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.

Sorry I was looking the the photo when I typed, I meant out at night to shows, dinners etc. There are pictures of him out with them at night, there are other celebs there, why would you want the company of a 7 yo?
I didn't mean out at midday at the park having an ice cream

I was a big fan btw, but even I thought, as a teen, it was bizarre. I thought he was guilty at the trial.
It bugs me that Magic Soul still play him.

I am a big fan of Michael Jackson's music and would've loved to have seen him live at his peak.

I was very torn on the allegations of child molestation/abuse until I did some research inspired by the Liar City podcast episode on the cases. I am now convinced that Michael Jackson was not guilty of abusing those children. Did he abuse other children? Possibly, but it's unlikely that we will ever know, considering no one else has made allegations about him and it has been almost a decade since he died.

Being weird =/= being a creep, a pedophile, an abuser, or a murderer. Christopher Jefferies was accused of being a murderer because he was strange, but he was undoubtedly innocent. Michael Jackson was a strange person, but that does not necessarily mean he was a child abuser or pedophile.

So much victim blaming on this thread

I should clarify that my current position is based on the fact that there is not a shred of evidence that suggests he is guilty of the crimes he was accused of, and there is ample circumstantial evidence to suggest that the families made the accusations for financial gain alone.

I used to think he was very unstable, but due to his childhood, I personally didn't think he had sexually abused a child or hurt them, I know he done inappropriate things with them like sharing a bed ect, but I truly believed he just thought in his head he was a child himself 🤔 but maybe I was wrong

Wade Johnson tried to sue the Jackson estate but was unable to get anywhere and the judge threw it out (after a 7 year battle). Also Wade said in court Jackson did nothing wrong and then changed his story, not saying that he is lying now... But he has at some point so he isn't reliable. Same for the other guy, James Safechuck.

Isn't that interesting. Sure they haven't been paid for the film, but I bet he'll try and sue again.

So much victim blaming on this thread

There's no proven victims here unless you know something we don't?

I think what is interesting about MJ is that we can see him as a young child performing right through to him at 50 preparing for the O2 concerts. We see him grow up- you can see his first audition for Motown back in 1968. He was an innocent child, as all paedophiles start out in life, they grow up amongst up, developing aberrant sexual attachments to children for whatever psychosexual reason. They do not spring out of nowhere looking like evil monsters. They are OUR children,brothers, sisters, fathers etc. MJ's situation, if he was a paedophile, and I think, on balance, he probably was, demonstrates this most clearly.

I agree with what a PP said above.

He was hiding in plain sight.

I’ll never understand people who are so attached to celebrities who they’ve never met.

They just can’t believe it. Why? They’re still people at the end of the day and people are capable of awful things.

For me it's the repeated stories about MJ befriending whole families in order to spend time with a male child. Why? Not sure you can innocently account for that

@NotANotMan
There is stacks of evidence to support the assumption that MJ was a paedophile who abused children.
Show me the stacks of evidence

What was vulnerable about him Minister? As I said in the post below the one you quoted, he had the means to utilise whatever measures necessary to deal with his fucked up psyche. However, he preferred to - what shall we call it? - 'self-medicate' by having sex with small boys?

I think you've misinterpreted my post. I wasn't excusing his actions. I work with the victims of child sexual abuse and witness first hand it's inpact day in day out so, believe me, I have no sympathy whatsoever for anyone who touches a child inappropriately, whatever their circumstances. I was simply making the point that people are complex, someone can be both a victim and a dangerous predator. What he did to those boys was, of course, indefensible. Acknowledging that he was an extremely damaged individual is not excusing or justifying his behaviour. Also, not everyone's psyche can be "fixed", no matter how much money you throw at the problem, it's just not that simple.

I think he did it and I also think there are a lot more paedophiles out there than most people think. A man at my work was arrested for it last year and he was the last person I would have suspected. Also a man who was developmentally disabled and living in a care home where I used to work was found to have abused young boys in the neighbourhood. I think they say it's about 1-2% of the population.

I never thought he was innocent. Michael Jackson to me is not the cute little boy singing away in the Jackson Five or the handsome young man of his youth as a solo artist, he’s the intensely creepy man he was from the early 90’s to his death. Because that is the version of him I grew up with.

Of course these weren't young boys whose views of the world were being shaped... The whole family would have been amazed and so impressed that the then hugely famous mj took a sweet child like shine to their.. Son, nephew... Brother, cousin etc. The young boy was then groomed like a the Rotherham girls were groomed to feel special... This is a mental brain washing process so the abuser can go onto to safely abuse. At age 7... Not hidden away.

In plain site what would any child think.. This might be normal and what happens because it was their normal. And mum and dad sanction the stay overs etc... And it's fun.. Mj is fun... They are not being abuse they are in a privalidged position..
. Not hard to see the process to re learn what's right and wrong and all that other damage to them speak out.

Ahh! These were

His ex wife Lisa Marie Presley said in a joint interview with MJ that she would be listed from their bed/room by children mobbing him to spend time with him. She said she saw nothing suspicious in his behaviour though and wouldn't hesitate to let her children spend time with him. That was back in 1995, but I think she was interviewed after his death by Oprah and continued to say she never saw anything untoward. There again he spent weeks of time away from her.

Ousted not listed

What purpose does this thread honestly serve?

I have no problem with paedophiles being vilified, there's just something a bit unsavoury about the 'famous' ones being endlessly researched whilst the ones we live with, work with, under our noses are free to strut about whilst their nearest and dearest live in blissful (or blithe) ignorance.

So many young girls are abused by husbands, brothers and fathers who don't/won't keep their odious selves to themselves. I expect, on balance of probability, some of their wives, sisters and daughters are posting about famous media-convicted paedophiles on a forum somewhere. Abhorrent.

I think the mental gymnastics some PP are performing to exonerate MJ, whilst simultaneously saying that parents should have thought clearly if they suspected abuse, is highly ironic.

If YOU are blinded by his fame and talent, and haven't even met him, how can you not expect families who are the "chosen ones" to not feel flattered and minimise any concerns.

MJ was found not guilty - but wasnt he represented by the same lawyer that managed to get OJ Simpson off the hook?

I wonder what it would take for some people to believe the victims? When all behaviour except WATCHING the abuse can be explained away?

What purpose does any thread serve?.
I've never seen a thread starting with a statement about its purpose or point this is a chat forum and it's a chat about a massive new ml story that's broken in the the form of a documentary.

I think it's an excellent thread with many excellent thought provoking comments about predators hiding in plain site whoever they maybe and the disengagement of our brains when we feel someone is just so good.

There is stack of evidence against the accusers though.

Theft, fraud, extortion, blackmail, false accusations of sexual molestation and being beaten up by department store security team.

Ex-staff fined for lying in court - sacked for theft from Netherland and then selling the stolen stuff on.

One of the children later spoke about his parents forcing him to lie and later got legal emancipation. He was NC with them.

LyingWitchInTheWardrobe you are right that this, and other forms of abuse, will be going on everywhere.

Discussing Michael Jackson doesn't mean we think abuse of others is ok. It isn't an either/or situation is it? It just so happens that this documentary is what is being discussed here.

I have worked with many abuse victims. Does that mean I can't have an opinion on MJ too?

MJ was found not guilty - but wasnt he represented by the same lawyer that managed to get OJ Simpson off the hook?

Must mean then that MJ is guilty too then . Which would be a ridiculous assertion.