Michael Jackson: Was he Innocent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

you can't watch Leaving Neverland anymore because his estate sued and got it taken off HBO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

you can't watch Leaving Neverland anymore because his estate sued and got it taken off HBO.

It’s amazing that a man’s life and legacy can be destroyed by mere allegations and heresy.

[Anonymous]

I think this video has some pretty good points and gives a more balanced viewpoint. You can skip to his final thoughts at 24:20:

https://youtu.be/h_bCSbPAzk0?si=G-8TJ6MsBBfrPjNU

This is another one from the same guy comparing the presumption of innocence with null hypothesis testing:

https://youtu.be/AY-ZuFc7ALw?si=J327jO4qvJqf0Qhz

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

you can't watch Leaving Neverland anymore because his estate sued and got it taken off HBO.

It’s amazing that a man’s life and legacy can be destroyed by mere allegations and heresy.

If there was even a whiff of a superstar sleeping in bed with kids now, his legacy would be instantly ruined. This was one sick weird man but people just want to keep liking his music.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

you can't watch Leaving Neverland anymore because his estate sued and got it taken off HBO.

It’s amazing that a man’s life and legacy can be destroyed by mere allegations and heresy.

So gross that you are defending a pedophile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course I see the difference. The man was weird and childish and quite possibly thought these kids were his actual friends because he didn’t accept that he was an adult.

I’m making the point that simply sleeping in a bed with a kid (though obviously {to mature adults} highly inappropriate) is NOT inherently sexual. As to your last statement, you’re projecting because you, like the majority of Americans, can’t identify tone and context clues, resulting in extremely literal (and frequently incorrect) reading comprehension ability.

And for the record, I am not even a fan of MJ but the bolded is EXACTLY what I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

you can't watch Leaving Neverland anymore because his estate sued and got it taken off HBO.

It’s amazing that a man’s life and legacy can be destroyed by mere allegations and heresy.

Do you believe Michael's allegations of parental abuse that destroyed his dad's reputation and legacy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course I see the difference. The man was weird and childish and quite possibly thought these kids were his actual friends because he didn’t accept that he was an adult.

I’m making the point that simply sleeping in a bed with a kid (though obviously {to mature adults} highly inappropriate) is NOT inherently sexual. As to your last statement, you’re projecting because you, like the majority of Americans, can’t identify tone and context clues, resulting in extremely literal (and frequently incorrect) reading comprehension ability.

And for the record, I am not even a fan of MJ but the bolded is EXACTLY what I think.

It it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

This was completely unacceptable behavior and we should call it out as such. This is who he was. It doesn't matter if he didn't accept he was an adult, he actually was and should suffer adult consequences like a marred reputation and shunning at at the very least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

you can't watch Leaving Neverland anymore because his estate sued and got it taken off HBO.

It’s amazing that a man’s life and legacy can be destroyed by mere allegations and heresy.

So gross that you are defending a pedophile.

+1mm. He was a child molester who used his money and fame to sexually assault vulnerable children of star-struck parents. What he did was even worse than Weinstein or Cosby, but his estate had enough money to threaten legal battles and settle out claims and make "leaving neverland" go away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course I see the difference. The man was weird and childish and quite possibly thought these kids were his actual friends because he didn’t accept that he was an adult.

I’m making the point that simply sleeping in a bed with a kid (though obviously {to mature adults} highly inappropriate) is NOT inherently sexual. As to your last statement, you’re projecting because you, like the majority of Americans, can’t identify tone and context clues, resulting in extremely literal (and frequently incorrect) reading comprehension ability.

And for the record, I am not even a fan of MJ but the bolded is EXACTLY what I think.

There are very specific allegations about sexual assault from multiple victims. Not sure why people keep talking about whether it was ok for him to sleep in same bed as kids as if that is all that was alleged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course I see the difference. The man was weird and childish and quite possibly thought these kids were his actual friends because he didn’t accept that he was an adult.

I’m making the point that simply sleeping in a bed with a kid (though obviously {to mature adults} highly inappropriate) is NOT inherently sexual. As to your last statement, you’re projecting because you, like the majority of Americans, can’t identify tone and context clues, resulting in extremely literal (and frequently incorrect) reading comprehension ability.

And for the record, I am not even a fan of MJ but the bolded is EXACTLY what I think.

There are very specific allegations about sexual assault from multiple victims. Not sure why people keep talking about whether it was ok for him to sleep in same bed as kids as if that is all that was alleged.

Neither am I, and yet those who insist on calling him a pedo keep bringing it up as though it’s irrefutable proof!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course I see the difference. The man was weird and childish and quite possibly thought these kids were his actual friends because he didn’t accept that he was an adult.

I’m making the point that simply sleeping in a bed with a kid (though obviously {to mature adults} highly inappropriate) is NOT inherently sexual. As to your last statement, you’re projecting because you, like the majority of Americans, can’t identify tone and context clues, resulting in extremely literal (and frequently incorrect) reading comprehension ability.

And for the record, I am not even a fan of MJ but the bolded is EXACTLY what I think.

There are very specific allegations about sexual assault from multiple victims. Not sure why people keep talking about whether it was ok for him to sleep in same bed as kids as if that is all that was alleged.

Neither am I, and yet those who insist on calling him a pedo keep bringing it up as though it’s irrefutable proof!

Allegations are not reality nor are they proof

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Of course I see the difference. The man was weird and childish and quite possibly thought these kids were his actual friends because he didn’t accept that he was an adult.

I’m making the point that simply sleeping in a bed with a kid (though obviously {to mature adults} highly inappropriate) is NOT inherently sexual. As to your last statement, you’re projecting because you, like the majority of Americans, can’t identify tone and context clues, resulting in extremely literal (and frequently incorrect) reading comprehension ability.

And for the record, I am not even a fan of MJ but the bolded is EXACTLY what I think.

There are very specific allegations about sexual assault from multiple victims. Not sure why people keep talking about whether it was ok for him to sleep in same bed as kids as if that is all that was alleged.

Neither am I, and yet those who insist on calling him a pedo keep bringing it up as though it’s irrefutable proof!

Uh... what do you call a grown man sleeping with other kids? He had these sleepovers it is proof.

[Anonymous]

Very curious how old the people are who think he’s innocent. For those of us who are at least 45 and saw the whole unraveling, it’s horrible but obvious that he was up to no good. And I don’t think we’re the ones seeing the movie either.

[Anonymous]

Do you guys realize that co-sleeping is normal in many cultures around the world? People share their beds and bedrooms with kids, aunts, uncles, brothers sisters?

I grew up in Pakistan and I slept on a large mattress with my sister and my father. I was 14 and she was 10!

I have also slept in the same room and bed with my cousin who was 35 while we were all 8-14!

My friend grew up in Russia and slept in the same room with her mom dad and her brother!

Just because someone shares a bed or a bedroom with a friend does not meat automatically that something nefarious is going on!

Michael did not have a childhood as he was a showpony. He didn’t have a normal family or a normal conventional upbringing. When he obtained insane fame and wealth as a young adult he used his money to build himself a park and a fun house. He would buy toys and cool animals. He reconnected with his childhood by hanging out with his friends; older friends like Elizabeth Taylor and friends who were young like Macaulay Culkin and other children. He also hung out with his large family and cousins.

If you look at the big picture and add context it becomes much more easier to understand.