Michael Jackson Trial: Hell Hath No Fury Like a Publicist Scorned - Comments Page 3

Originally, Michael Jackson: The Man Behind the Mask, An Insider's Story of the King of Pop, by 30-year Jackson PR man Bob Jones (who was fired unceremoniously last year by Michael's brother Rand) and journalist Stacy Brown, was scheduled to be published in April.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

  • 76 - jarboy

    Jun 09, 2005 at 3:13 pm

    in the american system, mj IS assumed innocent. doh

  • 77 - DrPat

    Jun 09, 2005 at 3:44 pm

    Oh, jarboy - in the American s, MJ is presumed innocent, no matter how many of us assume he is a serial molester.

    td, MJ may be assumed guilty of this crime, but the system still presumes him innocent he comes to trial. Otherwise, he's got plenty of grounds to win an appeal.

    What's the difference? Presume: To take for granted as being true in the absence of proof to the contrary; to constitute reasonable evidence for assuming.

    Assume: To take for granted; suppose.

  • 78 - jarboy

    Jun 09, 2005 at 3:48 pm

    sorry, phdpat, i meant to say presumed, just didn't proofread. don't need an english lesson.

  • 79 - td

    Jun 09, 2005 at 4:28 pm

    yeah, yeah, yeah...

    I was just responding to P's "should be given the benefit of the doubt' line. P seemed to insinuate that MJ should be presumed inocent despite proof to the contrary.

    Anyways, it doesn't really matter. Presumption time is over. I've heard the evidence. It's time for judgement, and there's no reasonable doubt in my mind that MJ holds sexual affections for younger boys.

    Hopefully the jury see's it the same way.

  • 80 - Josia

    Jun 09, 2005 at 4:55 pm

    The titles of these MJ posts just keep getting better and better ...

    Who do I contact about that? :)

    J.

  • 81 - james mclafferty

    Jun 10, 2005 at 6:18 am

    Some of you may/may not find this interesting.
    WWW.vh1news
    Michael Jackson's life is on the line in front a California judge. But no matter the outcome of his trial on child molestation charges, the gap between how the world views Michael and how he sees himself has never been wider. In this special, VH1 News explains how the beloved child entertainer became such a bizarre public figure.

    The answers lie in Michael Jackson's Secret Childhood. VH1 News has examined the singer's upbringing and found a life filled with abuse, hard labor, relentless ambition, and conflict between his religious upbringing and growing fame. Beginning with Jackson's birth in 1958 to the record-breaking success of his Thriller album in 1984, the special delves deep into Jackson's past, such as the mental and physical abuse he endured from his father, Joe Jackson (e.g., incessant rehearsals, whippings, calling Michael "big nose"); Joe exorcised his frustrations over his own failed musical career by exploiting his musically gifted children - especially Michael - by forcing them to perform in seedy bars and strip joints from Indiana to Ohio. At the same time, the proselytizing of his mother Katherine - a devout Jehovah's Witness - confused Michael about singing, sex and family secrets.

    This show opens the doors to the Jackson family homes in Gary, Indiana and Encino, CA, to uncover bizarre, never-before-seen home movies of Michael dancing with Emmanuel Lewis and cavorting with Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. In exclusive interviews, viewers are introduced to Michael's first "little friend" the child actor Rodney Allen Rippey. Other interviews include former CBS Records music mogul Walter Yetnikoff, the man responsible for Michael pursuing a solo music career, but knew him since his childhood years as a member of the Jackson 5, Tatiana Thumbtzen, Michael's co-star from "The Way you Make Me Feel" video who tells her tale of unrequited love for the shy pop star, and Teresa J. Gonsalves, a childhood pen pal who got to see a side of Michael that very few were privileged to see. These people, along with celebrity family therapists, biographers and religion experts, all offer their theories about the man whose public antics have become a national obsession.

  • 82 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 10, 2005 at 9:21 am

    sounds interesting to me, though explanation is not absolution

    Josia, who do you think writes the titles?

  • 83 - Steve

    Jun 10, 2005 at 10:02 am

    For those who are interested, Vanity Fair has done an excellent series of articles on MJ from ex-staffers and other sources.

    I have already ordered this book.

