Fun Stuff > CHATTER

Michael Jackson Died, Guys

<< < (30/37) > >>

bbq:
I know, I just thought the argument was getting a bit too serious business for the thread for respecting his memory.

Josefbugman:
Bill Bailey invented the moon walk, look it up on youtube under "QI origins of the moonwalk".

I must admit I don't really feel that much for him, his family and the people who loved his music yes I feel sorry for them and he undoubtably changed a great deal of musical history and certainly helped to define the sound of a good decade, possibly more. I was astonished at the out pouring of grief, but then I realised this man was the defining characteristic of some peoples lives, not now and it may not even have lasted that long, but it makes them realise how far they have come or fallen since they first heard one of his songs. Personally I will probably feel the same the day brandon flowers dies, because Hot Fuzz was my first CD, it defined me and my outlook for a little while.

Sorry, just my thoughts.

Candle:

--- Quote from: Sox on 01 Jul 2009, 07:16 ---Think about it. If you're going to falsely accuse somebody of molestation in the hopes of a massive payout, who do you target? Me? You? The President of the United States? Or Michael Jackson?


--- End quote ---

there was also that part where he invited kids over to his giant kid-luring theme park with the intention of closed-door slumber parties.

Sox:
Thanks for reiterating my point.

KvP:

--- Quote from: Sox on 01 Jul 2009, 07:16 ---John, you seem to be suggesting that Michael Jackson's combined wealth, fame, popularity and open sleepovers with pre-pubescent children made him no more likely to be accused of child molestation than the average person. Nobody is saying that those circumstances made him less likely to commit a crime, but they DID significantly increase the likelihood of a false allegation.
The way I see it, Michael Jackson, for the people who accused him, was the easiest target in the world. He was reachable and had a strange reputation that made it easy to accuse him of child molestation. Sure, they could have accused any rich guy, but no other rich guy was Michael Jackson, significantly lowering the chances of a successful pay out. There was a level of oppurtunity that richer men than Michael Jackson did not present.

Being Michael Jackson might not have made him less likely to commit a crime than anybody else (though I believe it did), but being Michael Jackson did make him far more likely to be one of those falsely accused. People who accused Michael Jackson of child molestation had a LOT to gain. Though evidence strongly suggests that Evan Chandler fabricated the entire thing, he has spent the past 15 years living in mansions. He accomplished this despite police closing the investigation, citing a lack of evidence.
I'd rather not begin to produce evidence from the investigations to support these arguments because it will turn into a debate about whether or not he did it, but his circumstances were definitely far more unique than you seem willing to believe.

Think about it. If you're going to falsely accuse somebody of molestation in the hopes of a massive payout, who do you target? Me? You? The President of the United States? Or Michael Jackson?
--- End quote ---
I suppose I would have targeted Michael Jackson. Also, if I were to date any celebrity I suppose I would date Maggie Gyllenhaal. The possibilities of both those things happening successfully rely on an amazing run of luck and coincidence. Y'all seem to be conceiving of wealth and privilege as these incredible weaknesses against false accusation, but it seems to me as though wealth and privilege are quite effective barriers against placing oneself in a position where your claims would be credible, just as Maggie's fame makes it nigh-impossible for me to be in a position to ask her out without looking like a lunatic. Perhaps there was an application process to stay at the Neverland Ranch, which would have allowed me, having decided beforehand to falsely accuse, to gain access, but in the Evan Chandler case I do believe it was Jackson who approached the Chandlers about a stay at the Ranch. If the Chandlers were looking to falsely accuse Michael Jackson, whether they conspired to beforehand or were opportunistic, the stars really aligned for them.

It might be true that Jackson's willingness to bring children unsupervised into his house to stay for extended periods of time and his wealth create a unique opportunity for exploitation. But it's bitterly hilarious to me that it's either been dismissed or not thought of that Jackson's willingness to bring children unsupervised into his house to stay for extended periods of time makes him a prime candidate for perpetrating child molestation. If it was anyone else (well I guess anyone not as rich and famous as Michael Jackson) that one fact would be highly, highly suspect. But the fact that Michael Jackson a. Made Thriller b. Was super-famous c. Seemed like such a sweet guy d. Apparently didn't molest every child he ever boarded and e. Never confessed seems to make it more likely to most that he was falsely accused by best-paydirt-in-the-world striking gold diggers than his being an offender despite that fact. In that people are all-too willing to accuse reported victims of being liars, Michael Jackson's case is not unique in the slightest.

So did MJ's situation make false allegations more likely than in most cases? Of course. It also made the chances of the allegations being true higher. So if I were to be extorting anybody, it'd be Michael Jackson. On the other hand, if I were a child molester, I would really love to be in Michael Jackson's situation circa 1993.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page