It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Was Michael Jackson Framed? by Mary A. Fischer GQ magazine

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 11:24 PM
who cares lets talk about this when all the other bad stuff in the world has ended. There is nothing here only a Hollywood star dead and thats it.

posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 11:52 PM
reply to post by OneNationUnder

I stated last night I won’t use up band width and my precious time debating the ignorant.

Since I last visited the thread additions have been made from a couple of attention seekers - their own words speak loud enough and don’t need me to reiterate what’s already obvious.

(I must admit I though I especially liked the one who went on like a know-it-all over the *facts* of the case yet admittedly didn’t even read the article. Makes me wonder if they walk around wearing a t-shirt that says “I’m with stupid“ - and the arrow is pointing Up.)

There is one opinion made I want to address:

The more he has hurt, the more he donates to rid himself of the guilt.

Child molesters don’t feel guilt.

In fact, the majority of child rapists feel the child *owes them* and that it’s the child's fault.

That and, like was mentioned by another contributor to the thread, the abusers feel they’re *teaching* the child what the child *needs to know when it grows up*...

To the rest of the contributors:

I want to thank those of you who shared opinions, informed opinions, and contributed to the thread with posts filled with dignity, quality and compassion.


[edit on 29-6-2009 by silo13]

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:11 AM
reply to post by silo13

Let that be a lesson to anyone who dare oppose your view on this case, god forbid anyone else's opinion be dealt with respect, I mean it's not like were in a public forum. But just for the sake of my own self respect I will share my opinion....despite what appears as though it could very well be extortion and nothing more, this child hasn't recanted his accusation so we can not be 100% sure, it takes a very arrogant person to say with certainty that this child is most definately lying. Honestly, I believe it is very possible that he lied for his father, but then again it very well could be true. And bullying me won't get my support. I hope he is innocent and if so that he rest in peace.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:14 AM
reply to post by RiotComing

I've just been over on GLP, and someone over there was saying that this is a hoax news story”
Any truth to that?


If you’ve read the article I doubt you’d be asking the question.

The author of this article, the award winning Mary A. Fischer has contributed to some of the worlds most well known and trusted magazines including Life, Rolling Stone, and Gentleman's Quarterly.

Mary Fischer is not is not my 'friend' (as made mention by another contributor to the thread), and though I would find it an honor to be so, Mary Fischer is a professional and I got extremely lucky she responded to my plea for a chance to re-post her article here in ATS.

Just a bit here on Gentleman's Quarterly, (where the article first appeared).

For nearly half a century, GQ has been a leading voice in men's magazines, covering men's style and culture from fashion and politics to travel, entertainment, sports, technology and relationships - since 1931.

GQ continues to offer high-quality writing from some of today's best writers, as well as the user-friendly style guides that have always distinguished the magazine. In the words of its publisher, "GQ addresses the people, places, ideas and issues that shape men's personal expression, development and experiences."

Now ask yourself.
Is the editor of a magazine, not an internet blog but an internationally acclaimed magazine, going to risk it’s long standing reputation of excellence on a *hoax* article?

Less likely even, spend the money publishing a *hoax* and risk massive money loss in the future when the article was proven to be false, risking GQ's long standing reputation in the opinions of its readers who’ve come to trust it’s content for a century?

Simple answer?


[edit on 29-6-2009 by silo13]

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:16 AM
reply to post by LiquidLight

MJ settled for a undisclosed amount of money to drop the case. That good people is a sign of a guilty child molester. So to be honest he settled out of court..because he DID NOT read my lip's...DID NOT!!! want this to go to trial.

You have your opinion and we have ours. The problem is, youre trying to pass your opinion off as fact, when in fact you have no idea what the hell youre talking about, regarding that case, just like the rest of us here.
MJ had no say so on whether this went to trial or not. The parents are the ones that blackmailed him, threatening to drag the issue out in civil court unless he paid them millions of dollars.
If you know as much as you claim to then you should realize that in cases like that, a victim cant even drop the charges because at that point it becomes The State of California Vs Michael Jackson, so even if they wanted to drop the charges, the DA would continue on with them.
Like the poster above already explained, the criminal side didnt have enough evidence and they knew it.

