Go to Don't you just hate Americans?
- Add a comment
- Go to MICHAEL JACKSON - THE ONE AMERICAN WHO SHOULD BE PITIED NOT HATED.
Limey...
...I make assumptions when most of the evidence supports an assertion, in this case a charge. I said it was probably right for the jury to find him "not guilty" (not "innocent") because the state might not have proven its case.
But if I had a child, I would not send him near Jackson, given the opportunity, on the reasonable assumption that the man is probably a child molestor.
I would not take the man's freedom away on that assumption, of course; guilt has to pass all reasonable doubt for that to be justified.
posted by
Dylan24
on
June 17, 2005
at
11:33 AM
| |
reply
MJ has the ability to change
his behavior because he's filthy rich! He can afford all the therapists that money can buy. He apparently doesn't believe in that, and that's where his problems begin.
posted by
zoke
on
June 15, 2005
at
11:49 AM
| |
reply
Limey
Thanks for your equally well-considered response. (1) I didn't say MJ is a psychopath; and I said I wasn't sure, but that the same argument you were making about feeling pity for him probably could be made. I know that every case is different; just seems like most of the ones I've ever heard of did have horrid circumstances growing up and I was curious at what point you felt personal responsibility kicked in since the whole point of your post was that we should feel sorry for him because of his lost childhood....did you ever answer my question? (2) I certainly threw the words around when I said genius...I tend to do that! I believe he has genius talent, and have seen documentaries on him that would indicate he makes his own business decisions like purchasing the Beatle catalogue and that seemed to indicate to me that he was capable of making very good, sound decisions...that was what I should have said. So, I fail to understand how he couldn't see that it wasn't good decision making to continue to sleep with young boys.(3)I am not talking about the verdict when I speak of innocence. I respect the verdict on the charges at the trial also; as stated, I didn't see or hear the evidence. Innocence as in "freedom from guilt or sin through being unacquainted with guilt or evil" is what I am speaking of; if you believe that a 46 yr old man who is sexually active enough to have two children, chooses to repeatedly sleep with young boys with no sexual thoughts at all, and would be comfortable letting him sleep with a son of yours - then we shall agree to disagree on the point of whether he is a man of innocence in the matter of bed partners.
posted by
Krisles
on
June 15, 2005
at
8:08 AM
| |
reply
Limey
You've just scored a huge point in my book. I fully agree with you!!!!!!
posted by
tigerprincess
on
June 15, 2005
at
7:27 AM
| |
reply
Krisles
Thanks for your well considered comment.
First - every case is different, and Michael Jackson is not a psychopath. (By the way, not every psychopath will have experienced an unhappy childhood).
Second - I didn't follow every aspect of the trial, but the jury did and I must respect their judgement.
Third - the rule is this: people are innocent until proved guilty.
I rest my case.
PS For what it's worth, I don't consider Michael Jackson to be highly intelligent. He's an entertainer who's made lots of money - and lost it through incompetence and self-indulgence. And, no, I'm not a fan of his: I don't much care for pop music.
posted by
Limey
on
June 15, 2005
at
4:44 AM
| |
reply
Limey
I want to clarify...I love MJ's music and I have no idea if the man molested boys or not..I never saw the evidence nor talked to any of the witnesses; and, to my knowledge, neither did any of the other people commenting here. But I don't think any man sleeping with boys is innocent if he has a sexual impulse in his body, which he would have us believe he has...something is rotten in Denmark, as they say. I don't think I "know" any celebrity based on what I know of their work. .I can admire their work but not admire what they do; and that is certainly the case with MJ. I just don't pity him because of his childhood and think that he has demonstrated the ability, given his business acumen, to make better decisions than to sleep with young boys. The parents' motives have nothing to do with the fact of how I feel about what he admits to doing and will probably continue to do. I have no idea if the verdict was correct...but I do not believe he deserves pity, nor that he is an innocent man in terms of his sexual interests in young boys.
posted by
Krisles
on
June 14, 2005
at
5:50 PM
| |
reply
Lim
I never thought we would have one thing in common Limey...but alas we do! He was never guilty of anything other than being weird. People forget Van Gogh was "out there" when he cut off his ear, but neither were guilty of anything other than being weird! I love MJ! Can ya tell?
posted by
Offy
on
June 14, 2005
at
4:17 PM
| |
reply
Limey
I know that MJ was found not guilty but he is a highly intelligent person who has been able to amass millons with his business savvy since leaving the influence of his parents and has always been able to manipulate the media with absolute genius. As MsN pointed out in her excellent post, I question if not guilty in this case equates to innocent for someone obviously capable of making informed decisions. I'm certainly not sure, but I think your argument could probably be made for every psycopath that the world has ever known...weren't most of them the victims of horrid childhoods of one sort or the other? At what point do you think personal responsibility kicks in for someone not mentally incompetent? I am just curious......politely (although, I am a Texan).
posted by
Krisles
on
June 14, 2005
at
4:11 PM
| |
reply
behindamask
During the course of the trial Jackson's background was revealed and it became obvious this was one sad individual - someone to be pitied.
