Michael Jackson: Was he Innocent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.

. Of what, exactly? Penetration? There is absolutely no question he had inappropriate relationships with children. Sleeping in bed with them, spending time alone, etc. He is guilty of something, it just depends on what degree.

What is the criminal charge for a non-sexual shared bed with a kid? I assume you’re allowed to sleep in a bed with your own kid, right?

What about spending time alone with kids? Should private coaches and tutors and babysitters be investigated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you heard of Leaving Neverland? The documentary featured two men who detailed their abuse from MJ on camera and you cannot make up the horrific details. The Estate of MJ used legal tactics to settle out any claims, but you cannot ignore people who were there with him at the ranch and experienced abuse as children. I am horrified by the people on this board who do not believe victims and brush off all of them as blackmailers - yes those types exist but most celebrities do not have this many accusers.

Documentaries are not objective. People can convince themselves of just about anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you heard of Leaving Neverland? The documentary featured two men who detailed their abuse from MJ on camera and you cannot make up the horrific details. The Estate of MJ used legal tactics to settle out any claims, but you cannot ignore people who were there with him at the ranch and experienced abuse as children. I am horrified by the people on this board who do not believe victims and brush off all of them as blackmailers - yes those types exist but most celebrities do not have this many accusers.

Documentaries are not objective. People can convince themselves of just about anything.

Did you see the WSJ article? The child was able to draw unusual markings on Michael's penis with accuracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you heard of Leaving Neverland? The documentary featured two men who detailed their abuse from MJ on camera and you cannot make up the horrific details. The Estate of MJ used legal tactics to settle out any claims, but you cannot ignore people who were there with him at the ranch and experienced abuse as children. I am horrified by the people on this board who do not believe victims and brush off all of them as blackmailers - yes those types exist but most celebrities do not have this many accusers.

Documentaries are not objective. People can convince themselves of just about anything.

Did you see the WSJ article? The child was able to draw unusual markings on Michael's penis with accuracy.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/michael-jackson-leaving-neverland-nephew-14097871

Taj told Five Live: "[Jordan's testimony was] incorrect. Jordy drew a circumcised penis when my uncle was actually uncircumcised. The autopsy proved that."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you heard of Leaving Neverland? The documentary featured two men who detailed their abuse from MJ on camera and you cannot make up the horrific details. The Estate of MJ used legal tactics to settle out any claims, but you cannot ignore people who were there with him at the ranch and experienced abuse as children. I am horrified by the people on this board who do not believe victims and brush off all of them as blackmailers - yes those types exist but most celebrities do not have this many accusers.

Documentaries are not objective. People can convince themselves of just about anything.

Did you see the WSJ article? The child was able to draw unusual markings on Michael's penis with accuracy.

Exactly, but I'm sure they will just tell everyone that it's normal for friends to shower and see each other naked. Even if one of the friends is an adult male who has no business being that friendly with kids.

[Anonymous]

His own sister (latoya) said Michael was a child molestor and she accused Joe Jackson of molesting her and her older sister Rebbie. She said only Janet was spared.

I think incest is a big thing in large poor families and it’s never talked about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:His own sister (latoya) said Michael was a child molestor and she accused Joe Jackson of molesting her and her older sister Rebbie. She said only Janet was spared.

I think incest is a big thing in large poor families and it’s never talked about.

LaToya has later recanted those claims and said her abusive husband forced her to say it. She maintains to this day that Michael is innocent and her father never touched her.

I don't think Joe Jackson was a pedophile. I think he was physically abusive to his boys. But I haven't heard anything about Joe other than Latoya. Rebbie and Janet have never verified those allegations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.

. Of what, exactly? Penetration? There is absolutely no question he had inappropriate relationships with children. Sleeping in bed with them, spending time alone, etc. He is guilty of something, it just depends on what degree.

What is the criminal charge for a non-sexual shared bed with a kid? I assume you’re allowed to sleep in a bed with your own kid, right?

What about spending time alone with kids? Should private coaches and tutors and babysitters be investigated?

Do you really not see the difference between, say, an uncle sharing a bed with his young nephews or a grandfather sharing a bed with his young grandsons and a middle aged man sharing a bed with young children whose parents work for him? Really?

