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??

I don’t think anyone would deny that at times abusers are enabled by other adults more often there isn’t an understanding of what is happening around them as they too have been groomed

Professionals working with sex offenders work as a team to keep themselves safe from being groomed and to get the whole picture of what is going on

They do not work on the same level as the rest of the population that is why they are able to commit such awful crimes

Well said, Backseat on the bus. One would think someone who went through such horrific abuse would have compassion for a little innocent child, instead of thinking nothing about retraumatising them again. A friend and I had discussed this case several months back. She herself was molested. Her parents took it to court. She was retraumatised and ended up having a breakdown. She was called a liar and shouted down by the Defence attorney. She has never forgiven her mother.

She never forgave her parents for dragging her through that court process. Especially her mother. In fact, has no contact with them now. Primarily due to that.

She said to me that if one of her children were abused, she would not take it to court. She would not do what her parents did to her. She would take the money for her DC.

I think her pov is very poigant and important.

People are abused because an abuser chooses to abuse them. That is where the final responsibility must always always sit. With the abuser.

I think you are deflecting away from what Jackson did by focusing on the parents here. Their behaviour should definitely be up for scrutiny, but actually, the responsibility for the abuse sits with the adult male who groomed and then sexually abused children. We need to come back to this, it's the thing that matters most.

I wholeheartedly agreed with you samphire regarding psychological damage (see my post on p.14)

You also quoted valeur as below - my comments in bold (Hi val I do like fact-checking but it is becoming increasingly hard to find credible non-biased sources on anything these days. I also did jury service once on two cases and it was eye-opening).

Again, ONLY USING MJs words and science based FACTS:
...we know he has 5 accusers. 6 actually but the latest one also has written for monetary gain
We know others allege witnessing the abuse. the Neverland 5 also had credibility issues
We know he had photos of nude young boys. yes - not pornographic but prosecution stated they could be used for grooming. One source mentions Jonathan Spence. Another mentions Kendall Cunningham in a nightgown, one suspected to be his brother Greg bare-chested, some of 3T but no photos of naked children from the waist down
We know he shared his bed with young boys. yes
We know that his fingerprints, and those of his accusers, were found in the same pages of his book of images of nude young boys. I thought on pornographic magazines which isn't much better but Messereau claimed Jackson confiscated a magazine from Gavin and locked it in his briefcase
We know he gave alcohol to young boys. according to Gavin's testimony. The 2005 jury also found him not guilty of this. In the documentary Wade made a thing of him being asked to bring wine as though it was more unusual for him to be drinking, not sure why
We know he entered into multi-million dollar settlements. two, yes although Francia's was 'only' 2 mill. Another poster, Luna, thinks there were 2 more but her source needs to verify who
We know his bedroom was alarmed yes, but we also know he had death threats from the FBI files
We know he had a large commercial pornography collection, with which he kept pictures of nude children. yes - did the prosecution say they were found together I thought photos were found in a safe in employee break room...which is strange in itself?
We know that he looked at some of the commercial pornography with his accusers. according to Gavin's testimony. Mark Ronson (record producer) said in 2008 that him and Sean Lennon switched to the porn channel but MJ not interested. It should never have been accessible anyway

With regard to the penis recognition:
In the trial in 2005, Sneddon wanted to present these photos to the jury but the judge Rodney Melville did not permit them as it would be too prejudicial. Does anyone know what conclusion the Grand Jury, which reviewed the photos in 1994, came to? Had they matched would not that have led to an immediate arrest?

With regard to the fingerprints:
I cannot find an independent source that Gavin Arvizo touched erotic magazines with his hands at the Grand Jury indictment hearing in 2004 so have to dismiss it. Magazines were not tested for months though and arguments were made for cross-contamination.
www.chron.com/entertainment/article/Fingerprint-evidence-viewed-in-Jackson-trial-1941805.php

But as you say samph in his own words:

Michael Jackson has proudly admitted sharing his bed with children. He says he sees nothing wrong with a 44-year-old man having such relationships. And insisting there is 'nothing sexual' going on, he declares: 'I give them hot milk, you know, we have cookies. It's very charming, it's very sweet, it's what the whole world should do.'

In a baby's bottle looking at some photos. I like milk. I like cookies.
But cannot imagine as a child/preteen having them at a sleepover that was not with my immediate family only. I wish I could be as trusting as others but I am a cynical person.

The above is why I think in all probability Jackson was a paedophile but, without Wade's current testimony in 2005, I can understand why the jury brought back a Not Guilty verdict.

