Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:. 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.Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.
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 wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:. 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.Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.
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 wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:. 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.Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.
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 wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:. 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.Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.
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 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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:. 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.Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.
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 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.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:. 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.Anonymous wrote:I think he’s innocent too.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.