    First of all, for those of you who feel that MJ is getting a rough deal, nothing could be further from the truth. Never has a defendant been given the red carpet treatment in so obvious and obsequious a manner. The partitioned off walkways, "special" passes to the courtroom for his entourage and body guards?? Why the hell would anyone need bodyguards in a court of law?? To intimidate witnesses, that's why. The same reason they had gang members flown into Neverland to work during the '93 Jordy episode. To remind people who might have thought about saying something just how rich, powerful, and ruthless a man they were up against.

    Common sense tell you this tale. 40 year old men do NOT have 8 year old special friends that sleep with them. And what about that little "mini-me" kid that hung out with him all during the 80's? If the MJ fans look past their adoration of the singer, you will see that this is WRONG. If this guy lived in your neighborhood you'd ride him out of town on a rail. Just because he is rich and talented doesn't mean he's "innocent". Just because he can sing doesn't mean he lives in another world. Just because he is an artist doesn't mean that all his motivations are beautiful.

    This man is a veteran of the entertainment industry. My sister is a filmmaker, and I know a little about this. If he were a true lil shrinking flower he would have been crushed by it LONG ago. It is a brutal, cutthroat world, and being talented makes others strive harder to take advantage of you. You have to be tough as hell to survive - and to thrive you have to be ruthless.

    As to those who feel that the victim in this case should have been more assertive?? You obviously know nothing about sexual abuse. I was abused as a child. I did tell someone - two years after it started. Sexual abuse is so hard to deal with as a child. You have all these conflicting feelings. This boy was fished out of the LA slums and showed a dream life by an man he idolized. He was also introduced to sex by this man. Sex, even if it is wrong, is exciting. Just because it wrong doesn't make it less so. So you have all this hero-worship, excitement, feelings you don't understand, and a life of wealth to give up. You have to turn in your hero to the police. You have to distance yourself from the emotional manipulation of a 45 year old man. Do you have any idea how hard that is for a kid? Try to imagine it.

    Also, keep in mind that after the Bashir video, MJ and his people had the entire family investigated. Do you think someone as rich as MJ couldn't find out that the mother would be very easy to discredit on the stand? As a rich and powerful molester, it must have been like a dinner bell ringing.

  • 84 - Nick

    Jun 10, 2005 at 11:37 am

    Steve, your story is a very sad one but don't think it gives you sufficient credit to pronounce a verdict on whether MJ is innocent or not. On the contrary, your history and patiality is exactly the reason why a person like you would never make it in a jury, and that is a very good thing to preserve the assumption of innocence.

    If you have been molested, condemn the people who are responsible for it and don't go fantasizing on a man who has been completely denied the presumption of innocence by the media, the prosecution AND the clueless public (That includes YOU).

  • 85 - swingingpuss

    Jun 10, 2005 at 11:47 am

    “The lion on the Serengeti doesn’t go after the strongest antelope,” Zonen said. “The predator goes after the weakest.”

  • 86 - Steve

    Jun 10, 2005 at 12:37 pm

    Why would ALL these people lie? The ex-staffers, the victims, the security guards? OK one or two might lie for money. One or two might lie for vengance, although risking a slander suit and/or harassment campaign from the gloved one and his minions makes that sound pretty stupid, not to mention the possible prosecution for purgery. So either there is an international conspiracy involving the media, the court system, and law enforcement - OR - this is exactly what it looks like. Unplug the Thriller album for a few minutes, straighten out that geri-curl and go outside to clear the fumes from your brain. The answer will come to you. I am not the clueless one here.

  • 87 - Nick

    Jun 10, 2005 at 12:51 pm

    Read the court transcript nd get back to me. Clueless.

  • 88 - Nick

    Jun 10, 2005 at 12:53 pm

    And by the way, it is spelt perjury and not purgery. Clueless...

  • 89 - Steve

    Jun 10, 2005 at 4:03 pm

    Nick,

    How many 10 year olds are in your bed?

    Clueless.

  • 90 - Steve

    Jun 10, 2005 at 4:09 pm

    Which parts of the transcripts have the wonderful proof of innocence? The part where he showed children pornographic websites in his bed? The fact that some were able to get away before he got his paws on them? If you have proofs other than your blind worship of this celebrity, I would love to hear it. Or just direct me to the parts of this magical transcript upon which you are basing this enless devotion.

    It all comes back to common sense. Either the whole world is lying, or this is exactly what it appears to be.

    It walks, it quacks, it has a big ole bill and swims. Wake up and smell the duckness.