This kind of delusion is why people think MJ stans are insane. It's not even that you'll say "Yeah, okay, I can see it looked really bad to share a bed with random kids who weren't related to him, but I don't think he was doing anything." It's that you literally act like you don't see the difference between what he was doing vs. a parent sharing a bed with their own child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you heard of Leaving Neverland? The documentary featured two men who detailed their abuse from MJ on camera and you cannot make up the horrific details. The Estate of MJ used legal tactics to settle out any claims, but you cannot ignore people who were there with him at the ranch and experienced abuse as children. I am horrified by the people on this board who do not believe victims and brush off all of them as blackmailers - yes those types exist but most celebrities do not have this many accusers.

Documentaries are not objective. People can convince themselves of just about anything.

Did you see the WSJ article? The child was able to draw unusual markings on Michael's penis with accuracy.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/michael-jackson-leaving-neverland-nephew-14097871

Taj told Five Live: "[Jordan's testimony was] incorrect. Jordy drew a circumcised penis when my uncle was actually uncircumcised. The autopsy proved that."

Right because Taj, a grifter family member who will make money from the estate, is to be believed over a court-appointed expert who looked at the photo and looked at the drawing and declared them to be identical. It was the circumsized or not, but the fact that the coloring was unique due to the vitiligo.

[Anonymous]

No. I believe Wade Robson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you heard of Leaving Neverland? The documentary featured two men who detailed their abuse from MJ on camera and you cannot make up the horrific details. The Estate of MJ used legal tactics to settle out any claims, but you cannot ignore people who were there with him at the ranch and experienced abuse as children. I am horrified by the people on this board who do not believe victims and brush off all of them as blackmailers - yes those types exist but most celebrities do not have this many accusers.

Why do you think one couldn’t make up horrific details?

It’s all heresy and allegations without any proof. The man was thoroughly investigated and his home and belongings ransacked. He was stripped naked and the accusers could not identify his body parts correctly.

He was strange and emotionally stunted and his relationship with children was probably inappropriate but there is no evidence that it was predatory or sexual. It’s a witch hunt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have any of you heard of Leaving Neverland? The documentary featured two men who detailed their abuse from MJ on camera and you cannot make up the horrific details. The Estate of MJ used legal tactics to settle out any claims, but you cannot ignore people who were there with him at the ranch and experienced abuse as children. I am horrified by the people on this board who do not believe victims and brush off all of them as blackmailers - yes those types exist but most celebrities do not have this many accusers.

Why do you think one couldn’t make up horrific details?

It’s all heresy and allegations without any proof. The man was thoroughly investigated and his home and belongings ransacked. He was stripped naked and the accusers could not identify his body parts correctly.

He was strange and emotionally stunted and his relationship with children was probably inappropriate but there is no evidence that it was predatory or sexual. It’s a witch hunt.

+1

And because he’s dead he can’t respond to the allegations, which are very possibly motivated by money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, his estate has paid close to $50M in settlements. They wouldn’t have paid near this amount if there wasn’t evidence of his guilt. I guarantee these settlement agreements have confidentiality clauses.

He's definitely guilty and was abused himself as a child. If you have doubt, watch the documentary with his accusers.

[Anonymous]

The most persuasive part about Leaving Neverland is how Michael sought out middle class, usually single parent families and basically became the family's sugar daddy. Mom or dad was ok with turning over their Kid to Michael because they were hitting the town in Las Vegas and whatnot. And yes, there is very specific allegations of sexual assault by the victims.

I don't think he abused Caulkin. He used him as bait to attract other kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The most persuasive part about Leaving Neverland is how Michael sought out middle class, usually single parent families and basically became the family's sugar daddy. Mom or dad was ok with turning over their Kid to Michael because they were hitting the town in Las Vegas and whatnot. And yes, there is very specific allegations of sexual assault by the victims.

I don't think he abused Caulkin. He used him as bait to attract other kids.

Agree with all of this. All of his actions with the little boys was grooming behavior and the parents of those kids were super naive or selfish to not recognize that.

That said, I am really, really surprised by all of the adults on this board who are staunchly trying to defend Michael. Are you really that clueless? Do you think he is totally innocent and he simply wanted to sleep in the same bed as little boys for days on end for no ulterior motive? Would you have allowed your loved one to sleep in the same bed as him since you think he was totally innocent?!?