To think it's tragic if Michael Jackson was indeed innocent

[pregahes]

It's a real shame for someone who created incredible music to have their legacy at risk. It’s just tragic, considering the impact his music had on so many. It's tragic either way, if he's guilty for the victims and if he's innocent for himself.

I'm a huge fan and at one point t thought he was guilty but kore recently change of heart. I think there would be more victims if he weee in fact guilty. Somethings doesnt add up.

It's tragic

I really can't see how I was excusing his behaviour. My post was very clear that I think he did it and that despite his childhood he still ruined lives. I have a clear opinion too, as I said, that he did what he has been accused of.

I hope the apologists on this thread aren’t parents.

Using the Mike down the analogy:

Mike lives alone. He likes spending time with young, prepubertal boys. In his house he has a massive gaming room and a fridge full of soft drink and endless sweets and crisps.

Some of Mike’s companions, now 20 plus years, say that Mike raped them. That he slept in the same bed and sexually assaulted them. It goes to court, the people accusing him can’t remember events perfectly, they get some timelines wrong. Mike is rich and has a good lawyer and isn’t convicted.

Mike befriends your nine year old son. your son wants to hang out with Mike, play in his gaming room and eat his pizzas and crisps. Mike wants him to sleep over.

Most parents : fuck no. Mike is a nounce
MN apologists: Mike was “proven innocent”. I see no problem with my son and Mike sleeping in the same bed

Omg!!! Ur a smart cookie.🤗🤗🤗

JFC the paedophilia apologists on this thread. Just awful - and so worrying that there are so many adults (many of whom presumably parents) who have no idea about safguarding, no idea how grooming works, no idea of the impact of CSA or of why children who’ve been abused might not say what happened straightaway.

These were CHILDREN. Little, naive, inexperienced children. One of the men in Leaving Neverland said Jackson told him if he told anyone what he (Jackson) was doing, then not only would Jackson go to prison but so would the boy, his victim.

And you can’t see why that boy might then deny that he’d been abused??

Jackson was a ruthless predator. Absolutely ruthless. He manipulated everyone around him, the boys’ families, the media, his jury, the world. This schtick about him being “childlike” himself and only yearning for the boys’ company because he’d missed out on a normal childhood himself - it was all a cover, and evidently a very successful cover. A deliberate ploy to con people so they wouldn’t realise he was a fucking NONCE.

Some of you - too many of you - are still allowing yourselves to be manipulated even now. Tragic.

He was innocent and exploited for money - & he’s been found innocent at trial
watch the documentary ‘Square One’

This!

Why do you think there would be more victims if he were guilty?

My brother sexually abused me for years. As far as I am aware I was his only victim. He's still guilty as fuck. Guilt has nothing to do with the number of victims.

If he wasn’t a paedophile then why did he act like a paedophile?

Sorry, but that point absolutely IS worth picking up on.

Being found ‘not guilty’ categorically is not the same as being found innocent.

That’s why they use the words ‘not guilty’.

Michael Jackson was never found to be ‘innocent’.

The old paedophile double bluff. They'll never know!

He was never legally proven to be a paedophile. But some of his practices would be highly questionable today.

Not just today but at the time. I’m not sure what time in history his behaviour would be seen as normal.

Absolutely 😳 @ the idea that men having sleepovers with boys was anything other than ‘highly questionable’ 20 years ago.

20 years ago was my heyday. It was not OK.

It’s never been OK.

Also, just two victims no evidence - is it not fair to say it could be true either way? Why so sure he's guilty. None of us know

Sigh. I thought we’d move past the point where victims were blamed for not videotaping their abuse? Cos that’s what you’re practically asking for, OP. Their word should be enough.

Virginia Robert’s has muddled her allegations a few times and got dates/details confused (and is actually yet to show the original photo of her and Prince Andrew) and yet everyone believes her. Clearly, in the MJ case, it goes back to ‘men can’t be assaulted sexually’ belief that so many people have.

IF he was innocent (big if) then his music is the least of anyone’s concerns. (IMO he wasn’t that great anyway…)

I always try not to judge without knowing both sides but he was an odd character and I watched leaving never land and found it both compelling and very disturbing ,the graphic detail made me inclined to believe them

Well Jimmy Savile was never proven to be a paedophile but I don't think there is any question that he was one .

I would find it incredibly worrying if my son or husband wanted to have sleepovers with very small boys

Well, the whole PO scandal is full of people paying up to avoid a trial. Are they guilty too?

Er, I think it does!
There is a presumption of innocence in UK and US courts so NG means you are still innocent.

A few days before the Bashir interview came out I watched a documentary about peodophiles that talked about how they are really hard to rehabilitate because they honestly believe that what they are doing is ok.

Then I watched MJ passionately and emphatically telling Bashir that sharing a bed with a child was a pure beautiful and natural thing to do.

Since then I’ve never doubted that he was a nonce. No one else would ever say that kind of thing. Even if he was “childlike” what kind of child believes that?

I just hope all his victims are ok and have found peace. But I won’t listen to his music again.

I will say something odd that's stuck out to me to say he is possibly guilty is the fact that there does seem to be a trend, no female accusers and so I find it weird all the boys he 'befriended' were all handsome/very cute, that strikes as odd to me. If they were purely friends then by coincidence they would have looked a variety of ways surely?

I don't know why him having an abusive childhood, or wanting to somehow recreate his childhood is used as an excuse or reason why he couldnt have been an abuser. Both can be true.

What if someone was very childlike and had a mental age of 10 due to a developmental disorder, or disability....would it still be ok for that childlike adult to have sleepovers with children? No, of course not.

If a trusted male friend had asked me if DS (when he was 8 or 10) wanted to go fishing for the day, or play crazy golf or go to a museum, I would probably have said yes. If they had said does he want to come over for a sleepover, that is entirely different.

There literally aren't any good reasons why it's appropriate or ok for any adult man to have sleepovers in his bedroom with small boys....and I haven't seen any plausible reasons why MJ should be the exception

I was horrified the parents of the children allowed them to sleep in a bed with him! When I watched a documentary I couldn't help but feel the parents set the kids up for it. I also can't believe they accepted closed door financial settlements and didn't pursue a criminal investigation. It doesn't sit right with me when money ie accepted in place of a criminal conviction. It should be both

He was not innocent in any sense of the word.
It irks me when his music is played.

The very idea that "his practices" were at all acceptable twenty five years ago!!!