  • 91 - Steve

    Jun 10, 2005 at 4:17 pm

    PS: Have fun with the mis-keys and spelling errors, but they won't hide your lack backup for your position.sgs

  • 92 - Steve

    Jun 10, 2005 at 4:19 pm

    And it's spelled "spelled", not spelt

    LOL

  • 93 - Nick

    Jun 11, 2005 at 4:27 am

    boring

  • 94 - Joe

    Jun 11, 2005 at 6:22 am

    Before I go any further, this is mere conjecture so I do not want to anger any of the Michael Jackson fans here.


    I have tried to be an objective viewer and the prosecution seem to have failed to discharge the burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt). However, my feelings about Michael Jackson still seem to be all up in the air - that his love for children could be sinister.

    Now, I discounted Michelle's earlier post for being nonsensical but maybe my reaction was a bit premature.


    Let us assume that Michael Jackson is a pedo and being the star he was, Sony would have tried everything possible to keep his habit under wraps - take a look at how Ray Charles's habit was kept a secret for so long. Everyone around knew Ray was hitting the needle but no one came forward. I know that child molestation and drug addiction may not be the same thing here but there is a common denominator - money. The people around Ray either loved him and did not want to hurt him by 'squealing' or had to milk the cash cow for as long as it lasted.

    Now, as soon as he started to ruffle a few feathers then he started to get into trouble with the law. Those people who were in his circle now freely went to the law enforcers.

    Back to Michael Jackson, if Michael was a pedo and Sony et al knew about this, there is no way they would have come forward because they were making so much money off of him.

    Up until 1993, with the dangerous album, Michael Jackson was hitting double platinum consistently. Why would anyone dare come forward about his secret life? Why would they jeopardise their futures, their finances?

    However, then came the 1993 molestation allegations. Even though it appeared to fail in the courts, there could have been more to it than meets the eye. Who knows whether there was undue pressure placed on the kid or his parents? These big companies are able to buy off the law enforcers, so I am sure they could have made 'evidence' evaporate if they truly wanted it to happen.

    Yes, the parents may have been shady but it is very possible to have a shady parent or shady parents trying to profit off of their children's misery. That is possible. It is possible that Michael did molest the kid but that the parents did not adhere to their duties as parents.

    So Sony asked Michael to come back with a new album and to tour, to recoup some more money, to go back to being the 'cash cow' but that is when the meltdown slowly began. History was no 'Bad' or 'Dangerous', it did not recoup as much as the company wanted. This is a business after all and their job is to profit.

  • 95 - Joe

    Jun 11, 2005 at 6:27 am

    They released Blood on the dance floor, they released re-mastered songs, they tried to recoup their money and they probably could not. The History phase saw the end of the big budget videos "‘Ghosts’. Ghosts was meant to be amazing, it was. However, it was also very expensive and just did not recoup the money they thought it would recoup.

    Sony wanted something big from Michael, something to 'bring him back' to being that 'cash cow'. They wanted a 'hip' producer; they wanted something that would capture a new audience. They invested a lot to make Invincible a success and even though they produced the CD in different colours (To buff up sales) it still failed. The execs must have thought (through their market research) that if ten million hardcore fans around the world wanted to buy all four (was it four? can’t remember) it would prop up the sales of the record to 40 million and beyond. That plan failed and Sony came to realise that this was no longer a cash cow, but a liability.

    The public feud did not help both parties and it was no surprise that the allegations were brought a few years later. Even though there might be a few people behind it, even if the Jackson fans' conspiracy is accurate, does it mean that Michael Jackson did not molest Gavin? Does it mean that he is not a pedo? When the cops raided Ray Charles and arrested him, I am sure his fans may have felt it was a conspiracy but even if it was a racist agenda to 'bring down a black man', Ray Charles was a drug addict. So, it is possible that even though there is a conspiracy behind this case, Michael Jackson may be what he is being accused of being and doing. The only thing here is that Sony is no longer in his corner, no longer willing to invest in big time lawyers, no longer willing to waste any money on this “liability”.

    Whether or not he will do time is another thing, because the case has not been strong enough. However, this is the 'other side' that I must learn to tolerate and I think it makes sense - it is not nonsensical at all.

    Yes, the parents may be shady and yes the kids may have inconsistent accounts. This could merely be a case of them trying to 'colour' the facts a bit, trying to exaggerate a little. Kids can get their facts wrong but that does not mean they are liars.

    Should a kid be victimised just because he is a troublesome youth? No way.

