Micky Jackson in trouble again

Big Gerry

Jacko may or may not have been a child molester but there must be many people who came into contact with him who think they can make an easy few million by saying he abused them.

MOR316

Big Gerry wrote: »

Jacko may or may not have been a child molester but there must be many people who came into contact with him who think they can make an easy few million by saying he abused them.

Pretty much.
Reading up on him since LN was aired, he was in and out of court with people trying to swindle money out of him through claims of he stole songs, he stole dance moves, he stole land, he had my babies etc. One of his maids was fired for stealing his possessions and she sued him for unfair dismissal

The guy obviously had severe mental issues, brought on by his career from 5 years of age until his death. That level of fame, it's not healthy nor right. Either was some of his behaviours but, I don't think he was a bad guy. Heart was in the right place, his head not so much

Anyways, final ruling was today. Case was thrown out again! The two lads are in real financial trouble now

micar

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

- research shows the average pedophile abuses approx 250 children

Well, that's complete nonsense.

MOR316

micar wrote: »

Well, that's complete nonsense.

They also don't spend time with thousands of children, allegedly abuse 4 of them and leave no evidence behind them tbf...

Galwayguy35

How are ye so sure he wasn't an abuser.

Nobody can say that.

Big Gerry

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

How are ye so sure he wasn't an abuser.

Nobody can say that.

Looking at Jacko from the outside he does fit the profile of an abuser.


I mean what man shares a bed with a child who is not related to ?

MOR316

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

How are ye so sure he wasn't an abuser.

Nobody can say that.

Just like nobody can say he was an abuser... There is a thing in the western world called "innocent until proven otherwise" and in 32 years of his adult life, there's been no evidence against him

To answer your question though, I've spent the last two years reading the FBI files on their assistance on the investigation into him, the court documents from 1993 and 2005 and followed Wade Robson's and James Safechuck's claims.

Each deposition the latter two gave, was different from the previous ones, with their stories consistently changing.

Anyways, it's all available if you want to read it yourself. It's public information. There is a hell of a lot of it though so probably not worth your while. I just found it interesting and have had nothing to do for 14 months so...

MOR316

What I do find quite sick though are people WANTING him to be guilty...

Like, he's after been found innocent again and it's still not good enough for some people...I can literally sense the disappointment in some posts and tweets
Why in God's name would anyone want anybody to be guilty of molesting a child?

Accept it, they have nothing on him. That documentary, the two lads lied their arses off! It's been proven over and over and now again, in court, for the final time!

buried

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

How are ye so sure he wasn't an abuser.

Nobody can say that.

Sure we can apply that kind of logic to any modern celebrity. Even Jesus.

buried

People seem to forget the fact, or are plainly unaware of the fact that Jackson, along with his siblings, were viciously beaten as basically near infant children, beaten repeatedly by their own father Joe in order to perform, get greasy famous and make greasy money for the likes of him. That is never mentioned in this sorry $hitshow whatsoever.

Galwayguy35

Well I don't know about any of you lads but personally I think a grown man sharing a bed with children is disgusting.

MOR316

buried wrote: »

People seem to forget the fact, or are plainly unaware of the fact that Jackson, along with his siblings, were viciously beaten as basically near infant children, beaten repeatedly by their own father Joe in order to perform, get greasy famous and make greasy money for the likes of him. That is never mentioned in this sorry $hitshow whatsoever.

Yep. I can't imagine what it's like to be a 9 year old bread winner for your family and been forced to sing in strip clubs.
I can't imagine what it's like to be so traumatised over your own family bullying you over your appearance all your life, that you ruin your face to the extent he did.
His skin disease, his lupus, his hair falling out, a burnt scalp, a damaged spine, media making up bizarre stories about you (his own fault, he started it by leaking them himself in the 80s) a level of fame where he couldn't leave his house without being mobbed, adults letting him down as child and teenager, seeing his father shag whatever groupies behind his mum's back and then getting hooked on painkillers and prescription drugs just to sleep...

It's a very sad, ****show of a story...

