Why are people still deluding themselves about Michael Jackson??

[waxahatchee]

If any grown man I know invited children to sleep in his bed with him there would be absolutely no question about what was going on. I am sure that most people would agree, why are so many people still deluding themselves about this?? Makes me so cross, why do they even play his music on the radio??

Is it really not illegal in the US to own books with naked children in them? Wtf? Weren’t they pornographic? It’s just so weird he wasn’t found guilty if they found loads of child porn, or even naked photos of children. What adult possesses loads of books with naked children in them??

Not illegal if they are not pornographic images.
They did not find child porn (I hate that term btw, it really is Child sexual abuse) or photos that would come under pornography.
The 'art' books were also not illegal to own and much was made of the fact he owned thousands of books.

Which is partly why the jury would not convict - lots of circumstantial evidence - but no smoking gun.
www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/no-child-porn-found-at-neverland-thenor-now-the_us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8?guccounter=1&guce_referrer_us=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_cs=dDHyQuaeK6gNWG-NzL-DDQ

Don't misunderstand me, occam's razor would point to Jackson being a hebephile but if there is a reasonable doubt, then you cannot convict.

8/12 jurors were convinced he was not guilty - one seemed to be a superfan. 4 wanted to convict/were less convinced but could not convict on the evidence they had in front of them, including the items on the list. The problem was that Mac Culkin and Wade's testimony was convincing and the prosecution witnesses were horribly flawed.

Sorry, I hate the child porn term too. You’re correct, it’s child sexual abuse. What is a hebephile?

I think Wade is a problem when convincing people as he hasn’t been the most credible due to issues surrounding him. Also the way the doc didn’t address a lot of things. If someone else made it and covered every single claim, defence and questions, we may not have so many still defending him.

Some/many of his victims were pre/pubescent. Hebephilia doesn't fit.

That 'artwork' of young boys, showed just what interested him and what he was into.

He was a paedophile. He sexually abused wade Johnson from age 7.

Brandi's tea-spilling does not prove Wade is lying unless they can prove that the times he claimed he was abused he was not even at Neverland because he was with her. As we are talking continuous abuse whenever he was with Jackson, that is going to be hard to refute (unless specific times were mentioned - so, for example, had he been with her when his family were at the Grand Canyon but that wasn't the case. Part of the reason Michael Egan's case against his abusers failed was because they could prove they hadn't been in Hawaii at the time).
Their point is that the narrative was Jackson wanting Wade to himself/slagging off women in general and if he introduced Wade to his niece that doesn't fit into the narrative.
But as with many facets of this case, the two things here might not be mutually exclusive. He could have been dating Brandi AND be being abused by her uncle.

jess Hebephilia is the strong, persistent sexual interest by adults in pubescent (early adolescent) children, typically ages 11–14.

Jonathan 10-16
James 9-14
Wade 7-14
Mac 10-14
Brett 9 - adulthood
Jordan - 13
Anton - 12
Kendall - 10
Omer- 11
Michael - 14
Gavin - 13

Wade's earlier abuse would be the outlier but call him what you want, abuse is abuse. Hebephile, paedophile, pederast - they all need chemical castration.

Ok, I will admit right now that I haven't RTFT (and usually that is something that really bugs me) but I think this is one of those rare times when it doesn't necessarily matter.

Sadly, I have RL experience of two male friends disclosing horrific sexual abuse to me that took place when they were children/teenagers. They are two of the most harrowing experiences of my life.

But I learned a lot from them (and the help they'd sought over the years) and while obviously it's now a case of "They said this... but MJ isn't here to reply..." sadly I recognise a lot of the denial/pretending it didn't happen/only hit me later in life that it did" language in Wade and James as I've listened to in my friends.

All the signs (including the initial denials made under oath where they were made) are exactly in line with how young (especially male at the hands of another male) victims of abuse try to deal with things.

My instincts is to believe them. It's not always about evidence provable in a court of law. Hearing their wives talk about how they are having to live with the abuse by default echoes so clearly with my own experiences (and I was not romantically involved, only a friend). The breakdown in the normal family relationships isn't something anyone admits to for fun or publicity unless they're complete sociapathic narcissists... ok, one might be - but all of them? What are the odds?

Broken people don't fit a profile. They don't all act the same way. Many of successful in later life, outwardly at least. But inside? They're broken. And it shows, even when they don't mean it to.

Added to that, I have a family member who has been involved in investigating childhood abuse. They know their stuff. There is no one 'right way' of reacting. But abuse is abuse no matter how the victim reacts.

@dustarr73

What an odd article. Surely it's not suggesting that Wade being in a relationship with MJs niece erasers his sexual abuse by MJ? And surely it's not suggesting that MJ setting up that realtionship means that he was not a predator?

I mean, what kind of a first rate mug could think that?

@teyem Well it reads to me like damage limitations.But i read it as if thats the case it made Wade easier to get at.He had a reason to be there,other than seeing MJ.

