Quote
MKjan

they've escaped much that predates the MeToo and cancel culture. This goes back decades. What does it mean? It means they are doing something right

I won't be that optimistic... The PC-Moloch needs new victims all the time so I bet the band will be blamed for :

- misoginy
- appropriation of the "Afro-American" (read Black) culture.
- disrespect for transgender people "that 1966 picture in drag! Pfew! Horrible!"

Investigators, prosecutors, judges, courts, child psychologists reviewed the evidence. Over, and over, and over. And concluded the children had been coached by Farrow. It's not an opinion . It's verifiable.

Quote
grandmeaulne
Investigators, prosecutors, judges, courts, child psychologists reviewed the evidence. Over, and over, and over. And concluded the children had been coached by Farrow. It's not an opinion . It's verifiable.

Sure, but it doesn't matter. It won't acquit him from the stigma anyway. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

I hear you Stoneage - his reputation has been stained whether guilty or not, though I don't really have an opinion one way or the other as I really haven't followed this story that closely.
Aside from his earlier comedy movies, I've never been much of a fan of his. In fact I watched Sleeper on dvd several months ago, and it was as funny as it was when I first saw it as a kid in the '70's.
Take the Money and Run was another funny one, but haven't seen it in years so might be a good time to see it again.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
grandmeaulne
Investigators, prosecutors, judges, courts, child psychologists reviewed the evidence. Over, and over, and over. And concluded the children had been coached by Farrow. It's not an opinion . It's verifiable.

Have you seen the doc? The prosecutor at the time reviewed the evidence, including the video of 7 year old Dylan and concluded that there was probable cause to prosecute. However he judged that it not be in the best interests of the child to proceed with the case as testifying and recounting the episode may have further traumatised her.

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
grandmeaulne
Investigators, prosecutors, judges, courts, child psychologists reviewed the evidence. Over, and over, and over. And concluded the children had been coached by Farrow. It's not an opinion . It's verifiable.

Sure, but it doesn't matter. It won't acquit him from the stigma anyway. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

It does matter, the truth always matter, despite the stigma. Allen has a lot of people in his camp. He remains happily married and has made many films since coach Farrow went after him.

It was an overly long and very poor documentary.

It does not shine any new light on whether Allen is guilty or not.

I believe in "innocent until proven guilty" as any right minded person should.

Quote
redkev

Quote
grandmeaulne
Investigators, prosecutors, judges, courts, child psychologists reviewed the evidence. Over, and over, and over. And concluded the children had been coached by Farrow. It's not an opinion . It's verifiable.

Have you seen the doc? The prosecutor at the time reviewed the evidence, including the video of 7 year old Dylan and concluded that there was probable cause to prosecute. However he judged that it not be in the best interests of the child to proceed with the case as testifying and recounting the episode may have further traumatised her.

Exactly.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
redkev

Quote
grandmeaulne
Investigators, prosecutors, judges, courts, child psychologists reviewed the evidence. Over, and over, and over. And concluded the children had been coached by Farrow. It's not an opinion . It's verifiable.

Have you seen the doc? The prosecutor at the time reviewed the evidence, including the video of 7 year old Dylan and concluded that there was probable cause to prosecute. However he judged that it not be in the best interests of the child to proceed with the case as testifying and recounting the episode may have further traumatised her.

Exactly.

Again, I'd argue there's a lot on both sides:

The Farrow story: it happened, they didn't move forward because they didn't want to traumatize Dylan further, Allen submitted to a lie detector but from someone he paid and wouldn't submit to one out of his hands, and evidence at the psychiatric place was destroyed which is highly irregular

The Woody Allen story: it didn't happen, Mia is only doing it to get back at Woody for getting together with her adopted daughter, the psychiatrists that looked into Dylan are highly respected, Allen had to go through 2 investigations then and then a third when he was adopting kids with Soon Yi and no investigation yielded enough results to charge him or prevent him from getting more kids, Dylan was coached, multiple people involved have changed their stories, namely Moses and the nanny's there on the day of the incident who say Mia pressured them

It just keeps going on both sides. I genuinely think its hard to say either side is completely right, which is why its so compelling 30 years later. One side HAS to be lying, but which one genuinely seems like its anyone's guess.

