Michael Jackson Spent $35M To Silence 24 Young Boys He Abused Over 15 Years
- Thread starter statham
- Start date
- Status
Wanting to do nice things for children is pretty standard for pedophiles. It doesn't help or harm your point.
Just look at the link for Jimmy Saville. They don't think their actions are hurting the kids.
ETA: Sandusky as well. He started a charity to help at risk kids and used it as a dating service.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
I don't believe he molested children, but this is an oversimplification. Besides the psychological issues that come from being a child superstar, and having vitiligo etc. I think it's clear from plenty of interviews with MJ that there was something abnormal about him, mentally. For all I know that may also have been part of his genius in music, dance, video production etc. He was abnormal. The problem with this definition is most people automatically think it means something malevolent when really it does not. There are many people in this world with different disorders and/or mental conditions and most of them aren't rapists or axe murderers.
He had a bizarre world view, definitely not entirely mature, and certainly oblivious to a number of things most of us take for granted. But he surely wasn't the only person in the world to act like this, probably just the most famous. Perhaps in the future psychiatrists will understand and name his particular type of abnormality, which will give additional context to his life.
Another well known example is Lewis Carroll (see Controversies and mysteries). It's actually very similar when you read into it. Certainly there were others as well, but not necessarily famous ones.
Could that mean both were closet child molesters? Yes, but it also suggests a more benign explanation.
FutureZombie
Banned
Are you high? How selectively are you reading this thread?
I was questioning your premise that a bad parent would just arbitrarily ignore an allegation like that. A bad parent might see the allegation as a payday, or they might manufacture the allegation and force the child to play along.
that's a lot more likely than a parent being complicit because they were a fan, or because MJ's charity helped them with cancer treatments.
Look, if MJ didn't kidtouch Corey Feldman at his most adorable, he was obviously immune.
by the way something, did you guys know of the ancient tradition of pederasty amongst the wealthy and elite? Interesting stuff.
vas_a_morir
Banned
There's just smoke, no fire... but good lord, I've never SEEN such smoke.
'Innocent until proven guilty' mean anything to you? I think it's sickening how in this day and age simply being accused of something means you're forever guilty in many people's eyes.
Now I'm in absolute agreement that MJ had a messed up view of the boundaries between childhood and adulthood, leading to interactions between him and children that wasn't quite right regardless of his intentions. But I never bought the more vile accusations. The people closest to him, including people like Macaluay Culkin, express nothing but love and respect for him. Hard to imagine none of them ever saw him doing those things to kids, or that they're all covering 100% for him.
Beerman462
Member
Pretty much this. What evidence has there ever been on these incidents when they are uncovered years later. All you have is testimony. One persons word against another. People can argue all day whether or not he molested those kids. Did he grope them? Was there ever penetration? Me personally inviting kids to your house as an adult and having a sleep over/sleeping in the same bed is bad enough.
bonesmccoy
Banned
Wow, you'd think after all that's been reported about child sex abuse cases in the past 10 years that people would be a little more hesitant to rush to the defense of a guy like Jackson.
I think i was mentioning you earlier.
Beerman462
Member
Accusations are serious, yes, but the thing that makes Jackson's case so different is because he's been often targeted for his fame, for his "strangeness", with stuff like this before. It's hard to take some of it seriously when a lot of it looks like it's a grasp for big money, and especially in this case where he's supposedly spent 35 million dollars to silence people. None of that bothered to drip during any of the trials he had? We're supposed to take such sudden, unverified claims truthfully now?
If he did in fact molest someone, that is a horrendous, inexcusable act. But at present, until someone comes with concrete evidence that this indeed did happen, all that's currently being asserted is the notion that a man who valued and spent time with children in an abnormal way than how we live and condition our lives with children, and because of this he must want to give kids the D.
speculawyer
Member
Tabloid.
But whatever. There have just been too many stories for this all to be fake it would seem. I don't know. Only the victims know but how can you trust what they say when they've been paid off.
But whatever. There have just been too many stories for this all to be fake it would seem. I don't know. Only the victims know but how can you trust what they say when they've been paid off.
Skimming through this thread, I haven't seen any MJ defenders claim to "know" that Jackson didn't molest any children.
In contrast, most of the MJ accusers "know" that he did it. Because they're so smart and omniscient.
Jackson definitely had mental issues. And it's definitely not okay (in the U.S., anyway) for an adult to sleep in the same bed as a kid. But to somehow equate this to the Sandusky case is dumb. Even before MJ started becoming visibly weird, several journalists commented on the Jackson kids being deprived of their childhoods by their parents. Michael being the youngest AND the star, was the most deprived. He was also beaten and whipped with a belt by his father.
Given all that, is it really that far-fetched to think that he created Neverland and invited kids over for sleepovers because he wanted a proper childhood?
I'm probably wasting my breath though. The first strike against Jackson for the vast majority of accusers was not the molestation charges. It was his "creepy" face, and effeminate voice and personality. Jimmy Page kidnapped a 14 year old girl in the '70s, but he's a national treasure because he was the epitome of cool.