    The family may have a 'past' but does that mean they should be victimised? No.

    It is easy for a good lawyer to make someone who is telling the truth look like a cold-hearted liar. This is something we need to bear in mind.


    The next time we call someone a Jackson 'hater' or 'nut', we should look at what they are saying, consider it and then if it does not make sense, present your arguments in a civilised manner. There is no shame in that; it would not make you less of a person for agreeing with something that goes against your initial stance. The bottom line is, Michael Jackson is a public figure and we will all have our different views about him.

  • 96 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 11, 2005 at 1:08 pm

    word

  • 97 - james mclafferty

    Jun 12, 2005 at 2:28 pm

    18 million copies of history have been sold to date i wouldn't say that was a flop would you?.Why is it,a band like travis(not sure if you all know who they are),can sell one million albums get a grammy and people say "oh my god they are so cool",when one million is all they'll sell and mj sells five million and they say "ah well he's had it now",for a start 5 million is 5x that figure so how can they say travis (i only used them for an example) is selling so much better? something odd there if you ask me.

  • 98 - james mclafferty

    Jun 12, 2005 at 3:13 pm

    Here are the figures of albums sold.

    Off The Wall: 19 million*
    Thriller: 59 million*
    Bad: 28 million*
    Dangerous: 29 million*
    HIStory: 18 million double albums (36 million disks).
    Blood On The Dance Floor: 6 million
    Invincible: 8 million
    Number Ones: 6 million
    Here are the estimated earnings of mj over his career.
    Off the Wall: $37 million
    Thriller: $115 million
    Bad: $57.5 million
    Dangerous: $57.5 million
    HIStory: $35 million
    Blood on the Dance Floor: $10 million
    Invincible: $15 million

    OTHER INCOME SOURCES:
    Tour earnings: $100 million
    Endorsements: $30 million
    Videos/films: $20 million
    Merchandise: $25 million
    Cumulative earnings: $502 million
    Assets: $100 million (Neverland ranch; Encino and Las Vegas homes; other properties); $450 million (50% stake in Sony ATV and other music publishing)
    Debt: $200 million
    Net worth: $350 million

  • 99 - jarboy

    Jun 12, 2005 at 4:54 pm

    hmm, and all i got was this stupid t-shirt

  • 100 - td

    Jun 13, 2005 at 10:05 am

    The thing is James, you just aren't seeing the math.

    Sure other bands sell less records, but they also cost a lot less too.

    Lets say the average record sells for $10 US. That means Travis sales of 1 million equal 10 million in revenue. There production and marketing cost propably come to 1 million or less. Therefore they have made 9 million profit for them and the record company.

    Invincible has sold 5 million copies worldwide. That represents 50 million in revenue. However, production and marketing costs for Invincible were 100 million. Therefore, Invincible has lost Sony 50 million.

    It's the same as a Big Budget movie that flops. WaterWorld made more money at the box office than Sideways, but it cost 100 times more money to make. Therefore, financially it was a flop.


    As far as your figures concerning MJ's assets, the actual figures are closer to 600 million in assets, and 415 million in liabilities. Included in the liabilities is a 200 million dollar loan that is due to be paid in full by december.

    The problem for MJ is that the asset evaluations are not absolute. They are only as valuable as someone is willing to pay for them. Obviously the Beatles catalog is, and will always be very valuable. MJs catalogue on the other hand, Mijac worth 75 million, may decrease significantly in value if he's found guilty.

    In order to pay off the loan, he has to sell assets, because he does not have 200 million in cash lying around. Most likely this means he will have to sell his Sony/ATV share, including the Beatles catalogue.

    This will leave him with 400 million assets and 214 million debt. But MJ is still going to have to sell more assets, because he is losing 20-30 million a year by spending more than he's earning. Since people know he needs to sell, he probably won't get the best price for his assets. And really, who is going to spend 25 million for neverland if it's the notorious location of child abuse.

    So where this is going, is that if MJ doesn't get the best deals on his assets, and his remaining assets begin to depreciate in value, he could soo find himself owing more that he can pay.

  • 101 - Steve

    Jun 13, 2005 at 1:36 pm

    I don't think he will be convicted. The American justice system is geared so the guy with the best lawyer wins. With the excellent fodder they have had for putting the victim (and his family) on trial instead of MJ, and with all the money he had to spend, aquittal is all but assured. The justice system is affected by color, but not black or white. The color of the American justice system is Green. Look at OJ's latest golf photos if you doubt that.

