Michael Jackson: Was he Innocent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he was innocent of any sexual abuse or harm. Was he weird with kids and did he have an inappropriate obsession with being around them? Yes. I don’t think he would ever harm a child. I just think he never had a childhood himself and viewed himself almost childlike and therefore wanted to be around children so that he could experience childhood through them. I even think toward the end of his life he was morphing himself into being Mickey Mouse. He looks oddly like MM in his later years with the rosy cheeks, pointed chin and eyeliner. He wanted to be a real life MM to kids and didn’t see anything wrong with it.

You're giving him way too much credit with the looking like Mickey Mouse. He looked like that bc vitiligo required him to add in contouring/blush/eyeliner like an old white woman and he went way too heavy handed half the time. Also he was addicted to plastic surgery, hence the little snub nose and pointy chin.

Vitiligo can cause extreme patchiness with large areas of melanin loss but doesn’t make you entirely white. It was his choice to go that route and if I were a black man I wouldn’t choose that. He also chose to use permanent makeup which is not something the average person with vitiligo does as it’s not necessary. I have 2 family members with vitiligo and the way he decided to deal with it is odd.

Agree, but also - given his original skin tone, it would be quite obvious and as someone famous, that would be very hard. Even non-famous vitiligo patients deal with depression etc. because of the way they look, so it's not surprising that it would mess him up. Also, this was many years ago. It's different now and people are better trained not to make fun of people because of something they can't change (though I do still hear jokes about MJ's skin, which really bothers me). There are also more options and so he may not have felt compelled to use the makeup or bleach his skin etc.

[Anonymous]

One of the children, now an adult, said he was coached by his parents to say Michael abused him. This was when the Catholic Church was paying out huge sums of money. People had incentives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like you're totally trolling here.

No, he's very guilty paid off at least 3 boys that we know of and a few boys were able to describe his messed up genitalia. Why would that be OP?

The people asserting his innocence are just dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gen-Xer here. I'm always fascinated at how younger generations examine this question and come away with idk...maybe he's innocent...

The man is guilty as hell. There are stories upon accounts upon cases corroborating the allegations. But MJ was a God in the 80's, this was decades before me too, and many families were complicit in allowing access to their children in exchange for money/perks. There may also have been episodes that were shake-downs for $$ from his estate, but many things can and usually are true at the same time.

Because he was a soft-spoken, gentle-voiced, undoubtedly talented performer, he doesn't fit the profile of what most of us think of as a predator. But there was way too much smoke on this situation for it to be anything other than an inferno.

This. He's guilty.

[Anonymous]

Why are we debating this when boys were able to describe his pen!s?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are we debating this when boys were able to describe his pen!s?

Was this ever corroborated?

[Anonymous]

The documentary was incredibly convincing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gen-Xer here. I'm always fascinated at how younger generations examine this question and come away with idk...maybe he's innocent...

The man is guilty as hell. There are stories upon accounts upon cases corroborating the allegations. But MJ was a God in the 80's, this was decades before me too, and many families were complicit in allowing access to their children in exchange for money/perks. There may also have been episodes that were shake-downs for $$ from his estate, but many things can and usually are true at the same time.

Because he was a soft-spoken, gentle-voiced, undoubtedly talented performer, he doesn't fit the profile of what most of us think of as a predator. But there was way too much smoke on this situation for it to be anything other than an inferno.

Millennial here and in our defense...his trial took place while a lot of us were still too young to follow legal news. Posted earlier that his '05 trial went down when I was a kid and I was in either 6th or 7th grade. I just remember my dad saying "I think he's innocent" and then he was later found innocent so I just filed it away and never thought of it again. I'm not an MJ fan so I didn't really think about it until this thread came up. He wasn't really a star for most of our childhood, at least not tail-end millennials like me. I think I said earlier in this thread, I was confused about his race and gender for several years lmfao so it's not like he was just such a big celebrity to me.

That being said, my bf is a few years older than me and graduated from hs the year the trial took place so I asked him his thoughts (I was curious after reading this thread). He was like "Idk, I always just thought he was developmentally delayed in some way and was just creepy and weird, rather than evil." He's also not a Michael Jackson fan, so I don't think there's bias there.

So, yeah, I think we as a generation are just out of the loop, for lack of a better term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we debating this when boys were able to describe his pen!s?

Was this ever corroborated?

