimed he diddled them or their kids accepted money and let the charges drop. Remember, you can still sue someone for damages even after you send them through a criminal trial.

As for me, I think MJ was fucked up in the head, and I certainly wouldn't have allowed my child to go to Never Never Land. Does that mean he's guilty of diddling kids? I don't know, but the "red flag" was surely raised. I just don't like others judging someones innocence or guilt by settling something out of court.

[Malto Marko]

I was going to stay out of the MJ threads today, but I saw this comment and couldn't resist. You are absolutely wrong, Chuck. Working in the risk management side of the casino industry, I see people and corporations who are completely innocent pay off others just to make things go away all the time. It's called an out of court settlement, and they happen whenever someone who is either innocent or guilty of something wishes to avoid the possibility that they will end up paying more in the long run.

Has anyone ever thought about the other side? If someone diddled my daughter, there would be NO AMOUNT OF MONEY that could make me stop pursuing charges all the way through the system, or shut my mouth for that matter. I find it a bit strange that all of the folks who claimed he diddled them or their kids accepted money and let the charges drop. Remember, you can still sue someone for damages even after you send them through a criminal trial.

As for me, I think MJ was fucked up in the head, and I certainly wouldn't have allowed my child to go to Never Never Land. Does that mean he's guilty of diddling kids? I don't know, but the "red flag" was surely raised. I just don't like others judging someones innocence or guilt by settling something out of court.

.....no, out of court settlements come from those who are guilty and may need to have to pay more should it go to court or, those who are innocent and will pay a sum to keep their names clean as sometimes people believe allegations whether they are valid or not.

Usually if there is not enough evidence and the charges are not valid, everyone will fight it. But, if there are deep pockets and it can not be proven one way or the other, Individuals and Corporations, will pay to make the allegation go away.

Average Joe, like myself, would never pay to make something go away, he would fight it. Larger Corporations and Indiviudals with money, have learned sometimes it is cheaper to pay to make it go away than to fight if even if you are right.

[Panoptes]

Umm...I'm not sure it would be possible for it to be explained. You would probably actually have had to be there.

Something about some slippery slope

[VegasLionFan]

.....no, out of court settlements come from those who are guilty and my need to have to pay more should it go to court or, those who are innocent and will pay a sum to keep their names clean as sometimes people believe allegations whether they are valid or not.

Usually if there is enough evidence they are not valid, everyone will fight it but if there are deep pockets and it can not be proven one way or the other, Individuals and Corporations, will pay to make the allegation go away.

Average Joe, like myself, would never pay to make something go away, he would fight it. Larger Corporations and Indiviudals with money, have learned sometimes it is cheaper to pay to make it go away than to fight if even if you are right.

LOL....you just don't get it, do you? I review events DAILY where our company, or employees did absolutely nothing wrong, but it is still cheaper for us to settle if we get sued depending on what the opposition asks for.

Scenario: You're a lawyer, and your client was MJ, and MJ went on TV and said "yes, I slept with McCauley Caulkin" with that messed up grin. You'd find ANY WAY POSSIBLE to settle it out of court, REGARDLESS of whether you thought you'd have a chance at winning.

A civil suit does not work like a criminal trial, in that there only needs to be a "preponderance of the evidence" and not being proved "beyond a reasonable doubt," which is required to convict in a criminal trial.

OJ's case was a prime example.

Again, I just don't understand why the families tended to drop criminal charges against MJ if they had such solid cases.