Do you think every woman that has claimed rape was telling the truth? They can lie, just like kids can.
If the parents orchestrated this entire event, dont you think the kid could've received a little bit of coaching?
Do you think that a thirteen year old boy, whose parents stand to gain millions of dollars, is above lying for them?

Like i said, you know just as much as i do about this incident and thats only whats been made available to us.

Going by the evidence for both sides, its my opinion as well as the opinion of the then District Attorney, that there was more evidence that the crime did NOT happen, than there was evidence that it did happen.

You see the difference here? Youre arguing opinions that youre trying to pass off as facts, im stating my opinions as well but those are backed up by the facts regarding the cases.

Oh well, you can go back to yelling at the TV some more.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:17 AM
I've been a long-time fan of his songs and think his contribution to music is nothing short of legendary. He will definitely be remembered as one of the greats in pop music and the music scene as a whole. He will also be remembered for his generous donations to charity and sincere efforts to help children around the world who are in need of support. It is my opinion that he should be remembered for these things above any negatives because he did more good than bad, and the memory of him should be honoured in this regard.

In terms of the child abuse allegations, at first I thought he was innocent and was just the victim of extortion. But in the most recent course case, the testimony of one of the witnesses had a strong effect on me, and lead me to believe he might be guilty. I do not know the name of the witness, but the scenario was along the lines as:

A man in his early twenties, testified against MJ and alleged that Jackson had sexually molested him when he was younger. As he was giving the testimony, he showed a lot of emotion including crying for most of his statement. He detailed things such Jackson giving him $100 notes while touching his genitals, extra $50 if he did not tell anyone.

Allowing this witness to give testimony was appealed against by Jackson's lawyers constantly, but the prosecution maintained it was evidence of a history of abuse for the current case against him.

In the end, the judge allowed the testimony, but stated that the events described by this witness could not be used to show MJ guilty in the present case. They could only be shown to collaborate the idea that MJ had a history of doing these things. Did anyone else find these events rather strange?

Why would this young man come forward and say these things? Was extorting money more valuable to him than maintaining his pride, honour and reputation?

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:54 AM
reply to post by Sheeper

Let that be a lesson to anyone who dare oppose your view on this case

I call ignorance for what it is - not because they chose to disagree with me.

No one forced them to post opinions based on rumor and tabloid transparency - So - why should I waste my time responding when they haven't even read the article this thread is centered on?

If they read the article and still disagree, fine, I look forward to an informed debate - as long as they can back it up with facts as I have.

Now back to the topic and a very interesting point you bring up.

despite what appears as though it could very well be extortion and nothing more, this child hasn't recanted his accusation

This 'child' is a 26 year old man.

The question is this:

If he were to 'recant' his story, wouldn’t he (or his father) be responsible by law to repay over 20 million dollars back to the Michael Jackson estate?

Why would either of them risk *recanting* now?
Since Michael's passing it’s my onion we’re even less likely we’ll hear from either of them again in reference to the past.

Consider also 'Jordie' Chandler's taken out a restraining order on his father and is in the process of suing him for aggravated assault (including spraying him in the face with mace and trying to choke him to death).

Obviously Chandler Sr. has (still) not changed his ways.

Thanks for your post.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 01:14 AM
reply to post by Dark Ghost

Why would this young man come forward and say these things? Was extorting money more valuable to him than maintaining his pride, honour and reputation?

And why would parents who suspect a man is molesting their child go to a lawyer and not the police?


Do you have any articles - not blog material - but credible articles concerning the allegations you’re referring to? I’d be interested in reading about the case.

Added note: I understand your point but - for an adult survivor of childhood sexual assault to come forward with allegations is a courageous thing.
Coming forward with allegations against an abuser does not and never should risk the survivors pride, honor or reputation.

Does this mean I believe for a moment the allegations by this man?
I can’t make any informed decision until I read more about it from a credible source.

Thanks for your participation in the thread.

[edit on 29-6-2009 by silo13]

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 02:12 AM
Thanks for sharing - great article.

I would ignore programed, shallow, insecure and blind members and their postings. My question is - why they even bother joining? If you are not the seeker and questioner, your comments will be stifling others who care to pay attention to things and try to understand the world around them.

