Michael Jackson, child molester?

[Piper84]

Would my mum have sent me off to go stay with Michael? Probably.

But she didn't.

Cow

To be honest, he was only interested in young boys of a certain age. The list is endless: Macaulay Culkin, the two Coreys, the Kriss Kross boys, basically vulnerable, "good looking" (it seems wrong to label kids of that age good looking, but they were definitely all photogenic) boys who all seem to have had drug problems since. I don't think it's a coincidence.

Who says? The media? Exactly.

What? That he struck up friendships with them? Or that he preferred the company of young boys? Can you think of any girls he had round?

 

[AP]

Would my mum have sent me off to go stay with Michael? Probably.

But she didn't.

Cow

To be honest, he was only interested in young boys of a certain age. The list is endless: Macaulay Culkin, the two Coreys, the Kriss Kross boys, basically vulnerable, "good looking" (it seems wrong to label kids of that age good looking, but they were definitely all photogenic) boys who all seem to have had drug problems since. I don't think it's a coincidence.

Who says? The media? Exactly.

What? That he struck up friendships with them? Or that he preferred the company of young boys? Can you think of any girls he had round?

Course both you and I don't know. We just have to figure it out from the media and Chinese whispers

 

[Piper84]

Piper whilst I agree with

I also think it's a shame as one of the main reasons abused children don't speak out is because they fear they won't be believed.

I also find it sad that a man was found not guilty on all ten counts and lived with the consequences of lies from people who played on his fortune. Michael was not the average pop star, he preached for world peace, acceptance, and love and was heavily involved in charity. Malicious lies destroyed that. He was an easy target, of course, because kids staying round at some guys house isn't the norm. Rumours circulated for a long time to the point where someone thought "i could set them in stone."

That's my belief anyway.

All we have to go on is the media. Someone's been hurt along the line, it's either Wade or Michael.

We also have the fact that he settled out of court, and the direct testimonies of the boys he had contact with. The media isn't allowed to make stuff up that blatantly.

Why settle if there was no harm involved?

As for charity, I think it's irrelevant. The Savile scandal has given me a lot to think about.

 

[babydust1990]

I personally believe he did. But even if he didnt, he had innapropriate relationships with young boys, even if he didnt sexually abuse them. To have a child that is not your own (or close family) sleep in your bed is wrong imo. I can't believe the parents allowed it tbh!

 

[AP]

Why settle if there was no harm involved?

Maybe because he wanted to continue his career. I dunno? Jeez?

I just can't personally sit and tarnish a man who's already been tried with the molester tag. That's horrible to me.

 

[Kate&Lucas]

To flip the coin you could say, why go through a lengthy, upsetting, career-damaging court case (whether innocent or not) when the accuser will happily drop their accusations for a bit of cash?

Or - why drop the case against a man who abused you/your children and settle out of court, when you believe he is a sexual predator and dangerous to other children?

And, to be fair, it's surprising what the media is allowed to simply 'make up'.

 

[Piper84]

Would my mum have sent me off to go stay with Michael? Probably.

But she didn't.

Cow

To be honest, he was only interested in young boys of a certain age. The list is endless: Macaulay Culkin, the two Coreys, the Kriss Kross boys, basically vulnerable, "good looking" (it seems wrong to label kids of that age good looking, but they were definitely all photogenic) boys who all seem to have had drug problems since. I don't think it's a coincidence.

Who says? The media? Exactly.

What? That he struck up friendships with them? Or that he preferred the company of young boys? Can you think of any girls he had round?

Course both you and I don't know. We just have to figure it out from the media and Chinese whispers

He was pretty open about his friendships with contemporary male child stars, and the drug problems of the former child stars mentioned are also common knowledge. I don't think Corey Feldman or Macaulay Culkin have tried to deny their substance abuse problems and Mac Daddy and Corey Haim have since died of overdoses. None of that is Chinese whispers or the media making stuff up, unless we're living in some kind of Truman Show world where everything is a lie.

The trials had already been carried out. He settled at the end after the harm to his career had been done. If he wanted to spare himself that, why not settle at the beginning?

 

[AP]

Like a previous poster said, you can't point the finger solely on Michael for others drug misuse.

 

[LisaL79]

Being involved with charity does not make someone innocent. Just look up Jerry Sandusky.

 

[AP]

I don't remember anyone saying charity makes you innocent

 

[Piper84]

Like a previous poster said, you can't point the finger solely on Michael for others drug misuse.

He's the tip of the iceberg. Like I said, vulnerable children abound in Hollywood. The kind of children usually targeted by abusers.

 

[Piper84]

Being involved with charity does not make someone innocent. Just look up Jerry Sandusky.

Jimmy Savile, etc.

 

[AP]

I was saying that if MJ was an innocent man, then lies destroyed the image and good he done

 

[Andypanda6570]

He didn't hide the fact he was around young boys. He let camera's into his home and always did interviews. He in fact did have women around him. Not one of his "Celebrity boy friends" that slept at his home never once accused him of anything, being stars themselves people would have paid attention ( Not that they didn't anyway, but being a celebrity means more media coverage) , they all still talk about Michael Jackson in high regard. The man is not here to defend himself and when he was he did it vigorously .. Everyone has their own opinion , but to say his childhood had nothing to do with the way he lived his life, is not true. He was still a child inside because of years of abuse by his father. He also stopped talking to his father for years at a time. I do not believe he was a child molester I just think the years of abuse manifested itself in the way of him being obsessed with kids and giving them everything he didn't have.. JMO

 

[Foogirl]

Yep, I tend to agree. And let's not forget despite a long court case he was found not guilty. Of course some will say it was down to highly paid lawyers etc, but at the end of it, 12 men and women found him not guilty. If that's what the justice system says, that's what we should focus on. If you think that system was wrong, postulating over MJ's guilt solves nothing, why not question the system?

Michael Jackson's behaviour with young children was probably inappropriate when we consider the bare facts. A grown man sharing a bed with children who are not his family is not something I would consider acceptable. But he was no ordinary grown man. He did have a very childlike demeanour. And I can't get away from the fact that the parents of the children he spent time with knew what he was like. They knew his reputation, heard the stories, for goodness sakes he was a grown man with a fairground and a zoo at his house. Even if his motives were innocent, I think as a parent I certainly would not be encouraging my children to spend time alone with someone in that situation, let alone allowing them to spend the night unchaperoned. If the children were abused, I would lay at least part of the blame at the door of the parents.

 

[Piper84]

Definitely the parents were at fault. It's astounding how blinded they seem to have been by the wealth and glamour of it all. Or it's just stage parenting at its worst.

A few parents testified that Jackson would start sobbing and shaking if they questioned their kids staying the night alone with him. If he did molest these children, which I believe he did, then he was also very manipulative about it. It's classic abuser behaviour when you look at the alleged grooming tactics (alcohol, presents etc.) with it.

 

[kerrie24]

I have always thought he was innocent.I think he was a nice guy who wanted to treat children to things and make them happy,and he did.

 

[Noelle610]

Honestly, I have no idea. I'm big on innocent until proven guilty, so in my mind I guess I'd lean toward "no". He was obviously a very troubled man and had a difficult life and I do feel for him.

 

[juicyfruity]

i believe he is guilty

 

[onetwothreebp]

As much as I love his music, I think it's a bit foolish to assume he's innocent. There is a lot of evidence that points otherwise. Where there is smoke, there's fire, usually.