If he had been an accused Englishman, I would have felt equally sorry for him.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:41 AM
| |
reply
Justsouno
How nice to hear from you again: still obsessed with the minutiae of life, I see.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:31 AM
| |
reply
Poor Poor Limey...
Poor Poor Limey - I know the facts, which you found necessary to post again instead of answering my question. Doesn't take a stupid, yankee American to recognize a hypocrit when she sees one!
posted by
behindamask
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:29 AM
| |
reply
Excuse me, Lord Limey you have a typo. The and one are two words.
posted by
Justi
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:27 AM
| |
reply
Just noticed: I believe you must have been commenting on my response to Burly.
No psychology needed - just commonsense.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:21 AM
| |
reply
Ms N Dependence
Eh? Jackson was found not guilty on all charges. Full stop.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:15 AM
| |
reply
Marshallengraved
You sound like a stuck record. Give it a nudge.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:12 AM
| |
reply
behindamask
Jackson was accused - yes, and stood trial - yes. But the man was found innocent on all charges, you stupid American Yankee.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
11:11 AM
| |
reply
A Thought For the Anti-American Blogger
Would you pity Michael Jackson if he were accused of touching little boys that lived in your country? This stupid, American, Yankee was just curious.
posted by
behindamask
on
June 14, 2005
at
10:26 AM
| |
reply
I pity you...
for hating on American ppl.
posted by
Marshallengraved
on
June 14, 2005
at
10:01 AM
| |
reply
Dylan
He had to know his behaviour was wrong. Really? Now you are making assumptions! The fact is: Michael Jackson was found innocent of all charges.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
7:34 AM
| |
reply
Limey
Reverse psychology?
posted by
Transcendental_Child
on
June 14, 2005
at
7:34 AM
| |
reply
Burly
Jackson's a sad case with too much money and too many 'friends' after it.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
7:30 AM
| |
reply
Mystic
I can well believe that!
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
7:25 AM
| |
reply
Hemlocker
I'm sure I can find better reasons to hate you. See my note to Dylan.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
7:23 AM
| |
reply
Dylan
He had to know his behaviour was wrong. Really? Now you are making assumptions! The facts is: Michael Jackson was found innocent of all charges.
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
7:20 AM
| |
reply
Limey
For once, old mate, I finally agree with you completly. Michael Jackson is to be pitied, not imprisoned. The bad people in this are the money grubbing kids and parents who wanted to shake him down. That was the crime.
posted by
Burly
on
June 14, 2005
at
7:11 AM
| |
reply
Limes - only in California would he have been found innocent
here in Texas, he'd be doing multiple life sentences in the state pen.
posted by
fwmystic
on
June 14, 2005
at
6:30 AM
| |
reply
Dylan to Limey
On the other hand, Dylan has a point too, though I would never put Michael Jackson in a mental institution. Hemlocker
posted by
Hemlocker
on
June 14, 2005
at
5:52 AM
| |
reply
MJ's lost childhood
When you're right, you're right. But please don't hate me because I complimented you. Hemlocker
posted by
Hemlocker
on
June 14, 2005
at
5:48 AM
| |
reply
A wise old professor sternly cautioned his class,...
...of which I was a member, against making psychological judgments of people we have never met and know little about at a deep personal level, and when we are not trained in psychology. We don't know that Jackson was desperately seeking his childhood. That may be the case, but even if it were, it would not excuse his behavior. He had to have known his behavior was wrong; if he did not, then he belongs in a mental institution, not in reaching distance of children.
posted by
Dylan24
on
June 14, 2005
at
5:48 AM
| |
reply
Hammock
Yes, that's my assessment.
PSI believe the rest of the Jackson children also had problems - the result of work pressures throughout their formative years
posted by
Limey
on
June 14, 2005
at
3:16 AM
| |
reply
He had no childhood, so he is tryiing to live it while he can, before he...
passes on.
posted by
Hammock_Noweilz
on
June 14, 2005
at
2:06 AM
| |
reply
Copy (or write down) this comment's web address (URL), which is:
Next, go to the email or web page where you want to link to this comment, and paste
(or type) the web address.
