Michael Jackson

He wasn't found guilty of any child abuse. The doc came out after he passed away, so basically there's a lot of people out there who think he must have not done it.
I can't believe someone grown adult male sleeping in the bed with little boys could ever be construed as anything other than grooming at the very least.
It does seem a bit off. But he was never convicted so some would say should be regarded as innocent.
It's almost like he's treated differently, as if he's another species entirely with his own set of rules he can get away with?

It’s interesting that mothers, who are presumably super careful about paedophiles and what influences they expose their children to in real life, throw it all out of the window for a global superstar.

A global superstar with drug and alcohol problems who is on record as sharing his bed with boys. Whose bedroom contents itemised by the police included adult porn jumbled in with arty books of child and teenage nudes, even a child’s pyjama bottoms with blood on them.

Basically he died before he could be convicted, which makes it easier for fans to pretend he wasn't a paedophile.

Yes the Australian guy lied years ago to protect Jackson and said he hadn't been abused by him, when he went on trial I think back in the early 00s. He explained why in the documentary but essentially at that point, he wasn't ready to speak up and didn't want to jeopardise his own career.

As for him coming from an abusive family/childhood I really don't think that's accurate. Yes his mother was chasing fame and relocated the family from Australia to LA essentially because Jackson promised the moon on a stick and she was totally caught up in it, as were the other family.

How anybody can watch that harrowing documentary and not believe these men beggars belief imo.

But yet they have broadly been disbelieved and it's a fucking disgusting.

It's clear to me from the detailed accounts of these two (pretty broken men) that all the things they said happened did in fact happen.

Plus all of the other stories/court cases that have come out over the years. How can people still continue to defend Jackson?

I don't know how anyone can see that interview and not see all the red flags flying about, he may as well have stuck a sign on his head saying I like little boys

This story can be told several ways. What I heard is that the older child was very rude to Brad and was put right. Now, this could mean a slap, or of you're from an Asian or African household, you know how this could be disciplined.

Now, apparently, Angelina didn't like the discipline given by Brad and proceeded to tell it in a way that painted Brad as a drunk child abuser.

Anyway, I'm not going to start cancelling Brad, and I certainly will never cancel Michael Jackson, who was taken to court TWICE and won.

It’s also funded ultimately, via a network of subsidiaries, by Sony,

OP have you watched Square One? It's a counter documentary that is an interesting watch.

People read Alice in Wonderland despite the fact that Lewis carrol clearly had odd leanings towards little girls.

Same for the female victims of Jimmy Saville ?

Neither was Jimmy Savile ,I don't think anyone is any doubt about him though!

Except they weren’t paid anything.

Savile was not found guilty of anything either.

Don't make excuses for him. Nothing was ever proven regarding Jimmy Saville, do you thing he was innocent ?

Yes, I believe it’s 1) because he was never convicted and 2) because he has the most dedicated super fans of any celebrity in the world.

I was never a fan of his music and having watched leaving Never land I find it hard to beleive he was innocent
However many people around the world bekeive he was a musical genius so it would be difficult to cancel him.

He was never found guilty of anything

I've always found it very interesting how the guys in the documentary decided to speak after he had died and couldn't defend himself

Must have been a great pay day for them

I don't get it either. Some people are just thick though, and think that their enjoyment of some music is more important than that person abusing children.

He's dead, so isn't earning money from his music. I don't believe in cancelling. As said we should leave the pictures depicting slavery in the art galleries etc. We'd have to rename roads, buildings and then we've got probmatic half way issues like the whole of Port Sunlight etc.
I'm a bit more hmm over the likes of Rooney getting broadcasting/commentator jobs.

Jordy Chandler was not lying. Although he did not want to testify against MJ in a trial nonetheless. He and his father brought a later case against MJ who had been trying to descredit him in the media against the terms of their settlement, in which JC upheld the fact that he had been abused.

If you enjoy the music of a paedophile that’s fine but at least be honest with yourself about it.

Michael Jackson was found innocent by a court

How is he benefiting from this though? Even if he had been responsible for genocide (like Hitler), you're not supporting him by buying or listening to his stuff (or in Hitler's case, paintings).

The quality of his music is indisputable. Sure, buying it when he was alive would have been supporting an (alleged) p'phile, but now, you're just supporting the industry.

Sorry, it's actually 'Do you think Michael Jackson was guilty?'

It annoys me too OP.

Sony paid 3/4 billion $ for his back catalogue in 2016. His legacy is simply too lucrative to too many powerful people/businesses.