Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead :(

[MJ]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

There are times when someone with a very high profile dies that I do feel a genuine loss, Princess Dianna, Freddie Mercury, etc. I just haven't felt anything after this news though, which has surprised me.

[Funky Dredd]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

Guess MJ was not loved as much as I thought in the states.. Thought his incredible talent was beyond his personal life but obviously is not, at leats for some of the comments here...

There was a time when he was, but unfortunately his actions have over shadowed that. Even though he was never found guilty he pretty much was in the eyes of some people. After all, he did settle out of court on a couple of cases and that pretty much sums it up. You don't settle if nothing happened.

[AchtungBaby!]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

^ Absolutely.. In fact i think he actually was pretty much guilty on that issue.. and you don´t want to be guilty on that kind of acusations but anyway his dead is kind of sad imo.. His life was unique and certanly difficult so, only God knows what happened inside that troubled mind..

RIP Michael

[i!!ustrious]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

fuck it, i truly don't care about him on a personal level. what he did for music though was honorable.

[Miroslav]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

There was a time when he was, but unfortunately his actions have over shadowed that. Even though he was never found guilty he pretty much was in the eyes of some people. After all, he did settle out of court on a couple of cases and that pretty much sums it up. You don't settle if nothing happened.

Look, don't get my wrong as someone claiming Michael Jackson's as innocent, because I honestly don't know. But this notion that settling "proves" guilt is false.

People and businesses settle legal disputes all the time without admitting guilt or necessarily being guilty at all. Why would you do that? Because it may be cheaper and less riskier to settle and make the issue just go away than to spend (in certain cases) hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars fighting it (especially when you factor in opportunity cost of time involved) and then rolling the dice with a jury of twelve.

Remember that the outcome ultimately rests not in what really happened / didn't happen, but in what you can convince the jury to believe happened / didn't happen. Most of the time, those two sides align and we get good outcomes...but not always (See OJ and countless stories of people who rotted in jail for decades before DNA tests proved their innocence). So it is always to some degree a risk when you submit to a verdict by a group of twelve. Is that risk worth it if, especially if you have significant assets that enable you to settle? Maybe...maybe not.

[AchtungBaby!]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

^^ Miro.. Well, maybe will have some bussines settle in the future.. Who knows.. But i´m pretty sure that NEVER be settle for something like Michael was, i can tell you that.. For other hand, theres a lot a people thinking how to make easy money, and Michael had a lot so.. you´ll never know...

[coleby761]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

RIP MICHAEL you are now in a better place now.

To all the people with the jokes and stuff, GROW THE FUCK UP. There is no proff that he did sexually abuse anyone. Until there is please stop with the jokes. Non of them are funny. I will repeat NON of them are funny. This world has lost a person with a big heart and it is sad that even after he is dead us so called HUMANS the Intellectual Beings on this planet still degrade him.. How Sad..

As far as his musical contribution I believe you certainly can't argue that. So that I will respect. And I'm able to see other's opinion that there's no proof he was a child molester. But he admitted to sleeping with small children. in my book unless it's your own kid's that at least makes you a weirdo. So please people you have your own opinions, others have their's. i certainly wouldn't want my kid's in his "Secret" room.

[nick007]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

Welcome back John!

[Life on Other Planets AKA Johns]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

^^ thanks mate

[chuckc]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

Guess MJ was not loved as much as I thought in the states.. Thought his incredible talent was beyond his personal life but obviously is not, at leats for some of the comments here...

actually he was adored here b4 he went wacked....then he was almost to the point of being hated in the U.S. he was only popular and liked in the rest of the world after all the craziness. we wrote him off as a freak.

it seemed that us media would constatnly attack/report him in every crazy way possible there for a while. he totally dissapeard the last 4 years...so they had nothing to report

[Funky Dredd]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

Look, don't get my wrong as someone claiming Michael Jackson's as innocent, because I honestly don't know. But this notion that settling "proves" guilt is false.

People and businesses settle legal disputes all the time without admitting guilt or necessarily being guilty at all. Why would you do that? Because it may be cheaper and less riskier to settle and make the issue just go away than to spend (in certain cases) hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars fighting it (especially when you factor in opportunity cost of time involved) and then rolling the dice with a jury of twelve.

Remember that the outcome ultimately rests not in what really happened / didn't happen, but in what you can convince the jury to believe happened / didn't happen. Most of the time, those two sides align and we get good outcomes...but not always (See OJ and countless stories of people who rotted in jail for decades before DNA tests proved their innocence). So it is always to some degree a risk when you submit to a verdict by a group of twelve. Is that risk worth it if, especially if you have significant assets that enable you to settle? Maybe...maybe not.

I never actually said he was innocent or guilty, I don't know him and therefor I can't pass judgment. But I would think a charge such as that would require defending (in my eyes)? I wouldn't care if I went bankrupt doing it, if I didn't do it I would make sure that my name was clear. But that is me and I wouldn't settle for anything less. I agree with the point you are making but I also think that if you are innocent then you need to fight to remain innocent.

[chunky]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

I find it strange that you can make an allegation of something so serious about someone and then be allowed to settle out of court. To me its like bribing a witness. But I do understand why Jacko would of settled. I think his lawyer would of said to him that he wasn't going to come out of it looking very good and he could make it all go away for a few million and it was easier to settle.

Personally I don't think he was a kiddie fiddler but he had some strange questionable behaviour.

[Miroslav]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

I find it strange that you can make an allegation of something so serious about someone and then be allowed to settle out of court. To me its like bribing a witness.

When you settle out of court, the only person who is really "bribed" is the accuser. Why did the mother settle for several million instead of pushing for justice and seeing the man who allegedly molested her child behind bars so that he couldn't continue to harm other peoples' children? If we say that a truly innocent person should go to trial to prove his/her innocence at any cost, then why wouldn't we also expect a person convinced that their child was molested to want to go to trial to prove at any cost that this crime was in fact committed?

I'm not saying I know what the truth was in this case, but another way that settling out of court can look at times is extortion - from the side of the accuser. Why do you think people are so quick to sue in this country and businesses sometimes go to ridiculous lengths from a potential liability perspective to fend of frivolous lawuits ("WARNING: THIS COFFEE IS HOT")?

[chunky]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

When you settle out of court, the only person who is really "bribed" is the accuser. Why did the mother settle for several million instead of pushing for justice and seeing the man who allegedly molested her child behind bars so that he couldn't continue to harm other peoples' children? If we say that a truly innocent person should go to trial to prove his/her innocence at any cost, then why wouldn't we also expect a person convinced that their child was molested to want to go to trial to prove at any cost that this crime was in fact committed?

I'm not saying I know what the truth was in this case, but another way that settling out of court can look at times is extortion - from the side of the accuser. Why do you think people are so quick to sue in this country and businesses sometimes go to ridiculous lengths from a potential liability perspective to fend of frivolous lawuits ("WARNING: THIS COFFEE IS HOT")?

I totally agree with you and as usual you put it a lot better than I ever could. Personally I don't think you should be allowed to make an allegation then be slowed to settle.

[GAVIN.MCAVOY]

Re: Bloody hell - Wacko Jacko is dead

i shouldnt..but