I started a small thread as well - just posted my suspicions. LINK

[edit on 29-6-2009 by FIFIGI]

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 05:36 AM
reply to post by silo13

Who the FRACK cares about Michelle Jackson-no not a misspelling. Just wanted to let you know in the grand scheme of things including my life, I would say Michelle ranks right up there with the ant that crossed my path when I was 8, except for the fact the MSM will use her and the other celebrity deaths as a distraction for real news.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 06:11 AM
reply to post by endisnighe

Who the *bleep* cares about Michelle Jackson


Millions and millions of people throughout the whole entire world, that’s who.

It seems you could have learned something from Michaels great compassion and love for his fellow man.

I hope you find something in your life that makes life living and brings you happiness and peace.
Good luck to you.


posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 06:59 AM
You have to ask where his family and friends where when this was going on, surely anyone with half a brain would have seen this family for what they where. When the father asked MJ to build them a new house I would have imagined even alarm bells would have went off in his brain.

The best way I have seen MJ summed up is in the southpark episode when they say that you have to grow up and be a father rather than trying to create a new childhood. He left himself wide open to this attack and all involved deserve all the karma that is on its way to them.

P.s I never heard about the injection of the drug before in the fathers dentist office, the father and his lawyer deserve hung, drawn and quartered.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:09 AM
Great article. Extremely well researched and written.

It is a terrible thing- to endure that sort of false accusation.
Can't imagine the toll it would take on a person.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:09 AM
reply to post by RiotComing

The hoax news story they are talking about is the blog post that says that the boy admits he lied. Not the GQ article of this thread.

The boy has not recanted.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:13 AM
This was a great article, and my thanks goes to the OP. S & F. I've never seen this one before, and appreciated her clear concise outline of the events.

Personally I always believed he was telling the truth. There's no evidence at all to prove him guilty OR innocent.

Unfortunately, "child molestation" accusations are extremely common in divorce situations. People can gain ALOT of power by crying wolf with that one. And as stated in this article, it's one the most difficult negatives to proove as innocent. Once you point a finger at someone and cry "child molestor", their reputation is forever tarnished, because people will always wonder... no matter how many times it's been to court or no matter how good the character of a person is.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:15 AM

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by silo13

Who the FRACK cares about Michelle Jackson-no not a misspelling. Just wanted to let you know in the grand scheme of things including my life, I would say Michelle ranks right up there with the ant that crossed my path when I was 8, except for the fact the MSM will use her and the other celebrity deaths as a distraction for real news.

Then go away and live your life. Nothing to see here for you. Nothing to be learned either.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 08:21 AM
i have enjoyed the different view points sharred thus far BUT what annoys me a bit is the fact that so many people have just come into the thread , mouths of by saying he is a *molesteror* *get over it he is dead*, *who cares* or * am sick of hearing about mj* etc etc etc

well if you feel that way and do not want to contribute to an ongoing discussion then do not look at this thread its as simple as that, maybe a lot of people dont care about it but there are a few of us here that do, and we want to discuss what we think.

getting back on topic i would also be interesting in seeing more info regarding the court testimony previously mentioned about the man who was paid my Michael to keep quiet etc., i have read a while ago something similar but cant recall who it was or the circumstances around it.

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 10:07 AM
whats up with the hypocricy...
people are upset that michael jackson's good name was slandered and was made to look like a monster

and then you go and post a GQ article that makes 5 other people look like monsters

going around pointing fingers doesn't tell me anything. unless you got a video of michael jackson getting peed on by r kelly with him holding up 2 forms of identification i think we should keep his name out of our mouths...

as mike jackson said in that south park episode... "thats ignorant, your all ignorant..."

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 11:14 AM
reply to post by dannyfal

whats up with the hypocricy...

How is it hypocrisy?

Those who’re running on at the mouth about what a *bleep* Michael is have yet to show evidence.

I provided an article from a reputable magazine written by an award winning author that proves a number of people extorted Michael, more importantly even used their son to do it - ruining his life, and more, it’s all written neatly, succinctly and has a bundle of fact to back it up.

Where’s the hypocrisy in that?

There isn’t any.

Thanks though for your post...

posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 11:25 AM

Its a great article and i really enjoyed reading it.

Have you got any other articles about the second trial that give an honest and well researched account about what happened?

Thanks again

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in