Having looked at some of the 2016 suit, I can also see why some think Wade is not credible.
www.scribd.com/document/335685460/MJ-Estate-Motion-to-Compel-Robson
but as has been said already, $$$ = good lawyers

Depp and Allen have both been heavily criticized on MN incidentally.
Woody Allen is now all but over I think.
Maureen Orth wrote about him too, as well as Jackson.
That said, Robert Weide and Moses Farrow were also convincing in their defence.

Their behaviour should definitely be up for scrutiny, but actually, the responsibility for the abuse sits with the adult male who groomed and then sexually abused children. We need to come back to this, it's the thing that matters most.

I have never suggested that the abuser is any less responsible or that anyone else bears the responsibility for their abusive behaviour. What I’m doing is exactly as you say, scrutinising the behaviour of the adults around him who knew about it and could have prevented his access to other children.

I’m absolutely gobsmacked at the repeated and sustained attack I’m under, as a victim of multiple abuse, for sharing what I think are valid points about how abusers are enabled and the responsibility of parents when it comes to safeguarding children. The lack of action by other adults meant one of my abusers was able to continue abusing me and many other girls. I think my point is entirely valid and I speak from a place of experience. That a certain poster continues to mercilessly attack and make really horrible implications and questions my own responses, as a victim, while I’m clearly involved in the conversation, is really fucked up. That you’re all here out of concern for these victims of abuse, while also ignoring someone attacking me and questioning my motives and implying I don’t have compassion for other victims, is shocking to me. I’m not deflecting anything. But I unfortunately know too well what it would take to really tackle pedophilia and abuse. It’s not just the abusers at fault. It’s people around them, including in this case staff and family but also parents. It’s the judicial systems we have which require victims to appear in court, laws which allowed him to walk free in 2005 despite quite clear patterns of paedophilic behaviours.

But I won’t stay on this thread and be bullied because I have a different perspective to others.

Woody Allen is now all but over I think I hope so. But the fact he adopted other children with his stepdaughter/wife, always troubled me. I sincerely hope they’re ok.

June Chandler was also groomed - her testimony sounds very similar to Joy Robson and Stephanie Safechuck's. Do bear in mind the following is a literary/biog source though (Untouchable - Randall Sullivan)

A genuine fondness for the Michael Jackson she came to know in those first weeks and months still sounded in June’s voice as she admitted being surprised and impressed by what “a regular guy” he was, so generous and polite and unassuming. There was still the faint echo of a thrill in her voice as June recalled the gifts Michael had lavished upon her and the trips aboard private jets to Monaco and Florida that she and Jordie and Lily made with their famous new friend. Both June’s story and her tone grew colder and grimmer, though, as she described the next trip she and her children took with Michael, the one they made to Las Vegas later in 1993. She was shocked and alarmed, as June told it, by her discovery that Jordie had apparently spent the night sleeping in the same bed with Jackson.

Speaking through an emotional strain that was quite convincing, June delivered the most devastating moments of testimony against Michael Jackson that were heard during the entire trial. Shortly after telling her son that he would not be allowed to stay in the same suite with Michael unless they slept in separate bedrooms, June recalled, she heard a knock at the door of her own hotel room. It was Michael Jackson, June told the jury. He stood before her sobbing, she remembered, his cheeks bathed in tears, wanting to know if what Jordie had told him was true: “He was crying, shaking, trembling. ‘You don’t trust me?’” Michael asked her, according to June. “‘We’re a family! Why are you doing this? Why are you not allowing Jordie to be with me?’ And I said, ‘He is with you,’” June remembered. “He said, ‘But my bedroom. Why not in my bedroom?’” Michael’s “histrionic tantrum” had gone on for another half-hour, said June, before she finally caved in and agreed that Jordie could sleep in Michael’s bedroom, and, as she told it, lost her son.

No one is attacking you or bullying you Jessica. No one. Simply asking you why you think parents are wrong to take the advice of child psychologists is not attacking or bullying. Asking you what you think is a fair amount as payment for child molestation is not attacking or bullying. You are falsely accusing people on here and I think the reason is because you can't/won't answer the questions.

I do think though, if after people read these posts and testimonies (such as my friend's) and still have a different perspective, when these posts should surely be enough to change/educate them, if they stubbornly cling to their perspective, then it says more about their inability to accept they were wrong, misinformed or simply hadn't considered other people's posts that would surely change their mind. Then at that point, it is stubbornness and unwilling to lose face or admit they're wrong. And that says everything about them, and not the posters they are attacking.