So i think they just proved the point they where trying to disprove

I mean, if he did set up Wade with his niece, even the most ardent rape apologist can see how, by keeping his victim close and within the inner circle of the Jackson family, he has greater influence and control over his life and ensures his loyalty and silence.

Yeah, absolutely, I agree. It just demonstrates further the cult-like practices that MJ leant on to keep everyone on script.

Because the choreographer in last night's documentary had his moment in court already when trying to sue the Jackson Estate and he lied under oath. He denied that he had written a book and approached publishers who refused to publish it. When a court order was placed to obtain the book manuscript they found a few different copies, all with different versions of events as to how he was first abused. The other man in last night's interview claimed he was at MJ's house more then he declared in court too, also in court he declared it as repressed memory and yet in last night's interview it was spun as if he always knew he was abuses. Most of the court manuscripts are floating around Google, I should imagine it won't be long before MJ family release some of this publicly to clear his name.

Also in a documentary David Guest produced, it was well documented by older celebrities that MJ would sleep over at theirs as a small child and spend weeks with them, learning the industry and receiving help with his career. It's odd I agree, but maybe he genuinely thought he could mentor these kids and maybe that's why he helped others too. There is definitely a tone of jealousy in last night's documentary.

Nobody will ever know for sure if these men are lying, but there are way too many discrepancies in their stories, so much so a court threw the claims out.

Also just before the allegations was made by the choreographer his career was failing, he approached the Jackson's asking to be part of the upcoming Jackson tour, singing MJs praises and declaring how he was a big part of his life. MJs people used someone else and he then made this allegation.

I suppose I might be being too harsh on the Jackson family. I've been thinking that their denials were just about the depleted income stream but I suppose they were groomed to accept unacceptable behaviour too and to react with a Pavlovian response about how MJ was innocent and childlike, a superstar and a saviour.

I mean, if perfect strangers who just liked his music can toe the line to maintain their image of who he is and was in the face of the evidence, then it's unsurprising his family will be more entrenched.

I can’t believe anyone could watch James Safechuck in that doc and think he was lying. You could see he was utterly destroyed by what happened.

I also think it’s entirely irrelevant to say that MJ is not here to defend himself. If he was, he’d just deny it and we’d be where we are now.

I’m afraid four people accusing him of the same thing, with strong similarities in their descriptions, is enough for me to be persuaded it happened.

Has any other adult male ever willing admitted to sharing a bed with a non-relative young boys/teens.

Well if the abuse happened then the parents of these boys are just as much to blame. My kids are into modern music, I'm not down with it but for example if Eminem summoned my child to his house for sleepovers I wouldn't be having any of it. The parents of these men were financially motivated back then, putting their kids at risk and if they could chase the money in such a way back then, why not now? The mother of Wade came across like a money grabbing narcissist who would stop at nothing for access to fame and fortune and the other mother's account of her experience of knowing MJ was bizarre. No way would I have any smiles or positive words to describe the past if the past included the abuse of my child.

@RageAgainstTheVendingMachine Have contacted my friend again, though they are overseas on business and rarely check their personal emails. Have tried to google info instead, and going through a mountain of links, the closest so far I've seen is estimates that he paid off up to 20 children, but that is still not the info I was told. Will keep looking and hope he replies. It's frustrating.

@unicornsrule "Why don't robson and safechuck seem upset when talking about the abuse by michael jackson"
Perhaps you haven't seen the documentary. I have only just seen part one, but in it, at various stages they both seemed on the verge of tears. I remember one was sniffling. And his hands were really shaking when he held the rings he was given by Michael. So they certainly seemed very upset and emotional.

@unicornsrule "Have read whole thread

Why have only two guys spoken out??
Wouldnt there be loads

I feel that he was a very kind man
He was very childlike as he never had a childhood
His whole childhood was spent rehearsing with his brothers-
He never played out with friends!
Never went to the zoo, fair etc
Never had sleepovers

Thats why he built neverland"

Did you honestly read the full thread? Because if you did, you took absolutely nothing in.

There were numerous boys, not just these two.
You are clearly naively falling for the lies he spun. He had no worse childhood than other childhood stars, in fact, many had a much, MUCH WORSE childhood than he did, and didn't build a paedophile attraction park. The whole childhood thing is bs, a cover. And you fell for it.
He built Neverland to attract boys. That is why he built it. Wake up. He is a paedophile who hid in plain sight, made you think he was innocent and nice, when the whole time he used Neverland the same way men in vans use candy - to LURE CHILDREN.

The degree of emotional upset shown does not necessarily relate to the severity if their trauma. For their own survival, victims will compartmentalise, dissociate and totally detach from the traumatic events. It's how they can continue to function in the world.

@CantstandmLMs Actually no, that in itself is a lie. Jordan never admitted the allegations were made up.

Thanks Luna.

www.snopes.com/fact-check/jordan-chandler-jackson/

A friend of mine has just posted on Facebook that anyone who believes the lies (her opinion) that Michael Jackson is a paedophile after watching the 'mockumentary' (her description) then they can unfriend her.
Ah well...