Quincy Jones Knew About Boys in Bed - Michael Jackson

Quincy Jones Knew About Boys in Bed

Michael Jackson Forum

Pages:  1Original Forum    Popular Forums    Search

Posted by: schmiggens

Did Quincy Jones warn Jackson on sleepovers?

Producer reportedly found behavior 'inappropriate'

Updated: 9:44 p.m. ET Feb. 17, 2005SANTA MARIA, Calif. - Star producer Quincy Jones, the mastermind who helped Michael Jackson craft such hit albums as "Off the Wall" and "Thriller," found the pop star's sleepovers with young boys "wrong" and tried to intervene, a TV program reported Thursday.

This latest insight into the turmoil surrounding the controversial visits by teenagers to Jackson's Neverland Ranch came less than a day after Jackson was released from a local hospital after being treated for flu symptoms.

Sources with ties to the two men told the syndicated TV show "Celebrity Justice" that Jones said he was "deeply concerned" about the sleepovers. One source said Jones called them "inappropriate " and "wrong," and worried they would be Jackson's "downfall."

But after several attempts, the sources told the show, Jones found that his longtime friend "didn't want to hear about it" and "didn't take it seriously." Jones has been listed as a potential witness by Jackson's defense team.

Jackson has publicly defended the sleepovers, insisting they were "not sexual."

"Why can't you share your bed? The most loving thing to do is to share your bed with someone," the singer told journalist Martin Bashir in a 2003 British documentary.

But in accusations that led to the current charges, a teenage cancer patient featured in the documentary holding hands with Jackson claimed the star molested him. Jackson was also charged with giving alcohol to the boy, who was 13 at the time.

Jackson recently dismissed the charges as "fiction."

- MSNBC

Reply To this Message

Posted by: mystic

I think Quincy Jones knows a lot about the Jackson family.

He was the one I mentioned before when I was wondering if he knew anything about the alleged abuse the Michael said he went through with his dad. Certainly Quincy would have known this as close as Jones and MJ were all these years.

I just dont think that Jones is a plus for the defense at this point.

He tried to warn MJ about the sleepovers, and even though he says that nothing sexual happened between MJ and these kids...well, he really cant say that for sure..I mean considering he wasnt there.

I hardly doubt that MJ is walking around telling people things like that.

I think Quincy could hurt the defense more than he could help just in the respect that he tried to warn him that it was a bad thing to have these "(un)pajama parties."

But thats just my opinion on it.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: schmiggens

quote:
even though he says that nothing sexual happened between MJ and these kids...well, he really cant say that for sure..I mean considering he wasnt there.


That "nothing sexual" quote is from Michael, not Qunicy.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: gaboman

I can't imagine anyone who'd have been closer to MJ during the late 70s, early 80s, this is true. He'd have a lot to tell, I'm sure, but I doubt he'll be called. Basically because he wouldn't have any first hand knowledge of this case.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: schmiggens

But could he give background information ? Whether Joe beat Michael, the allegations that his brothers had sex in front of him, etc?

Hmm ... I guess they would only need that if Michael pleaded insanity or something.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: gaboman

Joe has already come out and defended himself of that, remember? He didn't beat them - he used a belt. Besides, Quincy didn't meet Michael until 1978, and he was like 20 by that point. Probably wasn't being beaten (sorry, whipped) anymore.

True, QJ could give some insight to MJ's character, but I don't know if it'd be helpful to either side.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: fuscia

Quince would have been a roll model type figure. Right? If so, then the fact that Michael did not take the advice from him and other people really lends to the idea that he IS a pedophile and can not say no to his urges. This will look very bad for the defense.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: mystic

quote:
schmiggens said this in post #3 :


That "nothing sexual" quote is from Michael, not Qunicy.


I realized that a few minutes after I posted that, and I was gonna edit my post...and I got into doing something...and I forgot...Sorry 'bout that!

I still stand by my post on the rest though...

I think the guy could hurt more than help.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: HECK!

But Jones' statement is an important step in leading to the prosecution's case.

You can't just tell the jury that this celebrity is a child molester. You have to lead up to it, massage them a bit. You establish the odd behavior, then build up to the acts themselves. Lawyer tactics.

-HECK!

Reply To this Message

Posted by: mystic

quote:
HECK said this in post #9 :
But Jones' statement is an important step in leading to the prosecution's case.

You can't just tell the jury that this celebrity is a child molester. You have to lead up to it, massage them a bit. You establish the odd behavior, then build up to the acts themselves. Lawyer tactics.

-HECK!



I would totally agree with your statement if Jones was a witness for the state but he is a witness for the defense.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: HECK!

Then that's just plain silly.

-HECK!

Reply To this Message

Posted by: gaboman




So he WILL be a witness? I guess just a character witness... ah well.

Reading the article again, it does just say "sources close to the two men" or something like that. So, really, this is just media hogwash until the day when (if, really) he comes out with it in court.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: mystic

Thats true Gabo...but the article also said that he was listed as a potential witness (Im sure they have the list of witnesses for either side)...which means he might be called, but they arent obligated to call all witnesses on their list...so there is a chance he might not be called at all.

Personally, if this stuff is true..they should shy away from calling him...but on the other hand...I think they need to call adult witnesses.

They should really try to stay away from calling TOO many child actor witnesses. The more child stars they call, the more ridiculous he looks. I mean if he has more kids testifying for his character than adults, that speaks volumes to me.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: gaboman

This is true. They'll need to display Michael as a mature adult who likes to ... bring happiness to children (it took me ages to figure out how to phrase that). This will at least make him seem as less of a "weirdo". Seeing as how it seems he and Chris Tucker seem close, and Tucker had spent a fair bit of time with the mother, he'll be the defences key character witness. Though he may come across as bias, so who knows?

I don't know if Quincy Jones were to testify in Michael's defence, would it be best for MJ? I don't know either of them personally, but it really seems the two of them really parted ways for good at the end of the 80's, and there had to be a reason for this (could be Michael Jackson's love for the Simpsons and Quincy Jones' hate for them, but that doesn't seem like a big enough reason....... especially since QJ didn't denounce the simpsons until around 93ish).... err... lots track of myself...... anyways, they seem estranged. If it wasn't for the 2001 interviews with Quincy Jones on the Special Edition discs of Off The Wall, Thriller and Bad, I'd say Q would be the most dangerous choice.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: hellokittykelli

quote:
mystic said this in post #13 :
Thats true Gabo...but the article also said that he was listed as a potential witness (Im sure they have the list of witnesses for either side)...which means he might be called, but they arent obligated to call all witnesses on their list...so there is a chance he might not be called at all.

Personally, if this stuff is true..they should shy away from calling him...but on the other hand...I think they need to call adult witnesses.

They should really try to stay away from calling TOO many child actor witnesses. The more child stars they call, the more ridiculous he looks. I mean if he has more kids testifying for his character than adults, that speaks volumes to me.



I feel the same way, even if he brings in 100 kids and they say nothing happened it would still look weird.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: HECK!

Yeah, parading a room full of kids, the defense would go "see all these kids my client slept with, none of [i]them[i/] say they were molested."

This guy is such a freak show.

-HECK!

Reply To this Message

Pages:  1 Free Forums    Chat Forum

Michael Jackson Forum: Quincy Jones Knew About Boys in Bed

Forum Forum Forum