It was part of a legal proceeding, not sure what other corroboration you need? Read the WSJ piece linked above.

“A significant reason for the large settlement totaling about $25 million made by Jackson in 1994 to the Chandler family and their lawyer was the drawing of specific markings Jackson had on his penis caused by the skin condition vitiligo.

Jordie Chandler drew the markings and the drawing was put into a sealed envelope. During the criminal investigation, Jackson was so resistant to having his genitals photographed that he slapped one of his doctors. It didn’t matter for the civil suit. My reporting showed that when Jordie’s drawing was unsealed, it matched the photos.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we debating this when boys were able to describe his pen!s?

Was this ever corroborated?

No this came up during the first accusations and was never proven and never went to trial. They never submitted this as evidence in the actual trial. There was also no actual child porn found, there was a highly questionable book but no pictures on his laptop or in his room were ever found.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are we debating this when boys were able to describe his pen!s?

Was this ever corroborated?

It was part of a legal proceeding, not sure what other corroboration you need? Read the WSJ piece linked above.

“A significant reason for the large settlement totaling about $25 million made by Jackson in 1994 to the Chandler family and their lawyer was the drawing of specific markings Jackson had on his penis caused by the skin condition vitiligo.

Jordie Chandler drew the markings and the drawing was put into a sealed envelope. During the criminal investigation, Jackson was so resistant to having his genitals photographed that he slapped one of his doctors. It didn’t matter for the civil suit. My reporting showed that when Jordie’s drawing was unsealed, it matched the photos.”

Source?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gen-Xer here. I'm always fascinated at how younger generations examine this question and come away with idk...maybe he's innocent...

The man is guilty as hell. There are stories upon accounts upon cases corroborating the allegations. But MJ was a God in the 80's, this was decades before me too, and many families were complicit in allowing access to their children in exchange for money/perks. There may also have been episodes that were shake-downs for $$ from his estate, but many things can and usually are true at the same time.

Because he was a soft-spoken, gentle-voiced, undoubtedly talented performer, he doesn't fit the profile of what most of us think of as a predator. But there was way too much smoke on this situation for it to be anything other than an inferno.

This.

I also think it's hard for people to wrap their heads around MJ being both an empathetic victim of abuse AND a perpetrator of abuse. Yet that's the part of his story that explains what happened.

Michael and his siblings were abused their entire childhood. That, plus intense game and huge financial success, messed him up. It's never been totally clear to me if Michael understood himself to be a predator at any point -- I think there's a high likelihood that he was a vulnerable narcissist who was unable to see beyond his own need for a specific kind of physical affection or recognize the ways in which he leveraged his money and game to get it from children who could not consent to what was happening. He could maintain his innocence because he believed it, and he believed it because that's exactly how mentally ill he was, which is to say -- very.

But there's never been a question to me whether those kids were abused. Yes, often by their families too. That's sadly not uncommon in situations like this -- think of the family that turns a blind eye to a grandparent or parent abusing children because that person is a position of power over them. It's very sad.

It often seems people learn all the wrong lessons from his story.

I think by acting so childlike he convinced himself that what he was doing wasn't wrong because he was just another kid like them.

Yes, that's what I was getting at with the phrase vulnerable narcissism. I think his childlike affect not only served to manipulate the kids and their families into trusting him (always with the unsaid threat of his power backing it up), but it also helped him convince himself that what he was doing HAD to be okay because he thought of himself, always, as a victim of his father and childhood.

I think he might not have been capable of admitting to himself that he was using, and abusing, these children, because his own needs and childhood wound were always centered. He convinced himself he was doing something to help himself heal, so it had to be right. I also think he convinced himself that the things he did with the kids were helping them, also, but that's because he projected himself on the children and assumed they needed what he needed. So if he needed to snuggle with a 7 year old boy all night, then that must also be what the 7 year old boy needed as well, and the idea that this would actually be harmful or dangerous for the boy (because Michael was NOT actually a child) didn't cross his mind because he was incapable of seeing past his own need and vulnerability. Everything was in service to that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gen-Xer here. I'm always fascinated at how younger generations examine this question and come away with idk...maybe he's innocent...

The man is guilty as hell. There are stories upon accounts upon cases corroborating the allegations. But MJ was a God in the 80's, this was decades before me too, and many families were complicit in allowing access to their children in exchange for money/perks. There may also have been episodes that were shake-downs for $$ from his estate, but many things can and usually are true at the same time.