Quote
strat72
I believe in "innocent until proven guilty" as any right minded person should.

OJ was proven innocent. It doesn't always work.

OJ was proven"not guilty", not "innocent".

Yet in the Civil Case, OJ was found to be liable (i.e. responsible) for the murders, and ordered to pay $33.5 million to the Brown and Goldman families.
If anyone has any doubts whether or not OJ committed the murders, read famed attorney Vincent Bugliosi's 1996 book Outrage: The Five Reasons Why O. J. Simpson Got Away with Murder.
The title says it all, and you'll understand better why he was found "not guilty" in the criminal trial. It certainly wasn't because he was innocent, and as the Civil Case proved he was 100% liable.

Read all about it: OJ = Murderer

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-20 07:36 by Hairball.

Quote
Hairball

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Hairball

Quote
Big Al
We’ve discussed this before. I’m of the opinion that it’s the knowing that claws at one’s sense of inherent right and wrong. Bill Wyman and Jimmy Page knew the age(s) of the minors they engaged sexually with: Mandy Smith and Lori Maddox respectively. I suspect many of them had sex unknowingly with minors. It’s still very uncomfortable to think about, however.

Gary Glitter was a fully-blown, participating pedophile. He ended-up in Cambodia for a reason.

And there was also Mick with an underaged Rae Dawn Chong who was only 15 in 1976....

Rae Dawn Chong

...um...and Mackenzie Philips

I was going to mention her also, but looked up the scandalous accusation against Mick, and she said she was 18 at the time. Jagger + Mackenzie
She did quote Mick as saying "I've been waiting for this since you were ten years old" which is creepy as hell, but hard to say if any of what she says is completely accurate.
In the same book, she also claims she was molested by her dad repeatedly....

Thanks for clarifying...I didn't recall that.

Is this thread still alive? Seriously, a person who started this might have wanted some attention.
I wonder why you only blame Mick and Bill but never mention Keith who openly was with an underaged 16 years old Quicy Jones daughter while on the STP tour in 1972? While still with Anita? (question for those who glorify Keith's fidelity). Their realtionship was not a secret and footage of them kissing in their underwear was even shown in the Crossfire Hurricane, did you miss it?

Seriously though, judging people having sexual consent several decades ago, makes you look kinda creepy.

Quote
Mariuana
Is this thread still alive? Seriously, a person who started this might have wanted some attention.
I wonder why you only blame Mick and Bill but never mention Keith who openly was with an underaged 16 years old Quicy Jones daughter while on the STP tour in 1972? While still with Anita? (question for those who glorify Keith's fidelity). Their realtionship was not a secret and footage of them kissing in their underwear was even shown in the Crossfire Hurricane, did you miss it?

Seriously though, judging people having sexual consent several decades ago, makes you look kinda creepy.

I wouldn't go there, but Keith, growing-up in the U.K., would've been aware that 16 is the age of consent, here. My mother was 16 when she met my late father, who was 9 years' her senior. Mind you, my mum did lie about her age.

Keith was not even in the UK by then.

Quote
Mariuana
Keith was not even in the UK by then.

No, but the mentality that ‘16’ is OK, may have been ingrained.

I thought Keith was with Anita still in 1972? And didn’t they have another child in 1973? .And a miscarriage in1976? She doesn’t strike me as the type to have stayed with him in 1972 if he was cheating on her.And I have seen CS Blues several times but have never seen Keith having sex with Jones’ daughter.Where is the proof ?And did Quincey Jones ever say anything about it? He didn’t care?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-23 11:45 by Taylor1.

