Michael Jackson

[BroomJockey]

What do you have to gain by telling those who loved him that we shouldn't?

Easy enough. Validation on a personal level. It's easy for some people to believe the worst about others, because that way, when they slip up, they can say to themselves, "I am only human. I made a mistake, but at least I've never done THAT." The idea that someone might just have been innocent and caring enough to have slept in the same bed with a child not theirs in the same manner a parent or best friend the child's own age could strikes a chord in them that maybe instead of comparing themselves to the worst in humanity and being excused for their failings, they should compare themselves to the best, and strive to be better people. So obviously that means any time someone does something they can't grasp, that means it was done for nasty, evil, dirty reasons.

[Kalli]

Good point, Broom.. I suppose it's just one of those insane human nature things. I guess what gets me is that so many people just cannot fathom someone being that way, like you said, and that they are willing to persecute someone so brutally for their own peace of mind.

I guess if I looked at my own set of judgements, I'd find an example or two of myself doing the same thing.

[BroomJockey]

I guess if I looked at my own set of judgements, I'd find an example or two of myself doing the same thing.

Most people do. I'm sure I've got a few too. It's like the Wizard's First Rule, and the only solution is constant vigilance and self-assessment.

[Flyndaran]

Not everyone found not-guilty is innocent. I stand by my assessment of his guilt. And OJ did it too.

[BroomJockey]

Not everyone found not-guilty is innocent. I stand by my assessment of his guilt. And OJ did it too.

Hmm. Equating MJ to OJ. Pretty sure that's a fallacy of some sort, if you're trying to appear rational.

As for the first bit, no, not everyone. However, in light of a lack of sufficient evidence, a person is to be treated as innocent. Your personal judgement of a person's guilt or innocence carries no weight in society. This is why the mere accusation of this sort ruins lives. People decide to believe it even when it can't be proven. MJ wasn't saved by technicalities or lawyering. There simply wasn't evidence.

[Kalli]

Not everyone found not-guilty is innocent. I stand by my assessment of his guilt.

And not everyone who is accused is guilty. Do you actually have an "assessment" of his guilt to speak of? If so, I'm interested to hear how you came to that conclusion, because I haven't heard anything more convincing than "everyone says so".

[BroomJockey]

Not everyone found not-guilty is innocent. I stand by my assessment of his guilt. And OJ did it too.

Further thought: You scorn belief in face of lack of or contradictory evidence when it relates to religion, but you're all over believing this.

I guess you CAN believe.

[PepperElf]

my own personal feelings on him....

yes i think he engaged in acts of an "inappropriate nature" with children.
i rather feel that his behavior and the darker side of his personality is downplayed because he had hit songs.

i don't mourn him
and i wonder if there are some young men who will sleep better at night now

[Kalli]

my own personal feelings on him....

yes i think he engaged in acts of an "inappropriate nature" with children.
i rather feel that his behavior and the darker side of his personality is downplayed because he had hit songs.

Again I ask; do you actually have a reason for believing this? Could you explain, please?

[Wingates_Hellsing]

If anything the negative acts of the famous are exaggerated by the media because that's what sells.

No one's going to pay to hear about a CCL holder saving someone's life, a celebrity that's innocent of even one accusation or how logging companies aren't ruining the world. The facts state that all three are true statements, but most everyone is afflicted by confirmation bias, something I've made a personal rule to always avoid.

The best way to go about deciding the truth is to take the information from both sides with a grain of salt each and honestly comparing them. The one that has more facts on it's side is probably true. If there is something you don't understand, learn about it before passing judgment on it. But instead, most people pick the side they think is true and proceed to ignore any and all facts supporting the opposition.

It's like all the people who accuse opponent organizations of membership padding or studies as being biased when all organization seek to have as many members as possible (that's how you accomplish your goals, bring together those who agree with you) and everyone has pre-existing opinions.

In this case we have nothing but the word of the parents against the word of MJ. In this society, that isn't enough. If it were, I may well be in jail right now myself. If we didn't require proof of guilt before assigning it, anyone could be arrested for anything and they would go to jail automatically.

End of Song, for now.

[Flyndaran]

Further thought: You scorn belief in face of lack of or contradictory evidence when it relates to religion, but you're all over believing this.

I guess you CAN believe.

Abusing kids doesn't require magic.

Hmm. Equating MJ to OJ. Pretty sure that's a fallacy of some sort, if you're trying to appear rational.
....

Two people found not guilty that pretty obviously did it. Seems similar to me. In american justice systems, it matters far more who the jurors are than whether the accused is guilty.
I just say that MJ gave up the benefit of the doubt when he admitted to inapropriate behavior. Once that b.o.t.d disappeared his guilt seemed as likely as any sexual crime can be.
Would you let him sleep with your children?
Whatever. We aren't going to change our opinions of the facts.

[Kalli]

Interesting how so many people were keen to jump on the "Yeah fuck the pedophile, he deserved to die anyway" bandwagon (seemingly without any regard to how disgusting this attitude is), but when asked to present some kind of argument, any kind at all, to back up those huge claims then everyone disappears.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

I don't see anything that makes it anything like obvious that MJ did anything...

Got a link?

[LeChatNoir]

Two people found not guilty that pretty obviously did it.

Last time I checked, one person accusing another person of a crime is not sufficient to prove that the accused "pretty obviously did it".

I honestly think that MJ was naive and gullible for his age. I truly think that he thought it was ok to share his bed with a child (and not in a sexual manner) and that backfired on him. Of course people are going to think the worst.

Where is the physical evidence that Michael Jackson abused any child? Not just the say-so of the childrens parents, which isn't enough to convict anyone.

[Nyoibo]

Abusing kids doesn't require magic.

BJ was more pointing out, that even though there was no evidence to support the claims except a couple of peoples words for it, you still believe it, nothing to do with magic, that's faith right there.

I just say that MJ gave up the benefit of the doubt when he admitted to inapropriate behavior.

When did he admit to inapropriate behaviour?