AIBU to be shocked by public celebration of Michael Jackson?

[2021x]

Now the MJ film is out my social media feed is flooded with people doing the dances and talking about the movie etc. My local cinema is holding special events and screenings.

I personally have no doubt that he was a predatory paedophile. All the signs are there, especially how he talks about how he would never hurt a child and sharing a bed with them is the "most loving thing you can do in the world". He manipulated the world into thinking he had a "child-like persona" but was able to manage a music career worth millions... which someone who is naive would never be able to manage.

I also do not judge people who enjoy his music. It was very popular at the time, and would be associated with all types nostaligic memories. I listen to problematic artists all the time, but I don't pretend that they weren't abusive.

AIBU to be astounded that any business/media outlet would be seen dead even associating with him let alone celebrating such a horrifically abusive man.

I’m not sure why it would.

What? They were hidden in a safe and then the police found them when his home was searched. Why do you think that Jackson was keen to keep these particular books, which were made by convicted pedophiles for other pedophiles, under wraps? Bearing in mind he had thousands of books, he could have put them on a shelf and denied knowing that he even had them. But no, these were special enough to him that he kept them seperate and locked away.

We'll never really know with 100 percent certainty as he's no longer with us. It just highlights how much we worship people in the public eye. Admire the music, art, film or whatever but not the artist because, guess what there is a chance that those you admire do terrible things behind closed doors. Hollywood and the music industry is full of depravity and it would be quite difficult to find anyone who is innocent of anything. I've only just been able to listen to MJ's music as for a while, I did believe he could be guilty - still not sure but I just admire his genius and his music is still hits all these years later. Who knows.

Aside from any allegations, I do think MJ may have had some underlying neurodivergence. Not relating that to his possible abuse of kids at all but his actions and expressions just seem like he could have been. On the other hand, he was pretty ruthless on the business side.

I've already gone over why I think criminal conviction is a low ethical bar and why it's mad to ignore basic safeguarding of children and boundaries that protect them. I thought R Kelly was a pedophile since I first heard what he did, completely irrelevant to me he was acquitted in a court of law and unsurprising that he went on to be convicted. I don't doubt that MJ would have been brought to justice in time but regardless I believe victims of abuse just as you would hopefully believe any child you knew if they told you something happened to them without waiting for a jury to tell you so, especially if the person they were accusing goes around sleeping with children and owning art books published by known pedophiles.

You’d let your young son sleep in his bed, then? Because it’s all innocent.

@vickylou78

Ok so the books - I've read that these books were photography/art books (it's been overplayed in the press) He was an avid reader and was into art and photography etc. so that itself isn't evidence of anything.

Would you say this out loud in company? Or would you stop yourself because you know how it sounds?

Quite. I’m also an avid reader but funnily enough…

Lots of people in denial are quoting the Finding Neverland documentary and saying they dont believe tht

Have you seen The Trial on BBC , 3 parts. Pertinent information in that about the investigations and interviews with those who worked with him

I agree OP. I'm so conflicted about the film, I kind of want to see it for nostalgia's sake, but it also leaves a nasty taste in my mouth that it's clearly a cashgrab, that paints Michael in the best possible light at every turn.

No there was a whole podcast on this that I watched with Taj Jackson and he described the books. Described them as photography books. I've not heard of anything worse than that.

I saw that and earlier this year, a channel 4 series. In both there are various police and prosecutors sharing evidence that was found (i suppose they are all making it up too 🤨) A juror admitting they thought he probably was guilty...

His Attorny was on, saying he had a team of people working on getting dirt on the Arvizos, to make them seem unreliable, in order to clear MJs name ....rather than any evidence that would prove MJ didnt do it

What's your source for the art books being made by convicted pedophiles? I have literally never heard that until this thread

Thing is it wouldn't be difficult to get dirt on the Arvizo's as they've done fraud and extortion before! On several occasions.

