Petrarose
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2009
- Messages
- 9,574
- Points
- 0
Ashthinking back, and this is only hindsight here, I think the only person who could have made a suggestion or offer to help Michael was Debbie. She was the only witness who testified that she saw docs give him prof 2 times for sleep on the tour. She knew first hard the problems relating to sleep on the tour, not the dancers & crew in TII. Therefore, as far as I am concerned when she heard about TII, as a good friend she could have called and see how he planned to sleep. I am not saying he would have listened to her though.
I guess I should stop here because we will end up repeating the AEG case in the thread.
It seems Debbie wanted to talk about her charity. I don't know if she called the tabloid to advertise it, and they said she can if she talks about Michael and the children; or they called her to talk about Michael and the children, and she said she will do it if she can plug her charity.
Maybe some feel that the end justifies the means--that Debbie is doing a good job with the charity so it is ok for her to use Michael and the children to bring that charity to the forefront. The idea is that Michael would not mind. I don't agree with this thinking. To exploit the sadness, emotions, mental fragility of minors and the challenges of a dead loved one to plug a "non-related" cause is a disgrace to me. I am not saying the charity is not a wonderful and needy service. I know in no way would Michael use the pain of his children to plug his Heal The World Foundation or any of his other charitable works.
She did a good job with the auction information and I wish her well in her work.
I guess I should stop here because we will end up repeating the AEG case in the thread.
It seems Debbie wanted to talk about her charity. I don't know if she called the tabloid to advertise it, and they said she can if she talks about Michael and the children; or they called her to talk about Michael and the children, and she said she will do it if she can plug her charity.
Maybe some feel that the end justifies the means--that Debbie is doing a good job with the charity so it is ok for her to use Michael and the children to bring that charity to the forefront. The idea is that Michael would not mind. I don't agree with this thinking. To exploit the sadness, emotions, mental fragility of minors and the challenges of a dead loved one to plug a "non-related" cause is a disgrace to me. I am not saying the charity is not a wonderful and needy service. I know in no way would Michael use the pain of his children to plug his Heal The World Foundation or any of his other charitable works.
She did a good job with the auction information and I wish her well in her work.