Jun 25, 2009 -- 7:46PM, Tmarie64 wrote:

His pedophilia is a whole 'nother thread.  Not being convicted does not equate innocence.....

True, just like being accused of something does not equate guilt.

I think he never mentally/emotionally matured into an adult, for whatever reason.  There will always be speculation about whether he was actually a child molestor or whether he was just a troubled, reclusive man who did not have a good understanding of what was and was not appropriate in the adult world.  He never seemed to fully mature, and considering the extreme isolation he kept himself in, I could see where he could have a very poor understanding of what kind of boundaries should be kept between adults and children.  I can see where it's possible that certain parents decided to capitalize on his wealth, fame, and naivity.  Just saying...there are all kinds of possibilities as to what happened, and there was obviously not solid enough proof to convict.

I think it's incredibly sad that the world lost not one, but two HUGE entertainment icons yesterday.  Rest in peace Michael and Farrah.

Cesmom,

I think he never mentally/emotionally matured into an adult, for whatever reason.  There will always be speculation about whether he was actually a child molestor or whether he was just a troubled, reclusive man who did not have a good understanding of what was and was not appropriate in the adult world.  He never seemed to fully mature, and considering the extreme isolation he kept himself in, I could see where he could have a very poor understanding of what kind of boundaries should be kept between adults and children.  I can see where it's possible that certain parents decided to capitalize on his wealth, fame, and naivity.  Just saying...there are all kinds of possibilities as to what happened, and there was obviously not solid enough proof to convict.

You know I think that is very possibly the way it was.

Something that made me very suspicious at the time of the molestation charges is that the family of the boy accepted a settlement from Jackson.

If i had a child that had been molested by someone I would NEVER had taken money from that person. I would want that person in jail, not get his money.

To me that says that those people just saw a way to get money out of him nothing else.

Maya

Jun 26, 2009 -- 9:04AM, Svetlana wrote:

Jun 26, 2009 -- 7:59AM, Tmarie64 wrote:

Jun 25, 2009 -- 7:53PM, Mlyons619 wrote:

How do you KNOW nobody else can get into the ER?

DUH!  Because they SAID SO.  Did you not go to the link I provided?  Did you not read the quoted snippet?  Open your eyes, clean your glasses, it's right there in black and white.

Ignore the scandals?  Kate, you sound like the bishops of the Catholic church!

And given that this was the only hospital in LA, many emergency victims must have died.  Oh, for Pete's sake!  Don't be absurd!  When we lived in the LA area, my daughter fell face first off of playground equipment and bit all the way through her lip.  Her face and shirt were covered in blood.  We had to go to THREE emergency centers, because all of them were so busy.  My daughter's case was not that critical, but she clearly needed medical attention ASAP, and we were taken care of.  Whether the doors of that hospital were barred, or the halls were lined with the victims of one huge car accident (as they were in one of the hospitals I went to with my daughter), emergency care is available SOMEwhere in the LA area.  How much care could be given to genuine emergency victims in MJ's case, if the halls were blocked by curiosity seekers and paparazzi?

As to the scandals, you're certainly right that being cleared of charges, however completely, does not necessarily equate with innocence.  However, charges filed do not necessarily equate with guilt, as you are claiming.  Whether he did anything at all to those kids, he is facing a judge who knows exactly what happened, and he is enduring whatever consequences that perfect judge deems appropriate.

You've always struck me as reasonable, TMarie, don't let your hatred of MJ cloud that reason.

You've obviously never heard that in the case of a stroke... TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.   If a person with 5 blocks of this facility had a stroke, that person would be permanently damaged, and could very likely die, if they had to be transported to a facility further away.

I don't hate him... Never cared enough about him to hate him.  I'm just sick to death of the people who act like he was some great person who was deserving of more than anyone else.

Jun 26, 2009 -- 11:06AM, Tmarie64 wrote:

You've obviously never heard that in the case of a stroke... TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.   If a person with 5 blocks of this facility had a stroke, that person would be permanently damaged, and could very likely die, if they had to be transported to a facility further away.

I don't hate him... Never cared enough about him to hate him.  I'm just sick to death of the people who act like he was some great person who was deserving of more than anyone else.

I'll agree that people were denied necessary medical care if you can prove that that actually happened.  Given the population of LA, the idea that NOONE near the hospital had a stroke yesterday is absurd.  If you can prove that they suffered because medical care that would otherwise have been available was denied them, then I'll join you in outrage.  If you can find no case, then, given that stroke victims were certainly there, you'll have to admit that they got the care they needed.

You must also show that everyone within five blocks of that hospital that has needed immediate care got it when there was no blockage of the emergency doors, say for the entire week before yesterday, that there were no cases of people getting help too late at that hospital.  Not everyone gets the help they need in time, no matter where that need occurs.

I'm afraid that your hatred is too obvious to be denied, my dear.