Michael Jackson is dead

[QOD]

sad

One of the things I've learned from prosecutors of childcare cases, is that many people involved in the process reflexively believe the victim. Or in some cases, even where there are no complaints, see child abuse where it may not exist.

It's obviously right to hear the victim and treat the victim sensitively. But there are many cases of people who have been falsely accused whose lives have been ruined. You do have to give the alleged perpetrators a fair hearing too.

Thankfully quite a few people base their opinions on knowledge gained in a wider context than just personal experience. Otherwise we would live in a world full of narrow minded individuals.

I do understand thanks dittany. I have known someone who groomed young people, then abused them and was convicted, and I know exactly how devious paedophiles can be in how they operate.

However, I think I can safely say that if I get an unexpectedly large phone bill, I won't automatically assume that my teenage son has been calling up some American pop star for personal masturbation advice!

It's impossible to resolve this in this way ~ we need more information to know if there was any basis for the initial allegations.
Until we get that information we have to believe the result of the criminal case.
Dittany everyone in their right mind abhors paedophilia but that doesn't make every accusation true.You can keep restating your point till the cows come home but it won't make it true.

Dittany, there was one criminal case and the man was found innocent.

I agree with you that more perpetrators get away with child abuse than are convicted. However there is such a thing as false accusation - it exists - those accusations tend to be made by children who are badly damaged and often badly damaged by family members.

Because of the fact that false accusations exist, and also because of the fact that MJ was found innocent - overwhelmingly so judging by my summary reading of the case - I do think you shouldn't be automatically assuming that he is guilty.

No Dittany

you are saying he did it

everyone else is telling you you do not know that he did it

and you don't

what's a bit spookey is the way a few posters who have recognised their history on here have a burning desire to believe there has been abuse, despite failed prosecutions.

In my experience victims of such abuse want more than anything that it doesn't happen to others. Whereas on here the opposite is the case. No matter what is said to them they hold on to their dear belief that someone was abused.

And are we really supposed to believe that the person in that photograph with his arm around Michael Jackson/Michael Jackson lookalike/waxwork figure is 13 years old?

More like 30.

exactly coolpersephone.

He was found not guilty.

That does not mean he was innocent. Neither does it mean he wasn't innocent.

The vast majority of us on the thread seem able to grasp that point, thank god.

Truly bizarre!

dittany that is not a new accuser of Jackson. He's appeared in three documentaries about him and has several articles about him on this website.

Note that he says that many of the numerous articles printed about him and Jackson are rehashed bollocks.

He's written about him a fair bit, e.g.,

"Terry George: At 50 Michael is still the King of Pop

I can?t believe my old friend Michael Jackson is celebrating his half century.

Even though he?s only seven years older than me, I can?t think of him as being 50 as it sounds too old. It?s 20 years since we last met and I think in my mind he will always be that age, until we meet up again, which may happen quite soon."

He won "I won's Britain's Best Home" and was also on Secret Millionaire. In short, an expert self-publicist.

Actually, if we did a '10 most bizarre excuses by teenagers for racking up a fucking huge phone bill' I reckon " having to call up Michael Jackson" would rate among them!!!

Dittany, can you not accept that an eccentric and slightly vulnerable multimillionaire popstar might be a target? Especially if said multimillionaire shied away from company other than that of chimps and children? Arrested development doesn't even begin to describe MJ.

I can categorically state that Michael Jackson was not a criminal, yes. He has not been convicted of a crime, which is the definition of a criminal.

(Unless you mean a smooth criminal maybe )

(awaits predictable post about the semantics of criminology..... yawn)

He's lying about his age. He looks older than 'Michael Jackson'.

And I thought his predilection was supposed to be for pre-pubescent boys.

You mean he was mid-30's and racking up that huge phone bill on wank calls?! Now that's spooky!

Criminal. noun "One that has committed or been legally convicted of a crime."

No to the latter, as to the former, that depends on what crime you're talking about. Isn't speeding a crime?