Interesting question. I suppose some of those answers might lay in the Saville case. But yes, you are right, what is justice after someone has died, let alone how do you balance that justice against the silence of a dead man that cannot defend himself. The money will now have been passed on as inheritance, so how does the law deal with that, if monetary justice is recompense.
That was relevant to earlier claims, not the current claims of the two 40+ year olds that have just decided they want justice/cash.
I've only really seen a few headlines and I haven't bothered looking in to the detail to any real degree at all, but to get the cash, don't they have to prove their allegations to some reasonable degree? If they didn't pursue the cash, how could they present robust truth? Also, if their allegations are true, don't they deserve some compensation?
That was really vague, mate. She only ever so slightly touched on an issue which could have lead to more questions, but she never did. The only thing that I really picked up on was, Liz Taylor, saying that he was really intelligent. That's what I also believe. I suggest that plays a big determining factor because with his intelligence, he would have known it wasn't appropriate to have young boys sleeping in his bed. His theme park, special interest in kids, abused himself, very childlike, drugs, intelligent. As somebody said earlier, he had all the hallmarks of a predatory *****phile.
I haven't read anything at all about it, just listened to a program on R5, apparently the FBI did a deep investigation into 10 cases (allegations) and could prove nothing. It just strikes me as odd that 2 40yos (or earlier their parents) would make the claims long after the chance of going to court against the man is gone.
As i said earlier, i haven't seen the documentary, but have seen bits of the cases over the decades. I don't know, so have sat on the fence, although i do tend to fall off it when i hear hush money has been paid, but people can be exploitative for their own means - hence there is every possibility they sold their kids. The sad side of human nature when extreme sums of money are involved. I'm not making any claims Jackson did anything, i'm speaking from a psychological perspective of human nature and the thought of money changing hands to buy silence.
There's something I recall reading, but the detail is very hazy that offered what at face value seemed a reasoned argument that he was actually protecting the kids against the many, many other alleged *****'s in that level of life. I can't recall a single fact, and never checked any of them either. It was an article about the numbers of child stars that allegedly had to 'perform' to get on.
Nothing i would dispute in there. It was claimed later by media sources that Liz wasn't answering calls from him anymore. Did she know stuff on reflection that made her suddenly feel uncomfortable, or maybe she just had ill health, or maybe he became to much of a burden in his need of affection, or maybe it was just bullshitte by the media, who knows, her story has gone to the grave.
The question you asked... 'I haven't read anything at all about it, just listened to a program on R5, apparently the FBI did a deep investigation into 10 cases (allegations) and could prove nothing. It just strikes me as odd that 2 40yos (or earlier their parents) would make the claims long after the chance of going to court against the man is gone.' It seems a balanced view.
From what I've read the only reason he paid that money was to prevent a civil case. He would've had to deal with both a civil case and a criminal case. He wanted the criminal case to clear his name, and he was found not guilty. In a trial where both of his current accusers testified to say he never did a thing. So when were/are they lying - then or now. They lack credibility and no man's reputation deserves to be muddied based solely on that surely.
I suppose part the problem with celebrities and i use Cliff Richard as example, he ripped the arse out of the BBC and only got £210k for all his trouble. I wonder how much that cost him in legal fees, millions i expect. So i can part see why a celebrity might fall into the trap of hush money. Cliff Richard won his case, but he's never going to win back the damage it did to his life, let alone the expense of defence.
Like i said, I haven't watched it, but if it's anything like most other documentaries, yeah then one sided.