There's nothing in the way of evidence of wrong doing in the FBI files and court documents, 99% of those who were in his company as kids still defend him to this day as adults and now a court has cleared him again.
That's good enough for me!

sligeach

What's also not mentioned very often is how he had vitiligo, and what that must have been like for him. In the spotlight of the whole glare of the world, as he went through that. Someone who was very self-conscious from an early age and had been bullied by his father about his looks. A proud black man, who was constantly accused of bleaching his skin, and of not wanting to be black. He conducted himself with dignity throughout everything. The vitiligo was from his father's side of the family, and was confirmed in his autopsy and by several doctors after his death, including an Irish doctor who treated him while he lived here in Ireland. He had other health issues as well like lupus.

MOR316

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Well I don't know about any of you lads but personally I think a grown man sharing a bed with children is disgusting.

Not in favour of it either. I think it's inappropriate...

However, if 99% of those say nothing happened, it was their idea and it was purely innocent with no wrong doing and their parents gave them permission and had access to the room at all times, what can I say?

I still don't agree with it. Over stepping the boundaries

One of them wrote a book about it and said he became like a brother to him so again, I don't know...

buried

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Well I don't know about any of you lads but personally I think a grown man sharing a bed with children is disgusting.

Fair enough. Where do you stand on a grown man beating his own 5 year old son with a leather strap to dance better. Think it would do much psychological damage?

MOR316

buried wrote: »

Fair enough. Where do you stand on a grown man beating his own 5 year old son with a leather strap to dance better. Think it would do much psychological damage?

Nah, it's Michael Jackson so it's acceptable.

Just like it's acceptable for the media and people to call him gay, a queer and to mock his mental health issues...Different rules for different people

I watched most of the trial in 2005?.. There was no way he was guilty..

Those lads in LN got what they deserved anyway.. nothing..

MOR316

Deleted User wrote: »

I watched most of the trial in 2005?.. There was no way he was guilty..

Those lads in LN got what they deserved anyway.. nothing..

In fairness, I am good pals with someone who thinks he was guilty but, even he acknowledges that the 2005 trial was a money grab. I think most people can acknowledge that.

The prosecution got done over tampering with evidence ffs.

Galwayguy35

buried wrote: »

Fair enough. Where do you stand on a grown man beating his own 5 year old son with a leather strap to dance better. Think it would do much psychological damage?

MOR316 wrote: »

Nah, it's Michael Jackson so it's acceptable.

Just like it's acceptable for the media and people to call him gay, a queer and to mock his mental health issues...Different rules for different people

I find both situations disgusting so no need for the suggestion that I think otherwise.

MOR316

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I find both situations disgusting so no need for the suggestion that I think otherwise.

Apologies...

I've just come to the realisation over the last two years that people like to have this holier than thou attitude in society, where we all have to be tolerable of each other, yet it never applied to him.

A mate of mine called him a "black ******" and yet argues against racism and homophobia in today's world :rolleyes:
I remember an article in The Sun newspaper (could have been NME) in the early 90s, which had him drawn as a caged monkey, with a bucket of bananas ffs. Racist much?

Apologies if I over stepped the mark though. Didn't mean to falsely accuse you of anything
(Nah seriously, sorry)

buried

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

I find both situations disgusting so no need for the suggestion that I think otherwise.

No need for you to make your 'I don't know about you lads' suggestion either G

Big Gerry

MOR316 wrote: »

Not in favour of it either. I think it's inappropriate...

However, if 99% of those say nothing happened, it was their idea and it was purely innocent with no wrong doing and their parents gave them permission and had access to the room at all times, what can I say?

I still don't agree with it. Over stepping the boundaries

One of them wrote a book about it and said he became like a brother to him so again, I don't know...

Some people would argue that he was able to get away with what he did because he had money.


There is a rich "Irish sports star" who has been accused by at least 3 women of sexual assault but to date he has never been charged over any of the rape allegations against him.


It seems if you have money you can make a lot of problems go away.

MOR316

Big Gerry wrote: »

Some people would argue that he was able to get away with what he did because he had money.


There is a rich "Irish sports star" who has been accused by at least 3 women of sexual assault but to date he has never been charged over any of the rape allegations against him.


It seems if you have money you can make a lot of problems go away.

