Is Streisand Going Dolally?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-47680378
What a stupid thing to say.

[Deskdiary]

IF Michael Jackson abused the kids, then if the parents accepted a pay-off they are disgusting human beings. If my kids were abused there's not enough money in the world that would buy my silence.

But let's take the rule of law.

I genuinely believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty.

Tora - for years you have argued that the fans were to blame for Hillsborough. At the moment Dukenfield's future hangs in the balance and there's a very real possibility he may be found guilty. I don't like it - it's scapegoatism - but he could be found guilty of gross negligence manslaughter. Will you accept the decision? I suspect you won't even though his peers may find him guilty. And yet you're happy to accept MJ is guilty despite never having been found so.

[-Talbot-]

I genuinely believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty.



Then you believe Savile is innocent.

[Deskdiary]

Togo - you're confusing the concepts.

Yes I believe in innocent until proven guilty - but that doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on people who haven't been brought to trial.

Saville - yes, I believe he was a predatory dirty scumbag.

Jackson - I believe there's 'something' there, but my seed of doubt is that the parents accepted money. I can only judge others by my values, and (and I know I'm repeating myself), there's not enough money in the world that would buy my silence if one of kids was abused.

BUT the point is, Saville is innocent, as is Michael Jackson. Whether we like it or not (and in the case of the former definitely not) but they are undeniably legally innocent.

[Togo]

Adolph Eichmann.....Guilty as tried. Adolph Hitler......Not.

[Deskdiary]

^^^you're bringing in somebody who killed millions of jews to try, and fail, to prove a point?

Classy.

Argument well and truly - credibility gone.

[Deskdiary]

Argument well and truly *lost*

[ToraToraTora]

DD - Duckenfield is a scape goat to throw to the baying mob, same as SoldierF. I don't see how either can get a fair trial so no , I will not accept the inevitable guilty verdicts.

I don't care what the court said, MJ got off because he paid off the witnesses. As you say Saville was never tried but we all accept his guilt, even you, why is that? Are you saying the results of a trial can never be questioned?

[Deskdiary]

Tora - You've just said you don't care what the court said about MJ, as far as your concerned he's guilty.

If Duckenfield is found guilty, you won't care what the court said, as far as you're concerned he's innocent.

No doubt you can see my point.

[ToraToraTora]

yes, I have evaluated each case independently, the courts do not always get the right result, people get off on a technicality all the time, others get unfairly convicted; that does not mean the former are not guilty or the latter are.

[pixie374]

Realistically, there is often a difference between legally "not guilty" and actually "not guilty". Unless convicted, everyone deserves to be treated as innocent by law, but in reality, it must means 'we don't know.

[pixie374]

Just means...

[fender62]

as an aside, did oj simpson murder his wife...probably imho

[ToraToraTora]

can have done FF he was found not guilty, as DD tells us.

[ToraToraTora]

* can't!

[Peter Pedant]

// Is the same Michael Jackson that has never been convicted of abuse? If MJ abused those kids then he's a despicable scumbag, but the fact of the matter is we will never know.//

erk ? because he was never convicted so we will never know
- so the Bham bombers were convicted so THEY must have been the bombers and not framed?

and we will never know if the 2WW took place because there has been no criminal case about it - even tho we know war was declared in Sep 39 and Germany surrended May 1945

as anyone who has been in court knows, the conviction often has nothing to do with the events.....

not every nasty event is attended by a conviction

[Peter Pedant]

oh I see others have been wondering if convicitions for everything ar ethe way forward
what about ......

http://strangeco.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-poisonous-adelaide-bartlett.html

adelaide bartletts husband expired in front of her and ether was found in his - - stomach. She was acquitted of murder

The famed surgeon Sir James Paget was far blunter, stating that now that Adelaide was acquitted, she should, in the interests of science, let everyone know how she did it!

altho I agree saying that it was OK because he didnt

[Peter Pedant]

OK because he didnt zero any - was remamrkably cack-handed

[Peter Pedant]

// Duckenfield is a scape goat to throw to the baying mob,//

was responsible for 78 deaths and escaped accounting for himself for 50 y thro the activities of his pals who never say anything wtong in what they did

[Calicogirl]

Whether Michael Jackson is guilty or not though is actually irrelevant to what Barbara Streisand said.
She said she believed the boys HAD been abused but that 'Michael Jackson's sexual needs were Michael Jacksons sexual needs', and that their 'parents were dazzled by fame' as though that in some ay excuses it.
I thought we were talking about Streisand's moral repugnance because of her words and opinions when she thinks the boys were subject to rape and sexual abuse, not whether Michael Jackson was ever tried or not and died technically innocent.

[ToraToraTora]

twopee: "was responsible for 78 deaths and escaped accounting for himself for 50 y thro the activities of his pals who never say anything wtong in what they did " - well the they haven't decided that in court yet have they?