Michael Jackson has passed away

Mr. Toad · Post by **Mr. Toad** » Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:52 pm

Okay, I gotta admit I am having some sympathy for Michael. His father is an utter dirtbag. He has used Michael's death for promoting his own business dealings. Today at a press conference that was supposed to deal with custody issues he introduced his business partner in a new label he is launching. Is it just me or does he seem to be a little too happy about his son's passing. I know he has been discribed in utterly unflattering terms by most of his children, but his behavior is completely over the top.

milojthatch · Post by **milojthatch** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:18 am

Mr. Toad wrote:Okay, I gotta admit I am having some sympathy for Michael. His father is an utter dirtbag. He has used Michael's death for promoting his own business dealings. Today at a press conference that was supposed to deal with custody issues he introduced his business partner in a new label he is launching. Is it just me or does he seem to be a little too happy about his son's passing. I know he has been discribed in utterly unflattering terms by most of his children, but his behavior is completely over the top.

I agree, his dad is a dirt bag. From what I have heard, his father abused him growing up and much of the odd stuff he has done the last 10-15 years or so can be traced back to his dad in some way. Very sad I think.

a-net-fan · Post by **a-net-fan** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:51 am

milojthatch wrote:
Mr. Toad wrote:Okay, I gotta admit I am having some sympathy for Michael. His father is an utter dirtbag. He has used Michael's death for promoting his own business dealings. Today at a press conference that was supposed to deal with custody issues he introduced his business partner in a new label he is launching. Is it just me or does he seem to be a little too happy about his son's passing. I know he has been discribed in utterly unflattering terms by most of his children, but his behavior is completely over the top.
I agree, his dad is a dirt bag. From what I have heard, his father abused him growing up and much of the odd stuff he has done the last 10-15 years or so can be traced back to his dad in some way. Very sad I think.

Exactly! I was nausiated watching the way his father has conducted himself the last couple of days. His comments to the media were heartless and cold and to me he just seems like a ugly villain waiting patiently to cash in on his sons name and death!!!! He and his pompus cronies ( Sharpton and Jackson) I wish would take a hike! I really dont care to hear from any of them anymore.

As for Michael its no secret he was excentric .....but I have learned not to throw stones. Life circumstances are what make people like Michael the way he was and we have no idea what it was like being him. Because he was excentric and addicted to plastic surgery (which made him look like a freak)....when he was accused of molestation ......because of the awkward way he looked talked and behaved everyone was ready to burn him at the stake and assumed him guilty. Usually in this great land of ours a person is innocent until proven guilty. They were never able to do that yet he was branded as a molester. I always thought Michael was odd but I honestly didnt consider him a child molester. On the radio today they were saying that the one kid who accused MJ of molesting him has come forward to admit that he had lied about being molested by Michael and he was put up to it by his dad. How sad Michael had to die for his name to be cleared (at least from one accuser).

AwallaceUNC · Post by **AwallaceUNC** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 8:49 am

a-net-fan wrote:On the radio today they were saying that the one kid who accused MJ of molesting him has come forward to admit that he had lied about being molested by Michael and he was put up to it by his dad. How sad Michael had to die for his name to be cleared (at least from one accuser).

Has anyone heard/seen confirmation of this? That would be huge. I can't find anything in the news about this and as that would be a major headline, I'm assuming it isn't true. The radio station probably saw some rumor or false report online and repeated it.

-Aaron

Mason_Ireton · Post by **Mason_Ireton** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 9:01 am

Hmm take a grain of salt with this seemingly unexpected news, course I'd be extremely surpised by this unexpected "not guilty" verdict.

Post by **Luke** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 10:15 am

Mason_Ireton wrote:Hmm take a grain of salt with this seemingly unexpected news, course I'd be extremely surpised by this unexpected "not guilty" verdict.

Considering the verdict came four years ago, you shouldn't be that surprised.

Siren · Post by **Siren** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 12:06 pm

There is no proof currently that any of the alleged victims have recanted their stories. I've been searching google news for such a statement and there is none.

Frankly, if it did happen, it wouldn't surprise me. I actually wish and hope it is true, that Michael did not molest any children. But until I see something in print or on video, a radio station saying it happened is not enough to prove it.

milojthatch · Post by **milojthatch** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:29 pm

It was pointed out on a news program that I saw, that for saying these kids were molested, funny how every last on of there parents just wanted money! When ever you are dealing with a celebrity case, the question does have to be raised, is the "victim" really been wronged or is the person only after money? The whole time as well it seems, his biggest concern was the well being of his own children. Not himself, but his kids.

I agree that MJ was an odd ball, but I don't think he was dangerous. He always struck me as rather innocent in his personality. He was almost like a real life Peter Pan. If he did anything with children, I don't believe from what I have seen that is was ever meant to sexual in anyway. I don't know, I don't know all the facts, but frankly, no one does 100%.

I was also thinking about the good this man did. Beyond his music, he was really worried about teh state of humanity and wanted people to get along. He didn't see people as "Black or White" but rather as people. We need to heed the lessons this man gave to us.

a-net-fan · Post by **a-net-fan** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:54 pm

Siren wrote:There is no proof currently that any of the alleged victims have recanted their stories. I've been searching google news for such a statement and there is none.

Frankly, if it did happen, it wouldn't surprise me. I actually wish and hope it is true, that Michael did not molest any children. But until I see something in print or on video, a radio station saying it happened is not enough to prove it.