Courts looked through his accounts on both occasions in 1993 and 2005. No evidence of pay offs.
"He bought them extravagant gifts!"
He also bought Kobe Byrant a car and Will Smith thousands of original Marvel comic books after meeting them once...Doubt he was trying to "groom" or "pay off" them

1993 settlement was for the civil case, as that was going ahead before the criminal case. Jackson wanted the criminal case to go ahead immediately to clear his name so he settled the civil case for negligence. Two grand juries couldn't find any evidence of wrong doing so the criminal case was dismissed and never went ahead...

Would you like him to be guilty of such crimes?

buried

Big Gerry wrote: »

Some people would argue that he was able to get away with what he did because he had money.


There is a rich "Irish sports star" who has been accused by at least 3 women of sexual assault but to date he has never been charged over any of the rape allegations against him.


It seems if you have money you can make a lot of problems go away.

It's not about money. It's all about who you know and what dirt you can leverage on those you can bring down with you. Jimmy Savile is a prime example of that.

Big Gerry

MOR316 wrote: »

Courts looked through his accounts on both occasions in 1993 and 2005. No evidence of pay offs.
"He bought them extravagant gifts!"
He also bought Kobe Byrant a car and Will Smith thousands of original Marvel comic books after meeting them once...Doubt he was trying to "groom" or "pay off" them

1993 settlement was for the civil case, as that was going ahead before the criminal case. Jackson wanted the criminal case to go ahead immediately to clear his name so he settled the civil case for negligence. Two grand juries couldn't find any evidence of wrong doing so the criminal case was dismissed and never went ahead...

Would you like him to be guilty of such crimes?

I don't understand how anyone could pay out Millions if they were innocent ?

MOR316

Big Gerry wrote: »

I don't understand how anyone could pay out Millions if they were innocent ?

He requested that the Judge move the criminal case to be heard first. It was denied twice.
His legal team advised him at the time to settle, with the exception of one lawyer, who told him it would be stupid to do so. They warned him it could go on for years if he didn't settle the civil case. He also had two friends in his ear, telling to settle it.

Anyways, he settled and members of his legal team and members of the prosecution went on to work together. Go figure...

Not that it makes any difference but, he's on record as to saying it was something he regretted the most and two grand juries dismissed a criminal case as there was no evidence.

Agree though, it does look bad for people who don't know the ins and outs of it

sligeach

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Well I don't know about any of you lads but personally I think a grown man sharing a bed with children is disgusting.

This is a good, short interview with Macaulay Culkin about Michael from back around the 2005 trial.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhgJVmW4OIU

https://youtube.com/watch?v=dhgJVmW4OIU

Even Gavin Arvizo, one of the accusers admitted that Michael didn't sleep in the bed with him. Michael shared his bed, Gavin slept on the bed, while Michael slept on the floor. But the tabloids created salacious headlines.

sligeach

Big Gerry wrote: »

I don't understand how anyone could pay out Millions if they were innocent ?

Read this please. It's not long.

https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussion/1058771/if-michael-was-innocent-why-did-he-pay-off-his-accuser-in-1993-explained

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

buried wrote: »

People seem to forget the fact, or are plainly unaware of the fact that Jackson, along with his siblings, were viciously beaten as basically near infant children, beaten repeatedly by their own father Joe in order to perform, get greasy famous and make greasy money for the likes of him. That is never mentioned in this sorry $hitshow whatsoever.

Yes, that was also a bad thing that happened. And you seem to readily believe it. Why that and not the accusations against Jackson?

As for Jackson, if he didn’t want people to think he shared beds with minor boys, he probably shouldn’t have said he. He’s on record as admitting that and whatever about Bashir’s methods, that is a fact. And, as the thought police don’t exist, people will draw their own conclusions from Jackson’s admission and there’s not a thing that can be done that. His supporters need to accept that.

buried wrote: »

Fair enough. Where do you stand on a grown man beating his own 5 year old son with a leather strap to dance better. Think it would do much psychological damage?

It’s horrific. It’s also no excuse.

MOR316

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yes, that was also a bad thing that happened. And you seem to readily believe it. Why that and not the accusations against Jackson?

