Jacko Sicko

[giza]

A friend of mine posted this to a mailing list I'm on.

This from PopBitch, a British e-rag with content somewhat akin to the
Smoking Gun (which has a gruesome copy of the original deposition of
molestation from a decade ago). PB gets their info from 'insiders'
FWIW.

         >> Rip Him To Shreds <<
         Now Michael Jackson will be destroyed

     Leaks from the Michael Jackson trial paint a
     gruesome picture of life in Neverland:
     * Drawers full of boys' soiled underwear
     * Photos of naked blond boys as young as seven
     * Attempts to bribe cancer kid Gavin with
     promises to make him a film star in return
     for being nice in the Bashir documentary
     * More than 100 boys sleeping over
     at Neverland in the last three years.

     As Jackson is nearly broke and no more use to
     the music industry as a recording artist, it's
     unlikely he'll have the legal firepower
     to get off this time.

     Instead, this deeply troubled man is going to
     be torn apart in a media feeding frenzy that
     reflects a new mood in society: people
     are starting to resent celebrities and the
     influence they wield. Jacko will be first
     sacrificial lamb.

     (It's a shame - we always hoped that Victoria
     Beckham would be first up against the wall
     when the revolution came)

This should be fun to watch... from a safe distance away!

Comments

[blaze-heartfire.livejournal.com]

nyeh... more or less it's about time -.- cool guy in his time but... kind of loony now

[entropicana.livejournal.com]

I don't think he's really broke... altho he might be less wealthy. And he can always raise millions and millions for his own defense by selling the rights to all those Beatles songs he owns. :P

Re:

[giza.livejournal.com]

Yeah, he certainly seems to have enough to live off of.

And I've always wondered, just what DO celebrities do when they're in this situation? Do they sit around all day and watch TV or what? It sounds almost as though it's a very boring existance to lead.

[puctiger.livejournal.com]

Just remember that these sources are about as reliable as any Tabloid magazine -- not very.

Re:

[murasadramon.livejournal.com]

*nods*

No official evidence of the matter has come out yet, and even though we direct a lot of fun at MJ's way here at Camp Chaos, there's still no hard evidence against him. MJ's popularity is still EXCEEDINGLY strong in Europe, where more CDs are purchased, and has a much larger populace than the US.

MJ is still worth quite a bit of money, and I think that makes him a vulnerable target. Especially for extortion. He's a weird guy, no doubt, but there's been no hard evidence to proove he is yet. Innocent before prooven guilty, after all.

Time will tell whether or not the innocence remains.

Re:

[giza.livejournal.com]

I've always wondered about that... just where DO the tabloids get their information from anyway? And how accurate are they? I imagine that there must be a grain of truth in their articles (or they would have been sued into oblivian by people they write about ages ago). I used to follow alt.religion.scientology regularly, and I remembered that people actually did quote stuff about CO$ from some of the tabloids. Why? Because no "mainstream" newspaper would.

I wonder if any studies have been done on tabloids, how they operate, and just how reliable they are? Curious feline minds want to know!

[melskunk.livejournal.com]

Now, I don't wanna come off sounding like I'm pro-child-expliotation (or even pro-Jackson) or nothin', but I do find it odd that WITH all the boys that have been in Neverland, there aren't more accusations. Generally, when I see cases like this in the media, it starts with one or two, then you end up with DOZENS as investigation moves on and more kids are spoken to or come forward. DOZENS! I am not enough of a consperacy nut to think they all could be bought off or silent when talked to by investigators.
So I think he probably didn't do it.

Re:

[puctiger.livejournal.com]

A great number of tabloids can just make up their information. I haven't scanned the actual magazines myself, but I would wager that they have some kind of legal disclaimer that says their magazine is intended for entertainment purposes only, or something of the such.