Without presumption of innocence there is not civilization.

Quote
Taylor1
I thought Keith was with Anita still in 1972? And didn’t they have another child in 1973? .And a miscarriage in1976? She doesn’t strike me as the type to have stayed with him in 1972 if he was cheating on her.And I have seen CS Blues several times but have never seen Keith having sex with Jones’ daughter.Where is the proof ?And did Quincey Jones ever say anything about it? He didn’t care?

Weren’t Jagger and Pallenberg lovers’ during the filming of Performance? Due to their dysfunctional, drug-ridden existences, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were all unknowingly sleeping with each-other, quite honestly.

Let It Rock chuck Berry lyrics - She's too cute to be a minute over seventeen (sang younger live)

I Saw Her Standing There Paul McCartney lyrics - Well, she was just seventeen; You know what I mean

Stray Cat Blues Mick Jagger lyrics - I can see that you're fifteen years old; No I don't want your I.D. (sang younger live)

It was a different time. All 3 songs rock.

"Good Morning Little Schoolgirl"

"You're Sixteen"

"High School Confidential"

as far as mick bill & keith and for that matter there entire generation of celeberties go i kind of assumed they all did this and it disturbs me yes legal or not
but i think that the line that we as a society should draw in the sand about about how this is seen in the court of public opinion and how it affect there legacy should be determinded by if the women involved feel they have been violated and have had to live with severe trama inflicted upon them by these men
and if when they tell these stories there just bragging about there wild youths dosen't seem to me to be to be the same thing i believe these women and i believe rae dawn and i think she but it best when she said its her body and her experience to define please lets not make victims out of women that don't want to be seen like that it just feel wrong to me to take there voices & opinions which are the only ones that really matter out of the converstion

Quote
RollingFreak
Let It Rock chuck Berry lyrics - She's too cute to be a minute over seventeen (sang younger live)

I Saw Her Standing There Paul McCartney lyrics - Well, she was just seventeen; You know what I mean

Stray Cat Blues Mick Jagger lyrics - I can see that you're fifteen years old; No I don't want your I.D. (sang younger live)

It was a different time. All 3 songs rock.

Again, seventeen is perfectly legal in the U.K.; then and now. There's zero controversy, there. Also, bare in mind how young McCartney would’ve been when penning these lyrics.

In regard to Stray Cat Blues: I have a feeling Mick was trying to be provocative.

Quote
Mariuana
Is this thread still alive? Seriously, a person who started this might have wanted some attention.
I wonder why you only blame Mick and Bill but never mention Keith who openly was with an underaged 16 years old Quicy Jones daughter while on the STP tour in 1972? While still with Anita? (question for those who glorify Keith's fidelity). Their realtionship was not a secret and footage of them kissing in their underwear was even shown in the Crossfire Hurricane, did you miss it?

Seriously though, judging people having sexual consent several decades ago, makes you look kinda creepy.

I wasn't trying to get attention, buttmunch. I was trying to have an adult conversation concerning the documentary, and ancillary rock stars who engaged in underage sex. I didn't just mention Mick and Bill. It's a ROLLING STONES site. I also mentioned other rock stars such as Elvis, and Jimmy Page. I wasn't aware of Keith and Quincy Jones daughter. And what sexual consent are you talking about? With Dylan? At Seven Years Old? And if you don't comprehend that a minor of any age can't give sexual consent, you are the one that is VERY creepy.

Quote
Mariuana
Is this thread still alive? Seriously, a person who started this might have wanted some attention.
I wonder why you only blame Mick and Bill but never mention Keith who openly was with an underaged 16 years old Quicy Jones daughter while on the STP tour in 1972? While still with Anita? (question for those who glorify Keith's fidelity). Their realtionship was not a secret and footage of them kissing in their underwear was even shown in the Crossfire Hurricane, did you miss it?

Seriously though, judging people having sexual consent several decades ago, makes you look kinda creepy.