  • 102 - HW Saxton

    Jun 13, 2005 at 3:59 pm

    The Verdict in this case will be read at
    1:30 PM PST. Big News!!!!!

  • 103 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 13, 2005 at 4:00 pm

    wow, thanks HW

  • 104 - HW Saxton

    Jun 13, 2005 at 4:04 pm

    It's all over but the crying now.This is
    an agonizingly long half an hour to go.

  • 105 - Jake

    Jun 13, 2005 at 4:22 pm

    The majority of you blogheads seem quick to defend someone who has shelled out over 25 million dollars just to make betrayed children go away. MJ's reputation should have meant more to him than a billion dollars. He obviously has a penchant for little boys and has gone by for far too many years stealing innocence. If they don't get him this time, they will the next time he molests...which he will surely do again.

  • 106 - Steve

    Jun 13, 2005 at 5:35 pm

    And the rich and guilty walk free. All hail the American Judicial System.

  • 107 - sandra smallson

    Jun 14, 2005 at 6:59 am

    Take your medicine like a good boy Eric. Blah blah blah di blah!

    You were biased from the start. You have a closed, narrow mind when it comes to anything about MJ. You find him abnormal and you think there is more to his relatoonship with young boys than just friendship. OKAY. We heard ya the first time but guess what? That's your own private demon. It's YOUR palava.

    Listen carefully..NOT GUILTY on all TEN counts and the even ridiculous lesser 4 counts they added to desperately try and pin something on the man, especially that ridiculous one by the judge about furnishing alcohol to children which by law only applies to businesses. It's no wonder the family feel like it was a vendetta...everyone seemed to be going to extraordinary lengths to find this man guilty of something...anything.

    Eric..go back to what you were posting about before( can't remember what) because this whole MJ trial has made you look so bad, your sometimes clouded, biased reporting style which I remember I have accused you of before in other topics has come out in this case, loud and clear.

  • 108 - nick

    Jun 14, 2005 at 7:01 am

    And now a treat for all of you bitter twats


    Told me that you're doin' wrong
    Word out shockin' all alone
    Cryin' wolf ain't like a man
    Throwin' rocks to hide your hands
    You ain't done enough for me
    You ain't done enough for me
    You are disgustin' me
    You're aiming just for me
    You are disgustin' me
    Just want your cut from me
    But too bad, too bad
    Look who just walked in the place
    Dead and stuffy in the face
    Look who's standing if you please
    Though you tried to bring me to my knees
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Hell all up in Hollywood
    Sayin' that you got it good
    Creepin' from a dusty hole
    Tales of what somebody told
    What do you want from me?
    What do you want from me?
    Tired of you haunting me, yeah yeah
    You're aiming just for me
    You are disgustin' me
    You got blood lust for me
    But too bad , too bad
    Look who got slapped in the face
    It's dead and stuffy in the place
    Right back where I wanna be
    I'm standin' though you're kickin' me
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    (Rap: Shaquille O'Neal)
    Life's about a dream
    I'm really undefeated when MJ is on my team, theme
    Reality brings forth realizm
    It's the man of steel organizm
    Twizm
    Not from the prizm, take charge like manilla
    Nine five shaq represent with the Thrilla
    Grab my crotch, twist my knee, then I'm through
    Mike's bad, I'm bad
    Who are you
    (Michael)
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it
    Why don't you just scream and shout it
    Too bad too bad about it

  • 109 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 14, 2005 at 9:48 am

    oh good, more lyrics

    Sandra, whatever you say, babe. I am quite proud of my coverage of the trial. I gave the facts as neutrally as I could, and gave my opinion when I felt strongly about something and made it very clear that it was my opinion.

    I think he is a serial pedophile - I don't know if he did anything to/with Gavin Arviso, and if he didnt' he should have been found "not guilty."

    I think he is very lucky and dodged another bullet, but I also think the prosecution did itself a grave disservice by using the shotgun approach to the charges. I never thought the kidnapping and conspiracy charges held any water and they were just a distraction - worse still, they required testimony from the loopy, tainted Janet Arviso, which was disastrous.

    I have never had a personal stake in the verdict and I have no idea why anyone would think so.

  • 110 - nick

    Jun 14, 2005 at 10:00 am

    maybe because of your recent outburst... Nobody has forgotten it you know...