I don’t understand why some posters continue to compare the acquittal of R Kelly to that of Michael Jackson .
R Kelly’s initial acquittal ( child pornography ) was due to the fact that the prosecution could not prove the identity or age of the alleged victim in a tape because she refused to testify . He was acquitted on a technicality
In Michael Jackson’s case there wasn’t any credible evidence to suggest that he molested the children . In addition , the jury found the accuser and the family to be untrustworthy

Well you have now, these books were made by pedophiles. So would you still stick to saying you think they were just 'art books'?

It's easily verified online that these books were made by pedophiles

https://archive.ph/ME18E

The Boy a Photographic Essay and Boys Will Be Boys were compiled pseudonymously by Martin Swithinbank and Ronald Drew, both of whom were convicted of child sexual offences.

I see the library had to restrict access because sickos were ripping pages out of the books so now they are only accessible with an invigilator.

Reminds me of the creepy clip of MJ ripping a photo of kids out of a book when he was in a hotel with Martin Bashir and talked about how it filled his heart with bliss, they weren't naked but does he not have enough pics of kids ffs.

In a 1995 interview with Diane Sawyer, Jackson lied about the police discovering the books.

Yes you are correct. I have found lots of sources on this. It is very concerning..... They are commercially available books but like you say they are commonly found at paedo's. I'm not sure what to think about it if I'm honest. The defence at the time were saying that a fan could have given him them but then why would you have them locked away. I agree it's not good.

I think a fan could have given him one of them based on the inscription, but in the other one he wrote his own inscription.

@fundamentallyauthentic mentioned he lied in the Diane Sawyer interview, he did, she asked him about the books or if they found books and he said something like 'no didn't happen,not that I know of, unless someone sent them to me and I hadn't opened them'.

But as I said he wrote his own inscription in one of them "Look at the true spirit of happiness and joy in these boys' faces. This is the spirit of boyhood, a life I never had and will always dream of. This is the life I want for my children, MJ"

Sounds like he wrote that in case someone saw it, to tie it into his cover story, on what planet is the 'spirit of boyhood' just boys hanging out naked all the time? It's a sexual fantasy, not a yearning for childhood.

Because MJ cheerleaders keep over simplifying it that acquired = proven innocent and cases like R Kelly's (where his cheerleaders used that same argument for decades) show how wrong that can be. One jury, one trial going the evidence didn't prove his guilt without reasonable doubt, that is not the same as there being no credible evidence - you do not get a case to court with no credible evidence and that's with regular people, not popstars with massive legal teams like Michael Jackson.

They're not just commonly found at pedos though, they're made by pedos and are only commercially available because they were published by pedos, no regular publishing company is or was making that book available. It's not just about why would he have them locked away either, if someone gave that to you why would you keep them? Owning books by pedophiles who consider their abuse "boy love" while being a grown man who claims they just "love boys" says it all really.

Owning books written by paedophiles doesn't prove he molested anyone though so isn't evidence itself. It's just painting a complex picture of his character I suppose. I agree it's not a good look him having those specific books.

Do you think though that owning inappropriate books of children, admitting you sleep in bed with them and find it beautiful makes it more or less likely that you molested kids who said you did though? One thing doesn't prove anything but with Jackson you have a myriad of things that don't by themselves prove he sexually abused children (something notoriously difficult to 'prove' anyway) but for someone apparently innocent and where there's no credible evidence there's an awful lot of worrying things pointing in that direction no? I'm interested in what would be "proof" to you given any and all abuse is hard to prove as it happens in private, and are you holding MJ accusations to a higher standard of proof than you would another man?

You're genuinely weird. Why are you getting so worked up about this?

It's super difficult with MJ as his whole life the press were out to destroy him and people lied about him all the time, eg. He slept in a hypobaric chamber, he bleached his skin because he wanted to be white, his marriage to Lisa-marie was fake, etc etc. and he was literally constantly being sued and extorted for his money. There's also been exaggeration regarding his behaviour with children - things like dumping them when they were 14, not having any girls visit etc, the reason for the fairground etc. When so much bullshit is printed about a person it's harder to work out which bits are true and which bits are false.