Because he was a soft-spoken, gentle-voiced, undoubtedly talented performer, he doesn't fit the profile of what most of us think of as a predator. But there was way too much smoke on this situation for it to be anything other than an inferno.

Millennial here and in our defense...his trial took place while a lot of us were still too young to follow legal news. Posted earlier that his '05 trial went down when I was a kid and I was in either 6th or 7th grade. I just remember my dad saying "I think he's innocent" and then he was later found innocent so I just filed it away and never thought of it again. I'm not an MJ fan so I didn't really think about it until this thread came up. He wasn't really a star for most of our childhood, at least not tail-end millennials like me. I think I said earlier in this thread, I was confused about his race and gender for several years lmfao so it's not like he was just such a big celebrity to me.

That being said, my bf is a few years older than me and graduated from hs the year the trial took place so I asked him his thoughts (I was curious after reading this thread). He was like "Idk, I always just thought he was developmentally delayed in some way and was just creepy and weird, rather than evil." He's also not a Michael Jackson fan, so I don't think there's bias there.

So, yeah, I think we as a generation are just out of the loop, for lack of a better term.

I'm an elder millennial and I think anyone who feels this way needs to take it upon themselves to educate themselves. I think you have an obligation. Stop taking things you read online at face value, ask more questions, and when there appears to be a controversy around a person that doesn't make sense based on what you know, dig deeper until you understand it.

Not just with MJ. With politics too. I'm tired of re-litigating stuff like the Iraq War, Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky, literally everything about Trump, because people just consume short, misleading social media soundbites about this stuff and don't bother to actually look it up. There were people who voted for Trump in 2024 who weren't even aware of the Access Hollywood tape from his first campaign, even though it was just 8 years prior.

Educate yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gen-Xer here. I'm always fascinated at how younger generations examine this question and come away with idk...maybe he's innocent...

The man is guilty as hell. There are stories upon accounts upon cases corroborating the allegations. But MJ was a God in the 80's, this was decades before me too, and many families were complicit in allowing access to their children in exchange for money/perks. There may also have been episodes that were shake-downs for $$ from his estate, but many things can and usually are true at the same time.

Because he was a soft-spoken, gentle-voiced, undoubtedly talented performer, he doesn't fit the profile of what most of us think of as a predator. But there was way too much smoke on this situation for it to be anything other than an inferno.

Millennial here and in our defense...his trial took place while a lot of us were still too young to follow legal news. Posted earlier that his '05 trial went down when I was a kid and I was in either 6th or 7th grade. I just remember my dad saying "I think he's innocent" and then he was later found innocent so I just filed it away and never thought of it again. I'm not an MJ fan so I didn't really think about it until this thread came up. He wasn't really a star for most of our childhood, at least not tail-end millennials like me. I think I said earlier in this thread, I was confused about his race and gender for several years lmfao so it's not like he was just such a big celebrity to me.

That being said, my bf is a few years older than me and graduated from hs the year the trial took place so I asked him his thoughts (I was curious after reading this thread). He was like "Idk, I always just thought he was developmentally delayed in some way and was just creepy and weird, rather than evil." He's also not a Michael Jackson fan, so I don't think there's bias there.

So, yeah, I think we as a generation are just out of the loop, for lack of a better term.

I'm an elder millennial and I think anyone who feels this way needs to take it upon themselves to educate themselves. I think you have an obligation. Stop taking things you read online at face value, ask more questions, and when there appears to be a controversy around a person that doesn't make sense based on what you know, dig deeper until you understand it.

Not just with MJ. With politics too. I'm tired of re-litigating stuff like the Iraq War, Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky, literally everything about Trump, because people just consume short, misleading social media soundbites about this stuff and don't bother to actually look it up. There were people who voted for Trump in 2024 who weren't even aware of the Access Hollywood tape from his first campaign, even though it was just 8 years prior.

Educate yourself.

I think you missed that poster's entire point, which is that they didn't think about it until now because they were a child when it happened and Michael Jackson hasn't been relevant in years.

[Anonymous]

I have worked in domestic violence and sexual assault field for 25 years. I can pretty much handle anything in this realm.

The Neverland documentary fundamentally shook me. He is guilty. I can't listen to his music anymore.