  • 111 - Steve

    Jun 14, 2005 at 10:07 am

    For all the MJ fans out there, remember that "not guilty" is different than innocent. I hardly think that another OJ verdict, proof to the world that our judicial system is biased towards the rich and famous, is something to celebrate.

  • 112 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 14, 2005 at 10:08 am

    no one has to forget anything - I am still outraged that Jackson has been allowed by parents, society, law enforcement, etc., to behave as he has with boys over the last 20 years. That won't change.

    I am sorry if anyone was led to reject my judgment based upon the ferocity of my "outburst"

  • 113 - nick

    Jun 14, 2005 at 10:11 am

    OK OK I just thought I would remind you why some of us may think that "You had a personal stake in the verdict" because you just said yourself that you had "No idea why".

  • 114 - nick

    Jun 14, 2005 at 10:13 am

    "Not guilty" does not mean "Innocent" but it certainly does not mean "Guilty" either. Move on !

  • 115 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 14, 2005 at 10:23 am

    what does "move on" mean?

  • 116 - nick

    Jun 14, 2005 at 11:11 am

    Verb: move on
    Move forward, also in the metaphorical sense
    - advance, progress, pass on, march on, go on

  • 117 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 14, 2005 at 11:12 am

    so no one should write anything about Michael Jackson anymore?

  • 118 - DrPat

    Jun 14, 2005 at 11:18 am

    There is JUDGEMENT (a trial verdict) and judgement (one's personal conclusions in a matter). The JUDGEMENT is "Not Guilty."

    The judgement, however, is that MJ needs to surround himself with broken, crazy and tainted people because others have long ago concluded that he is not someone to be connected with.

    And, Eric, "move on" usually means: I insist you substitute your judgement for the JUDGEMENT...

  • 119 - nick

    Jun 14, 2005 at 11:21 am

    welllllll if you had something new to say why not, but apart from showing the very subtle line that exists between not guilty and innocent I have not learnt much from all the bitter people who live in their own fantasy world...

  • 120 - MCH

    Jun 14, 2005 at 12:34 pm

    Olsen,
    Your anti-Jackson diatribes, ad nauseum, reminds me of the movie "Groundhog Day."

  • 121 - Eric Olsen

    Jun 14, 2005 at 12:49 pm

    whatever you say - read the dozens of stories I have written involving Jackson and I am guessing fewer than five could be called "diatribes."

    And holy fucking shit! Are you -- the ultimate one trick chicken hawk pony -- really accusing ME of being repetitive? Astonishing irony there.

  • 122 - MichaelisGod

    Jun 22, 2005 at 12:31 pm

    I think the book should be BANNED and BOB JONES should be followed 24/7 by officials who will shoot the instant he utters anything at all that can be construed to be even remotely damaging or slandering to His Holines, our Lord and Saviour Michael Jackson.
    We live in a sick world where true purity and love and goodness cannot be understood. People will pay for condemning Our Lord. Michael Jackson is not the 2nd coming of the Christ...he IS the Christ and the world will bow before him or perish in Armageddon.
    BOB JONES and SNEDDON are clearly instruments of Satan.

  • 123 - todd

    Jun 22, 2005 at 1:38 pm

    If MJ were not famous and well liked, no one would be defending someone who sleeps behind a locked door, which is behind a long corridor with sensors that give off warnings when anyone steps foot in the corridor, with little boys unrelated to him.

    Not to say I think he was guilty... I have no clue and it wasn't my job to make that decision, as I was not a juror.

    I will say this tho... the Defense quite accurately pegged the mom as a scammer, but... what kind of person would let their child sleep with a grown man, other than a scammer or other type of distasteful person?

    No normal parent would allow that!

    Seems to me the defenses main tactic could have been used against them by the prosecution.

  • 124 - john

    Jul 22, 2005 at 6:39 pm

    hey it might be the truth but it might be false as well. The man has been fired and if he was any type of true human he would of been..I would of been out of there the firsdt time I saw something not after I had been fired after 30 something years of so called proof ohh common what type of human is he.....and yes I am a huge fan but if he did it he did it but it seems a little vingeful.!????

  • 125 - April

    Nov 28, 2006 at 11:16 pm

    Bottom line: Adult men should not be sleeping in the same bed with other peoples children. Also, adult men (or women) should not be giving alchohol to minors. Neverland is supposed to be about innocence. Michael Jackson is pushing line.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 28, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs