knotkranky wrote:Spikee wrote:knotkranky wrote:Naw dude, it works the other way. Why would any parent say; Ok, i'll take the money for molesting my son, instead of justice and the money. Huh?
And that McCauley kid later sued his parents cuz they stole millions from him.
Michael paid to have it stop. Consider this, what did happen with indictments was crazy. One of his own employees said mJ gave oral sex to a boy in the driveway out in the open in broad daylight. But the press hung forever on MJ giving a sip of wine to a kid. Geez, they took pictures of his dick. Yeah, lets show those to the kids during the trial to id mike. He fucked up by allowing himself to be extorted and most likely began with his own disgruntled employees. Yeah, that never happens.
Of course each time it happened he was softer and an easier target. Then he went super recluse. MJ was never really protected well by anyone he could trust. Ever. He didn't even trust his own family.
I saw a lot of strange things with that dude and they all had to do with how stressed and paranoid he was. On a human level only, it was sad.
All that shit and his compulsive surgeries shortened his life dramatically.
apologists? You cats are gullible media sluts
I don't know man, but I'm just saying that I still can't connect the dots. Again, there had to have been some foresight to see that if he paid out
any money that there would be consequences and suspicions to deal with. Again if it was me and I was being extorted and I had everything to lose -- money, career, good name -- I'd tell those parents to bring it.
And yes, I'd probably become a recluse as well afterwards and fwiw I do concede that a total life from even my earliest years in the music industry, with a crazy family prodding me like a show horse would have left an indelible effect on me as well. But knowing how relentlessly and feverishly I'd fight the parents of those kids... man, I just can't get there with you. So I'm going to have to respectfully disagree.
You're a cool dude, but i'm gonna give you and the others a hard time on this.
First, you don't have any dots bro. You're offering tabloid sound-bite arm-chair speculations, who's "just sayin" while wishing a horrible death to a possibly framed/extorted man while reducing any facts to simple school yard posturing. There is nothing to win if it goes to trial. Stopping the flow of baseless accusations from snowballing in the biggest, longest media circus trial ever is the shrewd and correct move. letting the fight ensue is certain calamity no matter the jury's decision after two years of horrible "accusations" Defamation and not law was the DA's intentions. Going through that would have been much worse than paying out. And the end of that, who ever says; Oh sorry for that, geez, I guess we were wrong, nevermind. You also made no mention why any parent would stop the accusations for the money. You like these people? You know who they are? Do you even know there names? Remember the McMartin pre-school trials? Look it up. Same shit, went to trial, turned out to be bs, many lives ruined through similar public mentality.
Here's a dot for you: The child in question refused to testify at the last second. Yes it's true. But you and ,any others won't here it cuz that simply isn't any fun.
The only dots you need to follow is your buddy Tom Sneddon and the power of mob mentality.
you dudes are like this lot >
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g 
The funny thing is that in looking at a similar case, that being the R. Kelly scandal from years back, I don't consider him to be guilty of what he was accused of doing. Then again, the case went to trial, it had its day in court and he as well was acquitted. The great divide of course is that R. Kelly didn't buy his way out of the mess, he just weathered it.
Of course, many could say that his career took a huge hit when all of that went down, and I'd agree with that. The court of public opinion is a nasty thing and each person makes their decisions based on different criteria. Some just make snap judgments. Me, I just view the MJ settlement as anomalous and given the severity of the charges, have a hard time letting that go in my mind. But you are right, there were other cases and trials and he was acquitted on charges in '05...
I don't know man, you contend that he would've paid a bigger price to weather trial after trial, and you're probably right. Not all people are as fair as me though, and when someone such as myself is willing to hold judgment until after a trial, but the case gets settled out of court, I get highly suspicious as to why the case wasn't allowed to go to court. Comment all you want about the DA and the state of the legal system itself, but for someone like me the DA can't defame the defendant...
unless the claim carries weight. And indictments don't do much to me either, Snoop Dogg and Ray Lewis being 2 cases to reference. They went to court for homicide charges, and they were acquitted.
You can lump me into the witch hunt category if you like, I'd in turn lump you into the category of people that have unrealistic expectations. I think we can both agree that the damage was pretty much done once the allegations were made though, so it doesn't really matter if I, just one person, don't weigh the allegations and instead consider the sequence of following events now does it?
I will meet you halfway on this and no further -- if he indeed never engaged in unlawful acts with children then it's a real shame that he was even put in a spot to where people would have to make their own decisions on whether he actually did what people accused him of. That's the real sadness, if you ask me... that you can destroy a person's career just by making allegations.
- hurlingdervish. yeah KK, was she a screamer or a moaner??
