Sisqo and Vinnie
 

Why all the hatred for Vinnie who ok caused a bit of violence (in his past) and has clearly changed beacuse he hasnt lost his temper in the house at all. if he was half as bad as the papers make out the men in white coats would of taken him away by now, and he does ALOT for charity.


Then theres no hate for Sisqo who sexualy abused a child? lol

people have there prioritys mixed up me thinks.:nono:

sisqo has been kicked out

Stupid thread

Sisqo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vinnie
:D

Yeah but people hating on vinnie for a bit of violence in his past,and alot of people seem to think its unforgivable, but i noticed when alot of people found out Sisqo had sex with children alot were like " ohh well i forgive him" . lol thats crazyness.

I think both of them made mistakes and I see past that for both of them.

My problem with Vinnie stems from the fact that he is a cock. That's all. And no amount of charity donations will ever change that.

"hating on" what part of the USA do you come from ?

Sisqo is a piece of ****, that's all.

The main difference between Sisqo & Vinnies pasts is this : Sisqo was not aware that the girl was underage but I'm quite sure Vinnie was aware of when he was hitting some one!

Hehe. Nice.

Can someone remind me of Vinnie's redeeming qualities? I can't think of any.

It amazes me how many people have the ability to read Sisqo's mind and KNOW that he wasn't aware the girl was underage. A grown man having sex with a child is beyond the pale, and I do NOT buy that Sisqo was unaware of her age. He got a 14 year old pregnant then spends the next 10 years avoiding any responsibility.

Anything Vinnie has done is not comparable with the exploitation of a CHILD and people who try to excuse Sisqo are deluded.

well, the fact that he doesn't make a habit of it and as far as everyone is aware this was the one and only time it happened, it is logical to come to the conclusion that he is not a paedophile as paedophiles tend to make a habit of it.

Simply because we are unaware of him having any previous form doesnt mean he doesnt do it regularly.

People probably though Peter Sutcliff, Fred West, Harold Shipman, Vanessa George etc. were okay.

It amazes me how many people have the ability to read Sisqo's mind and KNOW that he was aware the girl was underage.

Works both ways, dude.

Ditto.

Your basing this on assumption, nothing more. I imagine if you accidently banged a 14 year old and got her pregnant you would do your best to avoid that scenario from that point on.

Assuming someone is a paedophile is a very heavy assumption to make.

Oh so a 45 year old bloke that can keep his temper in check for a couple of weeks on public tv - must be a changed man! You are easily fooled!

So you think that no guy ever slept with an underage girl accidentally thinking they were older then? I'm not saying that he wasn't in the wrong but I am saying that there is a difference between a person who specifically seeks out children and someone who mis judges a persons age.

I have a strange feeling of Deja vous........................

Saying Sisqo was not aware of the girl's age is nothing near the sort of leap in logic that the notion he exploited her is. Are you really prepared to say that given the context of what he did (if he did it), that he is on the same level as a child molester? Don't you think he would have offended more than once if that's how he got his kicks?

I think it's also worth bearing in mind Sisqo has yet to receive any criminal conviction or scheduled criminal court appearance. This whole thing still has yet to be proven in a court of law, which is more than what can be said for Vinnie, who has repeatedly gotten in trouble with the law and repeatedly gotten off lightly due to his money and status.

Its the fact he is keeping quiet totally about it, I bet his agent makes it a condition of any interviews its not mentioned. If it was a simple single mistake, why not just admit it, either way he wont ever go back to switzerland except in the unlikely case he gets extradited.

As far as the Swiss High Court is concerned he is the father of the child. That is fact. Its Swiss Law, you may not agree with them or the way they interpret his refusal to submit DNA evidence in his own defence. But under Swiss Law it has been proven. (or rather he failed to disprove).

I wouldn't be shouting it from the rooftops either if I were him. the fact that he hasn't spoken about it to the press has no bearing what-so-ever on whether or not it was intentional

Exactly neither does the fact we only know he has done this sort of thing once prove that it was an unintentional one off mistake does it?

That's totally within his right and completely logical in the face of the media. If he doesn't want to talk about it you can't blame him for that. It doesn't mean he is without remorse when the cameras switch off.

It doesn't prove the reverse either, does it?