Michael Jackson and the new documentary

[joystir59]

Leaving Neverland, being shown at the Sundance film festival and in the spring on Channel 4....I love his music and have believed he was vilified by the racist media, and by greedy individuals and families after his money; but am really not so sure of his innocence any more. I guess that's my aibu- that we have to listen to his accusers don't we? I was sexually abused as a ternager, and not believed. It was a profoundly damaging experience.

Famous family, one with a different surname.

Loves drugs and porn stars and according to his ex wife, was in possession of images of child abuse

@Princess1066 two and a half men springs to mind

Isn't he also HIV+?

He wasn’t in the west wing or the breakfast club.

Oh now I know - vile

I remember how everyone was baying for blood with Cliff Richards and that turned out to be wrong too

After the BBC fiasco it was too difficult for the CPS to press charges. There's plenty of evidence but the BBC fucked up.

Everyone's talking about it & judging but have any of you actually seen this documentary? It's not out in Uk yet.

Everyone's talking about it & judging but have any of you actually seen this documentary? It's not out in Uk yet.

The man is dead... The only one this doco can and will affect is his poor kids.
All these people coming out again 10 years after his death...why if there is nothing to gain?

There have been enough reviews from the US release for people to get a fair idea of the content. This didn’t come out of clear blue sky to sully the fair name of a previously squeaky clean MJ. These allegations were there long before he died. And there might be a lot to gain for the victims beyond money; gains in terms of vindication and closure. Getting it out in the open could be a carthasis of a kind for them when for decades they’ve been call liars, gold diggers and vilified by the Jackson brand and the blinkered fanbase - yeah, he’s dead but they’re not.

@Tellem2 Actually, no, they didn't confess that it was a lie at all. And the kid didn't commit suicide, he's still alive. His father committed suicide, but he had cancer.

I do believe he molested children. I do believe a lot of their stories.

Two points specifically convince me;
He only had boys stay over (and only pre-pubescent/to pubescent age), never girls. Paedophiles almost always have a preference. Girls, or boys. If he loved all children as he so claimed, why then did he never have girls stay over? Why ONLY boys? That is more than a little suss imo. If he wasn't a paedophile he would have had at least a third of girls there, if not half. He had NONE. Don't tell me there weren't any girl children that would have loved his attention, staying at Neverland, etc. Yet to him, girls just didn't seem to even exist.

Secondly, the boy books he had. While not child porn itself, many of the pictures in the books show boys mostly naked, ad posing in 'suggestive' ways. One of the books is one of the staples of NAMBLA. That group is well-known for it's members all having a copy of that book. See the book shows boys nude, posing, but not hardcore enough to be considered child porn. It is basically borderline though. That he had at least 3 books all about the 'beauty of boys', mostly naked pictures, posing, (absolutely no pictures of girls), and one of those books basically a NAMBLA soft core boylove bible, certainly in my opinion goes beyond 'Reasonable Doubt' for me.

Just to remind us of how good he was. Aged 11, I believe

Seriously? What part of your post are you not understanding? The years of glorifying Michael Jackson should be long gone. It doesn't matter how talented or famous he was, he abused children and anyone still thinking otherwise is delusional.

@pollysproggle Firstly, you ask why parents would accept a payout? It goes both ways. I ask you, why would you pay out $22 million if you were innocent? And there were at least 3 other unnamed children we know of that he paid off. 4 times? That's no longer a co-incidence.

Secondly, to answer your question, many parents feel their child has been traumatised enough. If you know anything about abuse court cases, you'd know it is BRUTAL for the victim. It is basically, as a victim who had to go to court said "like being violated all over again". For a child, that is rough. Actually, Woody Allen's daughter Dylan's case (the legal documents were online a few years back last time I checked), the police and social services believed that she was abused, but advised Mia against further proceeding in court as they felt it would be too traumatic for the girl. Hence why Woody wasn't formally prosecuted.

So, there is a valid reason a parent of a vulnerable child would take the millions (which would also help for therapy) and sign an NDA. And YET, there is not one reason why someone supposedly falsely-accused would just....hand over 22 million dollars as 'hush money' if they were innocent. See, your own argument works against you.

Who is 'CS'?

Reading further (I am commenting as I read) I figured out who CS is, so please disregard my last post.

Jimmy Saville, R Kelly, all the others... rumours swirled around these men for decades before we finally opened our eyes. Same for MJ. He’s guilty.

With regard to the parents who accepted payouts. I don't know how the american legal system works, but in the UK, a much lower level of proof is needed for a judgement to go in your favour (I think it's on the balance of probabilities for civil and beyond reasonalble doubt for criminal). As we know, rape is often a very hard crime to provide proof for as often it is a case of one person's word against the other.
So as a parent do you put your child, who says they have been abused, through the ordeal of a criminal trial that is unlikely to be sucessful, or sue MJ, recieve the hush money and get them some counselling?

Much lower level of proof in a civil case. Sorry I'm half asleep!

Everyone's talking about it & judging but have any of you actually seen this documentary? It's not out in Uk yet.

A client was at the premiere. She wasn't prepared for how graphic the details were that came out in it, despite having read all the press notes and seen cuts in advance, and felt the whole audience was shell-shocked. They did the whole four hours in one sitting, which must have made it a pretty intense experience.

Corey and McCaully (spelling?) are both pretty ‘messed up’ and if I had to put money on it I’d bet they had some pretty bad things happen to them at the hands of MJ and/or others. They just don’t want it to be public knowledge x

MJ was found not guilty in the eyes of the law. That means nothing.
Put it this way, if I go to the supermarket today and slide a bottle of wine under my coat, leave without paying and go home undetected, that doesn't mean I've not stolen it or I'm not a thief, it just means that no one knew what I've done, it doesn't make me any less guilty.
If someone genuinely thought that they had done nothing wrong, they wouldn't pay out huge sums of money.
If you were accused of something that you knew you were innocent of, you would go all out to clear your name, particularly if it was something as heinous as a sex crime. The last thing you would do is offer a payment to the accuser. That can be seen as bribery or hush money. If you were innocent, why would you want to make yourself look guilty by doing that.
No grown man would want to share a bed with an unrelated child. They have the brains to know that such behaviour can lead to accusations that can land you in deep trouble. Even MJ couldn't have been so naive not to realise that.
MJ may have been a good singer and performer ( he didn't do anything for me personally ) but that doesn't make him a good person. Paedophiles are sly and devious, that's how they manage to get away with it for so long, sometimes forever.
Why did he abuse some and not others. Well that again could be down to being devious. Take for example 10 children, abuse 2 of them. If you get caught and all 10 children are questioned, 8 of them are going to truthfully say that the perpetrator has never abused them in comparison to the 2 who say he did. The law of probability is then likely to balance in favour of innocent due to those 8/10 children.

I used to think he was asexual and had some form of dysmorphia which made him long for childhood and be a child. However I'm now thinking he was guilty and can't listen to his music anymore. Also why is no one gunning for CS who has been a known paedo, rapist, abuser for decades and continues to get away with it. Do they have to be dead before the accountability begins? And if so what is the fucking point of it all!!

As for CR, again no prosecution because of a BBC fuck up but lots of evidence.

Corey and McCaully (spelling?) are both pretty ‘messed up’ and if I had to put money on it I’d bet they had some pretty bad things happen to them at the hands of MJ and/or others. They just don’t want it to be public knowledge

Christ, the brass neck on you to essentially accuse them of lying when they defend MJ. Get back in your lane.