NYCblurb said: " THIS IS NOT CORRECT. OF COURSE ONE COULD SUE IN CIVIL COURT, BUT IT IS TOO LONG AFTER THE FACT IT APPEARS."
But a criminal conviction is powerful evidence in a civil trial where the burden of proof is merely "the preponderance of evidence" (sometimes referred to as 51% and up), far lower than "beyond a reasonable doubt".
I think that may be what the person who originally asked about the timing of criminal and civil cases may have been thinking about.
Another point of view, like it or not: https://talunzeitoun.com/2019/01/30/michael-jackson-and-me/?fbclid=IwAR1WrK6Kk6Rxa2nYctaVjNZlhvEohwD2j8kuCOTKQ8fMod6VAkwbbxXhY9Y
GiantsInTheSky2 said: "I also highly recommend watching the Oprah aftershow on HBO where she interviews the subjects as well. She asks some good questions."
She does. Good questions and HARD questions, such as "Why did you allow the abuse to go on for years?" and "Did the sex feel good to you as seven-year-old?" I realize that latter sentence sounds creepy out of context, but she led up to it and it's an important question to ask, because one of the reasons child abuse is so damaging is the combination of pleasure and pain it visits on the victim.
Kad said: "Actual question: we know the Jackson Estate filed a lawsuit againstHBO over airing the documentary, which they claim violates a non-disparagement clause in a 1992 contract between the estate and HBO.
Is the estate able to sue Robson and Safechuck for defamation (or something along those lines)? Does the fact that Jackson has been dead for a decade prevent them from doing so? Is there any legal action the estate can take against these two men specifically, if the estate feels they are being untruthful in order to profit?
"
Kad, I'm not a lawyer, but one article I read (NEW YORKER, I think) said it is nearly impossible to sue for defamation of a dead person. That is why the Estate is resorting to an obscure clause in a 27-year-old contract as the basis for their suit. I'll be surprised if the suit survives a motion for summary judgment, but who knows? As the Manafort sentence demonstrated, the law for rich people and institutions is "different".
bk said: "Another point of view, like it or not: https://talunzeitoun.com/2019/01/30/michael-jackson-and-me/?fbclid=IwAR1WrK6Kk6Rxa2nYctaVjNZlhvEohwD2j8kuCOTKQ8fMod6VAkwbbxXhY9Y"
Thanks for the link, BK. For the life of me, I never understand why "Well, he didn't molest me" is considered a reliable defense to a charge of molestation and/or rape.
Broadway Joe said: "He was always a creep and doesn't deserve a pass because he didn't have a proper childhood and made some overrated pop music."
That's an extreme and inaccurate oversimplification of a very complex progression of abuse(s) that began with the abuse to Jackson, himself. ...and the phrase, "made some overrated pop music" falls far short of Jackson's accomplishments.
John Adams said: "Broadway Joe said: "He was always a creep and doesn't deserve a pass because he didn't have a proper childhood and made some overrated pop music."
That's an extreme and inaccurate oversimplification of a very complex progression of abuse(s) that began with the abuse to Jackson, himself. ...and the phrase, "made some overrated pop music" falls far short of Jackson's accomplishments."
I don't care about Jackson's accomplishments. Whacko Jacko had numerous young boys sleep in his bed and had them travel with him. Too many superfans refused to see the smoke when there was a raging fire for many years when he was still alive. If this was the creepy neighbor down the street he would have been arrested a long time ago but this was another case of money and power can get you out of anything.
I watched the whole documentary and I believe both of them.
GavestonPS said: "For the life of me, I never understand why "Well, he didn't molest me" is considered a reliable defense to a charge of molestation and/or rape."
Even stranger when the famous kids that hung out with Jackson (Culkin, Feldman, etc.) trot this out... why would it be a surprise that someone would potentially molest a bunch of unknown kids and avoid the famous ones? No one said he molested every single kid that ever set foot at Neverland...
haterobics said: "GavestonPS said: "For the life of me, I never understand why "Well, he didn't molest me" is considered a reliable defense to a charge of molestation and/or rape."
Even stranger when the famous kids that hung out with Jackson (Culkin, Feldman, etc.) trot this out... why would it be a surprise that someone would potentially molest a bunch of unknown kids and avoid the famous ones? No one said he molested every single kid that ever set foot at Neverland..."
Exactly.
I'm sure he used the group visits as an audition process.
Predators usually know exactly the right child to pick.
haterobics said: "GavestonPS said: "For the life of me, I never understand why "Well, he didn't molest me" is considered a reliable defense to a charge of molestation and/or rape."
Even stranger when the famous kids that hung out with Jackson (Culkin, Feldman, etc.) trot this out... why would it be a surprise that someone would potentially molest a bunch of unknown kids and avoid the famous ones? No one said he molested every single kid that ever set foot at Neverland..."
Though I'm beginning to wonder.
Absolutely re the child stars, who probably had their own support systems protecting them from outsiders. I suspect Culkin and Feldman were far more difficult to groom than unknowns and show biz outsiders like Safechuck and Robson.
joined:6/10/12
joined:
6/10/12
Posted: 3/12/19 at 2:41am