You’re not just asking questions. You’re being passive aggressive and repeatedly making comments like this: One would think someone who went through such horrific abuse would have compassion for a little innocent child, instead of thinking nothing about retraumatising them again.

If you’re so concerned for victims of abuse, where’s the acknowledgement or sympathy for me? Why are YOU retraumatising ME. Instead you’re continually questioning my motives and compassion for others. All because I think the parents behaviours are completely unacceptable.

Why are people who have not been abused leading this conversation?

I often find it so baffling when people come on here all self-righteous about what they would or wouldn't do, attack the parents for making a judgement call in the best interests of their child ie no prosecuting, then get upset when they face the same scrutiny and judgement themselves, and flip out. So hypocritical. I can judge them, but don't you judge me. smdh

Honestly, you don’t have a fucking clue. In your own posts you are questioning the response of an abuse victim, and telling me how I should think.

The children are the victims. I have not questioned them,

Adults should be scrutinised. If we really want to change our society and prevent this kind of thing, we must address how people around abusers behave. The abusers are at fault for the abuse, of course. But beyond that we must look at how such large scale abuse happened in plain sight.

Jessica, if you want to talk about the abuse you have suffered perhaps you should start a thread about it as this one is retraumatising you. I'm sure you will find Mnetters very sympathetic.

Jessica you have no idea which posters have or have not been abused, and to suggest that people who have not been abused are leading this conversation is nonsense, you simply don't know.

Again, we must not deflect the blame and responsibility for abuse away from the abuser.

If you are finding this thread traumatising, perhaps best to step away from it.

Watched the doc
Lots of looking to the right
Hand touching mouth
Nodding no when saying yes

If you know anything about body language you will know this doc is bullshit

Micheal is innocent
Still not a fan of his just not a follower.

I am asking questions. None of which you answer. I suggest you look at your own posts, because yours are full of passive-aggressiveness towards me, and snide remarks.

I think it is fair to question the compassion of someone who say they would not take the money and would rather retraumatise (because that is what you're suggesting) a child by going to court instead. What about the compassion for what the child will suffer? Isn't my friend's testimony enough for you?

Why do you assume you know on here who was or wasn't abused? How do you know I wasn't? Maybe I was and don't wish to talk about it or have my experience cloud my judgement. Why do you assume you know who is leading these conversations weren't abused?

These are all rhetorical questions I guess. I know by now you won't answer anything.

DioneTheDiabolist thank you, I’m ok 👍 I prob should know better than to come to AIBU and expect a good conversation!

Bellasorellaa

Seriously? Oh you can’t be serious

God reading to comments
It’s like pathetic children on this thread
Why can you people not have a discussion with each other without insulting others

jJess
It's an emotive issue and many MNetters, like yourself, have been victims of abuse, find the witness testimonies resonate with their own experiences and want to voice their support for the victims and their condemnation of the perpetrator.
Fwiw, I think you are right to call out the parents as, like the staff, they enabled him. But, ultimately, as Louise O'Neill pointed out today, rape is always the fault of the rapist and the responsibility for the crime lies with them.

to you and others jess

Jessica no I’m not serious I’m just commenting I don’t believe it for no reason

"In your own posts you are questioning the response of an abuse victim"

Aren't you doing the exact same thing?!?? You are questioning the response of abuse victims, and the response of their parents.

Where do you get off telling people what they shouldn't do/accept money where ever, and then getting upset when the same is done to you? Maybe it is simply a mirror being held up in your face. You are questioning the response of two families who have been abuse victims. Why do you have the right to do that?

I’m not obliged to answer anything. You’re not entitled to anything from me. I find your attitude disingenuous and uncaring, thats mostly why I don’t answer some of your questions, they’re not in good faith. You’ve ignored plenty of what I’ve said. I’ve responded to others and I’ve explained my reasoning for my comments regarding those that enabled this multiple times.

When I was a kid (70s to 80s) MJ was considered a harmless eccentric. I liked his music and choreography and it's very sad to think that someone who produced that could do these horrible things. So I think that's a big part of it. For myself, I am conscious that I don't know what he would have said about this, and maybe if I was being asked to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt I would be worried about that. But I'm not. I'm forming an opinion based on what's available and it doesn't look great. Am I sure he was a child abuser? I can't be. Do I think it's likely based on what's known? I think it is.