Such as?
The testimony of the kids.
The fact that he routinely slept with them by his own admission.
The fact that the police found naked pictures of kids when they searched his ranch.
The fact that he never had any sexual interest in adults.
The fact that he fit the psychological profile of a pedophile to the letter
The fact that some of the jurors who acquitted him now say they believe their verdict was a mistake.
The fact that he tried to commit suicide when the allegations first got made public. Innocent people don’t do that. Innocent people get pissed off. Innocent people sure as hell do not pay tens of millions of dollars to someone who is accusing them of something so vile, and so publicly damaging.
The odds that everything was all just some kind of Three’s Company misunderstanding, and he was totally innocent of everything with no sexual interest in those kids whatsoever are so far-fetched that Occam’s razor only leaves on truly plausible conclusion.
Have you never met an asexual person? I have, and they are spooky, they are rare, but they are real. Yes, if a pedophile likes to sleep with children, that is a cause for serious concern. But an asexual person might sleep with a boy, a girl, a man, woman or philodendron with equal aplomb and innocence.
I don’t think MJ wanted sex with children, I think he wanted to be a child himself. But I freely admit that I know no more about this than anyone else.
I just found my Facebook update for the day. Thanks!
Why did that first kid (the one he paid off) know what his cock looked like?
There is only one thing on your list that is actual evidence of a crime (the pictures) and I am at work so I can’t google “Michael Jackson Kiddie Porn” to verify this. The rest is very shady. Would you really convict him based on the above “evidence”? He fits a profile? He “seemed” asexual? Jurors changed their minds? They do that all the time. That’s the point of sequestering them. The evidence that the public sees is very different than what they see.
I’m just saying, imagine you’re Michael Jackson, obviously a troubled individual, and someone lays (let’s assume) completely unfounded allegations on you. These cases are notoriously hard to prove, they cost a lot of money, and you can never completely clear them off your record, no matter how innocent you were. If someone says you fuck kids, you will always be known as a kid fucker.
It’s just funny to me that people are willing to state categorically that the man was a pedophile. I see absolutely no proof of this.
Would you have been willing to let your own kid sleep with him?
I don’t have to think there’s enough evidence to convict him in court to conclude that I’m still personally convinced.
Why did that kid know what his cock looked like?
Same for me. As far as I know, Michael Jackson is a man who never had any childhood, having to work as a singer since he was five years old or thereabouts, in an extremely strict, extremely religious family, with a father who had no problems beating up his children if they misbehaved in any way. I’m not a psychologist, but I can see how this would lead him to act like a child and prefer the company of children, up to playing with them and sleeping with them, in order to reach this part of his life which he never had.
Of course, it’s also entirely possible that he did sexually abuse them. But I have no idea, I wasn’t there. I do note that our society tends toward fear of strange men who would rape our children. But even if he didn’t rape these children, what he did certainly wasn’t healthy, for him or for them.
It’s actually rather common for celebrities accused of crimes to pay off the claimant regardless of whether they actually committed the crime or not. It saves them from having to go to court and have all their life exposed in the media. I’m sure this would have been convenient for Jackson.
Name one other celebrity who paid off someone accusing them of child molestation.
His Neverland ranch is also a monument to childhood. He was clearly obsessed with the concept of childhood, and I think that turned into a fetishization of childhood and of children.
Child molestation? Can’t name any for now, sorry. But what I had in mind was René Angélil (husband and manager of Céline Dion) who paid two million to a woman accusing him of sexual assault. She and her husband were later charged and convicted of extortion. It’s in his Wikipedia article, though it seems that the extortion conviction was overturned (the solicitation of a bribe conviction still stands).
That “childlike” demeanor is also a characteristic which is common to pedophiles.
Child molestation is a totally different animal. Would YOU be willing to pay any amount of money at all to someone who was falsely accusing you of blowing little boys?
I am bothered by the credit to which we give Pop Stars as though they are the modern day equivalent to Beethoven or Mozart. I’m sorry, Michael Jackson made some good toons but this whole idea that he was a legendary musician is retarded.
The entire point of pop music is so that we can watch preening narcissists prance around on stage dressed like clowns. It’s a circus spectacle and not some grand contribution to art.
Here was a guy who never had to come back down to Earth and suffered greatly for his disconnection from Earthly reality.
That he may or may not have been an actual pedophile puts the icing on the cake.
The man is NOT worthy of the worship he receives.
Absolutely not.
Based on the evidence presented at trial, I disagreed with OJ’s jury and agreed with Jackson’s. One has nothing to do with the other.
So if the answer is “no” than that is evidence that Jackson wouldn’t either?
Yes.
Jeff Smith, the “Frugal Gourmet”:
Wow.
I have enjoyed reading and agreed with 99% of your posts on this board, but this is ridiculous. What I would do in no way effects or is representative of what someone else would do. Billionaire Michael Jackson had a very different life than yours truly.
You know this. You wouldn’t let anyone else make an argument like this with you and get away with it…