I havent heard anymore about what I heard on the radio this morning either. It was on the entertainment news time of the radio station. They said that it was the kid that settled with him outside of court for millions of $. Since this morning I havent heard anymore about it soooooo maybe they misinformed their listeners. *shrug*

Siren · Post by **Siren** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 7:55 pm

Believe me, if one of the alleged victims came forward and stated that, it would be BIG news. Especially with his family, they would be pushing it for vindication. I would LOVE it to be true, not because I want him to be innocent, as much as I want the children to have retained their true innocence. I think the parents are 100% dirtbags either way just for accepting hush money. They either prostituted their kids or had a good extortion bracket going. Either way, its sick. IMO, sicker than if Michael did molest them. Because for every parent that took a settlement check, that meant there would be more victims. Something like that should be ILLEGAL...oh wait it is...child prostitution IS illegal....this is what you call "a loop hole".

tsom · Post by **tsom** » Tue Jun 30, 2009 11:44 pm

So people are just now realizing that MJ's kids may not be his or Debbie's either? DUH! I could have told you that a decade ago. I know your skin can change but if you have black genes then you are not going to pop out blond blue eyed babies...OHhhhhh NNNOOOOO...Common genetics.

And for a mother to sign away her rights like that just doesn't make sense. Hence: neither one are the biologically related to those kids.

BelleGirl · Post by **BelleGirl** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:01 am

I was a teenager in the 80's when MJ had his top years and we danced a lot to his music. Everytime I hear MJ-hits I have to dance - which is funny because I'm not a good dancer at all, but I grew up with all the disco-hits.

I'm worried about Michaels 3 young children. It seems to me they were having a weird life with MJ ( wearing veils and masks, one mother "bought off", another mother unknown) and now they are under the custody of their grandmother. This in accordance with MJ's last will and testament (I just read this morning in the newspaper). But this also means they will be under the custody of their grandfather!? Seeing Joe Jackson hasn't really got a reputation as warm kindhearted father, I just wonder if this was a wise decision? I'm afraid these kids will turn out as emotionally damaged as MJ himself.

Roger Rabbit · Post by **Roger Rabbit** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 8:05 am

I appreciated Michael's older material than his newer stuff. Its sad to have lost him, and his kids will likely suffer the most. The will they found said his mother and Diana Ross are beneficiaries so maybe the kids will be ok, but who's to know with all the crazed fans around?

BelleGirl · Post by **BelleGirl** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 9:17 am

Roger Rabbit wrote:I appreciated Michael's older material than his newer stuff. Its sad to have lost him, and his kids will likely suffer the most. The will they found said his mother and Diana Ross are beneficiaries so maybe the kids will be ok, but who's to know with all the crazed fans around?

Why can't the two older kids live with their biological mother Debbie Rowe? I hope that they will be able to visit each other regularly at least. I think it's important for a kid to know who his/her real parents are. I really don't like the way the (biological) parents dealt with these kids as if they are couple of exchange items between them.

bluemoon86 · Post by **bluemoon86** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:34 pm

BelleGirl wrote:Why can't the two older kids live with their biological mother Debbie Rowe? I hope that they will be able to visit each other regularly at least. I think it's important for a kid to know who his/her real parents are. I really don't like the way the (biological) parents dealt with these kids as if they are couple of exchange items between them.

Debbie Rowe doesn't want the kids

BelleGirl · Post by **BelleGirl** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 2:04 pm

bluemoon86 wrote:
BelleGirl wrote:Why can't the two older kids live with their biological mother Debbie Rowe? I hope that they will be able to visit each other regularly at least. I think it's important for a kid to know who his/her real parents are. I really don't like the way the (biological) parents dealt with these kids as if they are couple of exchange items between them.
Debbie Rowe doesn't want the kids

Poor kids!

Siren · Post by **Siren** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 5:23 pm

Debbie Rowe was nothing more than a breeding baby seller. She popped out a few kids, for a PRICE. She calls them a "gift". She decided to go back on trying to get custody of them twice. She shouldn't own a goldfish, much less have any more children. Children are not disposable. They shouldn't be born to be given as a "gift" nor for sale.

a-net-fan · Post by **a-net-fan** » Thu Jul 02, 2009 7:01 pm

Siren wrote:Debbie Rowe was nothing more than a breeding baby seller. She popped out a few kids, for a PRICE. She calls them a "gift". She decided to go back on trying to get custody of them twice. She shouldn't own a goldfish, much less have any more children. Children are not disposable. They shouldn't be born to be given as a "gift" nor for sale.

AMEN!!! The kids dont even know her! Just because she gave birth to them doesnt mean that she is the one the kids should go to!! She has never been a part of their lives and MJ specifically requested that they not be with her and that she not be supported at all by his estate upon his death. All this lady sees is dollar signs! BUT I cant say much better about MJ's family ......especally his Dad. If he were to be involved with the childrens care im sure he will have them dressed up in sequince and working for his NEW RECORD COMPANY in no time. What a jerk

BelleGirl · Post by **BelleGirl** » Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:35 am

Siren wrote:Debbie Rowe was nothing more than a breeding baby seller. She popped out a few kids, for a PRICE. She calls them a "gift". She decided to go back on trying to get custody of them twice. She shouldn't own a goldfish, much less have any more children. Children are not disposable. They shouldn't be born to be given as a "gift" nor for sale.

Agreed, children should not be given up for sale! But it was MJ who 'bought' those kids! If we want to be fair, MJ is just as much to blame for this 'horse trading"as Debbie.

Jack Skellington · Post by **Jack Skellington** » Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:14 am

He didn't want Debbie Rowe to take care of his kids, he wants Dianna Ross to be their mother.

Anyways is anybody getting in the habit of listening to Micheal's songs now that he's dead ?
I've never listened to "Smooth Criminal" before, but my God it's really amazing.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Michael Jackson has passed away