In contrast, most of the MJ accusers "know" that he did it. Because they're so smart and omniscient.
Jackson definitely had mental issues. And it's definitely not okay (in the U.S., anyway) for an adult to sleep in the same bed as a kid. But to somehow equate this to the Sandusky case is dumb. Even before MJ started becoming visibly weird, several journalists commented on the Jackson kids being deprived of their childhoods by their parents. Michael being the youngest AND the star, was the most deprived. He was also beaten and whipped with a belt by his father.
Given all that, is it really that far-fetched to think that he created Neverland and invited kids over for sleepovers because he wanted a proper childhood?
I'm probably wasting my breath though. The first strike against Jackson for the vast majority of accusers was not the molestation charges. It was his "creepy" face, and effeminate voice and personality. Jimmy Page kidnapped a 14 year old girl in the '70s, but he's a national treasure because he was the epitome of cool.
What hard evidence was there? My recollection is that there was a single witness with a varying story.
speculawyer
Member
That Chapelle bit is genius. I got to hear it live and man was it hysterical.
This makes me think of this post on reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/news/commen...kson_vindicated_the_autopsy_confirmed/c9u60o6
Delicious Waffles
Member
That was my first thought.
Black-Wind
Member
Lets see ...
It was never proven beyond allegations made from people who lack credibility who many believe did this for the money.
Yes, I believe he was a pedophile. But, I think in his mind it wasn't wrong.
timmaysmittay
Member
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck you need to assume it's a fucking duck.
The man was a great artist, a generational icon, and a pedophile.
The man was a great artist, a generational icon, and a pedophile.
I love Chappelle but that bit always bothers me because he so willfully ignores the context of all the examples he uses. He even has a bit about the power of celebrity and what people are willing to do just because someone's famous but never factors that in with R. Kelly. The Elizabeth Smart vs. 8 year old kidnapping is just embarrassing.
thecouncil
Banned
the problem being that if someone told you it looked like a duck, walked like a duck and quacked like a duck, it could still be an elephant.
highrider
Banned
Google Sandusky evidence. It's too much for me to do a singular link.
highrider
Banned
Nice post.
JordanN
Banned
I read up on Jacko, there's no proof he touched anyone.
It's only because he defended sleeping in bed with children that to alot of people automatically means he also had to shag them but that's a fallacy.
He just wanted to be a child after his father robbed him of his own. He just took said antics too seriously around other adults who wouldn't get the message he was sending.
It's only because he defended sleeping in bed with children that to alot of people automatically means he also had to shag them but that's a fallacy.
He just wanted to be a child after his father robbed him of his own. He just took said antics too seriously around other adults who wouldn't get the message he was sending.
in bed...
Yes, he built an amusement park at his home. I love me some Thriller, but damn.
I don't get it, he was investigated by the FBI twice and they found jack squat indicating he was a pedophile.
Unless the man was charged and convicted, I'm not going to call him a pedophile.
If there's more to it I apologize. My recollection was that he was convicted solely on testimony of victims and the one witness.
Spring-Loaded
Member
This is almost verbatim of part of that Dave Chappelle trial sketch
You can't be serious.....
Definitely. And I'm certainly not pointing fingers at the kids. Their parents, on the other hand, are indefensible regardless of whether the molestations actually occurred.
RustyNails
Member
Great post.
Kinky John
Member
If Jackson looked/acted the way he did but made shit music, most people would have written him off as a probable paedophile long ago.
FutureZombie
Banned
Saying he was never convicted of anything doesn't prove much. Casey Anthony wasn't convicted of anything. But she took 1 month to tell the police that her daughter was missing. That is all the evidence you need to know she murdered her. This is exactly the same situation. Casey Anthony did not make pop music. So MJ defenders, do you believe she was innocent or not?
And saying "innocent before proven guilty" is only valid in a court of law. You can't hide behind that here.
And saying "innocent before proven guilty" is only valid in a court of law. You can't hide behind that here.
Willkiller
Banned
I always believed Terry George, which send the alarm bells ringing.
Wait. So you're saying, Casey Anthony murdered her child, that means MJ MUST'VE molested children?
I don't see the connection between the two. Maybe it's just me though...
Buddha Beam
Banned
I would guess molesting infants or something.
FutureZombie
Banned
I'm saying that you can make a judgement on something regardless of the outcome of a court case. And it is clear as day that Casey Anthony is a murderer, yet she was declared innocent. So for those that say MJ is innocent because it was never proven in court, they have to also say Casey Anthony is innocent. You can't pick and choose your arguments in favor of those that are musicians.
Anticitizen One
Banned
This is such bullshit.
No, they don't have to at all. They are separate cases, different people etc. I'm not picking sides, but your reasoning is terrible.
vas_a_morir
Banned
He's responding to a poster who says you can't call someone a criminal until they've been convicted in court. Not picking sides, but it's a fair statement in that context.
- Status