Exactly. This is the cancel culture we live in now and its disgusting.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
Mariuana
Is this thread still alive? Seriously, a person who started this might have wanted some attention.
I wonder why you only blame Mick and Bill but never mention Keith who openly was with an underaged 16 years old Quicy Jones daughter while on the STP tour in 1972? While still with Anita? (question for those who glorify Keith's fidelity). Their realtionship was not a secret and footage of them kissing in their underwear was even shown in the Crossfire Hurricane, did you miss it?

Seriously though, judging people having sexual consent several decades ago, makes you look kinda creepy.

I wasn't trying to get attention, buttmunch. I was trying to have an adult conversation concerning the documentary, and ancillary rock stars who engaged in underage sex. I didn't just mention Mick and Bill. It's a ROLLING STONES site. I also mentioned other rock stars such as Elvis, and Jimmy Page. I wasn't aware of Keith and Quincy Jones daughter. And what sexual consent are you talking about? With Dylan? At Seven Years Old? And if you don't comprehend that a minor of any age can't give sexual consent, you are the one that is VERY creepy.

Yes you were, or rather you tried to use a current non-related o/t documentary to advance your distaste (or fascination) with the bands sexual exploits of the past.

It worked, but next time maybe just lead with that as opposed to saying an alleged pedophiles escapades are somehow related. Fin.

Quote
MisterDDDD

Quote
24FPS

Quote
Mariuana
Is this thread still alive? Seriously, a person who started this might have wanted some attention.
I wonder why you only blame Mick and Bill but never mention Keith who openly was with an underaged 16 years old Quicy Jones daughter while on the STP tour in 1972? While still with Anita? (question for those who glorify Keith's fidelity). Their realtionship was not a secret and footage of them kissing in their underwear was even shown in the Crossfire Hurricane, did you miss it?

Seriously though, judging people having sexual consent several decades ago, makes you look kinda creepy.

I wasn't trying to get attention, buttmunch. I was trying to have an adult conversation concerning the documentary, and ancillary rock stars who engaged in underage sex. I didn't just mention Mick and Bill. It's a ROLLING STONES site. I also mentioned other rock stars such as Elvis, and Jimmy Page. I wasn't aware of Keith and Quincy Jones daughter. And what sexual consent are you talking about? With Dylan? At Seven Years Old? And if you don't comprehend that a minor of any age can't give sexual consent, you are the one that is VERY creepy.

Yes you were, or rather you tried to use a current non-related o/t documentary to advance your distaste (or fascination) with the bands sexual exploits of the past.

It worked, but next time maybe just lead with that as opposed to saying an alleged pedophiles escapades are somehow related. Fin.

Wrong again. I never expressed distaste. (Project much?) Simply a discussion. Obviously I triggered you.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
MisterDDDD
Yes you were, or rather you tried to use a current non-related o/t documentary to advance your distaste (or fascination) with the bands sexual exploits of the past.

It worked, but next time maybe just lead with that as opposed to saying an alleged pedophiles escapades are somehow related. Fin.

Wrong again. I never expressed distaste. (Project much?) Simply a discussion. Obviously I triggered you.

My earlier "triggered" comment to you clearly left a mark.
Good.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-24 20:29 by MisterDDDD.

Quote
dcba

Quote
MKjan

they've escaped much that predates the MeToo and cancel culture. This goes back decades. What does it mean? It means they are doing something right

I won't be that optimistic... The PC-Moloch needs new victims all the time so I bet the band will be blamed for :

- misoginy
- appropriation of the "Afro-American" (read Black) culture.
- disrespect for transgender people "that 1966 picture in drag! Pfew! Horrible!"

I agree the PC moloch's can throw stuff at the Stones, but I don't think the Stones become victims for it. They cancel the cancel culture. As the tee shirt says, they survived everything since 1962, and seems like they laugh at it all.