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??

LunafortJest can you not @ me, it sends an unnecessary email as I’m already on the thread you don’t need to and it’s annoying.

I’m entitled to my opinion, as you are yours, but please stop with the patronising crap. I understand more than I want to about this sort of thing. 22 million isn’t ‘rightful compensation’ IMO.

*Abducted in plain site is very good example of grooming and control

And so is dirty John. Both very powerful true stories .*

Exactly!

I judge the parents for accepting money, not children. We are talking millions here. It’s grotesque.

Millions to a multi million aire.

So these poor boys should get nothing whilst Micheal and his whole family live off his earnings made from fans including all these young boys?? They live elevated wealthy life and these boys get no compensation?

But if an employee was hurt on site in one of theirs homes they could Sue for money??

Bearing in mind they'll never get justice, how else do you think they should be compensated Jessica ? Other than financial recompense...

Jesus. I have just read this entire thread and can not believe that anyone would think that MJ was innocent. Talk about the families being ‘groomed’, we have all been groomed in to believing he was so ‘innocent and childlike’ that he could never commit such atrocious acts. Sickening. I watched the documentary last night and couldn’t t sleep after it, it was so upsetting.

I don’t understand why folk think people are lying because they accepted money, I think it proves that MJ was guilty for offering a payout. If I was innocent there’s no way I’d settle out of court and try and pay off my accusers.

The difference for me would have been to take money perhaps but also support the other cases.

Jessica you may be new to this site. @'ing people is the normal way of addressing people, even if people get many emails (which is generally how you know someone has replied to you). It is how things are done on this site.

I am not meaning to be patronising. Tbh I feel you are patronising of victims and their parents. I don't know many abuse victims who have the mindset you do, so it is peculiar. You don't understand why victims would seek compensation. You don't understand that all parents of abused children are groomed to some degree. Now you question compensation? I find it difficult to take you seriously unless you are trolling.

What would you deem an acceptable amount of compensation for child abuse? How much do you think the loss of a child's innocence is worth, if not millions? What is the price tag you would put on a child's innocence and psychological health, and how would you determine that bar? I am genuinely curious.

missyfafa just to clarify, me personally, I don’t think it means the children are lying whatsoever.

Money can never compensate for abuse. It can buy therapy though.

I wonder why people ( not on this thread but in media and the public ) don’t see that Johnny Depp paying off Amber Heard is a sign of guilt? Not intending to derail but since we have discussed how our society is full of men like this, I’m just frustrated that Depp, Woody Allen and others aren’t universally vilified too. Allen is such an obvious pedo I can’t believe people still defend and work with him?

It is how things are done on this site. No it isn’t. I’ve been here under different usernames since it was created. I’ve seen plenty of people ask not to be @ actually, and I’ve been told off for doing it. It’s a polite request.

The rules of the site include not accusing people of trolling. I take extreme offence at your implications I’m not a victim, so I shall not engage with you further. Your comments are unfair to me, simply because I disagree with the parents behaviour and the obscene amount of ‘compensation’. Compensation as part of a court judgement is different to what happened here.

I think some people do see it as a sign of guilt but as with MJ some are die-hard fans and refuse to believe their heroes could do anything wrong. However in the MJ case it’s not the only sign of guilt is it? it is coupled with lots of other bizzare incidents and weird behaviour and testimonies and evidence. I happen to think Woody Allen is vile...

Interesting that you mention Woody Allen, JessicaWakefieldSVH. I was going to bring him up earlier, but thought my posts were long enough.

Dylan was assessed by child services, child psychologists associated with the police, and police. Law enforcement, the child services and child psychologists all found she was abused. But Mia Farrow was advised against going to court as the damage to Dylan would be too great. There are actually legal documents from the Farrow-Allen case that state this.

So, you've just brought up a case that didn't go court due to trauma to the child. Which basically proves our points.

MJ was a whole industry

He could afford the absolute best and pay people to lie in court for him

I totally understand why families took money

I just watched both parts of the documentary. I’m absolutely sickened. In answer to the OP, I have no idea why people are defending him. I’ll never listen to his music again, it is stained forever now. His image and brand will never recover from this. I also think his family and entourage have questions they should be made to answer in court about facilitating and then covering up his clear child abuse.

Jessica, now you are claiming I doubted you are a victim. I said no such thing. Nor did I specifically say I thought you were a troll. I find your attacks on me to be a case of avoiding to discuss the topic and avoiding answering my pertinent points. Which is, how would you personally define how much a child should be compensated?
I think it should be commensurate with the abuser's income. In that case, Jackson's victims should be able to seek millions.

@EnthusiasmIsDisturbed "He could afford the absolute best and pay people to lie in court for him

I totally understand why families took money"

Exactly. It is abhorrent and repulsive that people are ignoring the idea of retraumatising a child all over again, and ignoring the expertise advice from child psychologists to not go to court. And is it jealousy I wonder, the reason why people get upset at the compensation payouts to children? 'Oh but it shouldn't be 22 million'. Nothing like jealousy and victim-blaming. It should be based on the abuser's earnings, so 22 million is fair.

Jessica I am sorry for the abuse you suffered. You more than most would presumably have some insight into how awful it must be to testify in court to abuse, in front of your abuser?

Bearing that in mind, I'm rather surprised that you have no empathy for families who would rather avoid putting their children through that, and why some children would not be able to speak out against their abuser, even as adults.

Just wow. Now I’m jealous? You’re really unpleasant.

Backseatonthebus abusers are enabled by adults around them ignoring signs. That’s why myself and my friends were abused. So yes. I have a real problem when adults behave in a way which allows abusers to carry on abusing. I was screamed at and threatened with the police by my head teacher, as were 8 other girls who were all brave enough to come forward at aged 11. None of our parents went into that school, or to the police, to support us. We had to go back into his classroom.

Even if you remove all of sexual allegations from the table - which they will likely remain given the fact that MJ is dead and there have been so many monetary settlements, and the MJ PR machine is working overtime to destroy the reputations of anyone connected to the story - the question remains - why did ANY of the adults responsible for either MJ or the children allow them to be put in that situation in the first place?

It has never to my knowledge been disputed that he spent time alone with these children, it seems it is also commonly accepted that he shared a bed with various pre-teens. How did no one either employee or parent say NO this is not appropriate? Surely even if his motivations were purely innocent his circle couldn't have thought it was a good idea, but no they facilitated it. It beggars belief imho

Who are you referring to, Jessica? If it is me, I didn't say you were jealous - I have seen many people say they shouldn't get that much. If you have a reason to think I was talking about you, I think that is on you. Not me. Unpleasant to me is being hostile to someone who is simply wishing to engage in a discussion, ignoring questions asked, and insinuating re-traumatising a child all over again in court is ok. That is my definition of a thoroughly unpleasant person.

Boxerbinky careful, you’ll get attacked and accused of things on this thread if you dare question the behaviour of adults surrounding this.