As for Jackson, if he didn’t want people to think he shared beds with minor boys, he probably shouldn’t have said he. He’s on record as admitting that and whatever about Bashir’s methods, that is a fact. And, as the thought police don’t exist, people will draw their own conclusions from Jackson’s admission and there’s not a thing that can be done that. His supporters need to accept that.

Well, his father admitted to it, as have the rest of the family.
There's no evidence against Michael, that says he did it, in terms of the accusations.

The rest of your post, I agree. He said he did and people will draw their own conclusions. Not everyone is going to be arsed resesrching it which is understandable.

One thing that I don't understand is that he admitted it in 1994 in an interview on American TV. Not fully sure why it was an "OMG" moment with Bashir when he was already on record about it

buried

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yes, that was also a bad thing that happened. And you seem to readily believe it. Why that and not the accusations against Jackson?

Multiple family members in the Jackson family have stated this is what was going on with that horrid money seeking violent scumbag, including Jermaine who suffered a great portion of it. And none of them looked for greasy money from stating it either, they just wanted the truth to be known. So I would be of the mindset to believe that more than anything else.

MOR316

There is also one aspect that is often overlooked...

Michael Jackson asked Wade Robson to testify for him in 2005. He asked Wade Robson personally to take the stand and defend him...
If Michael Jackson abused Wade Robson, why would he ask him, out of everyone he knew, to testify for him in court?

It makes no sense

On a side note, it's nice to be in a non Covid thread for once

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

MOR316 wrote: »

Well, his father admitted to it, as have the rest of the family.
There's no evidence against Michael, that says he did it, in terms of the accusations.

The rest of your post, I agree. He said he did and people will draw their own conclusions. Not everyone is going to be arsed resesrching it which is understandable.

One thing that I don't understand is that he admitted it in 1994 in an interview on American TV. Not fully sure why it was an "OMG" moment with Bashir when he was already on record about it

I know, it’s all very odd. I think it’s why it holds such fascination as a topic for so many people. Were people really so naive 30 years ago? Even as a standalone fact and if nothing else happened, that is a completely bonkers admission. But sure, look at how docile Robson and Safechuck’s own parents were about the whole thing. I make no bones of thinking that Jackson is guilty but the more I consider their parents, the more disgusted I am with them. I mean, moving with your child to another country and putting pressure on him to be the breadwinner when he’s barely in double digits?

buried

Guilty? Whats he guilty of? Being violently thrown into being a performing circus animal at 5 years of age for nothing but greasy fame and greasy money by his own f**king father. None of which was his fault? Come on lads, we are not dealing with something here that Sherlock Holmes would have to get out of his bed to solve.

MOR316

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I know, it’s all very odd. I think it’s why it holds such fascination as a topic for so many people. Were people really so naive 30 years ago? Even as a standalone fact and if nothing else happened, that is a completely bonkers admission. But sure, look at how docile Robson and Safechuck’s own parents were about the whole thing. I make no bones of thinking that Jackson is guilty but the more I consider their parents, the more disgusted I am with them. I mean, moving with your child to another country and putting pressure on him to be the breadwinner when he’s barely in double digits?

I know you think Jackson is guilty. It's your opinion and that's cool. I was the same before 2019 but, after all I've read, my opinion has obviously done a 180

Agreed about the parents. It was their contradictions in LN that made me wanna research it more and this bull**** that Jackson chased Wade when it was the mother who harrassed Jackson for 4 years straight, in order to get him to meet Wade again and demand he put him into his projects. (He put him in one video but edited him out as he was rubbish)

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

buried wrote: »

Guilty? Whats he guilty of? Being violently thrown into being a performing circus animal at 5 years of age for nothing but greasy fame and greasy money by his own f**king father. None of which was his fault? Come on lads, we are not dealing with something here that Sherlock Holmes would have to get out of his bed to solve.

Yes, I consider him to be. Why would that bother you? Seriously? He got his acquittal (in one case). Outside of that, you can’t control what people think of him.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

MOR316 wrote: »

I know you think Jackson is guilty. It's your opinion and that's cool. I was the same before 2019 but, after all I've read, my opinion has obviously done a 180

Agreed about the parents. It was their contradictions in LN that made me wanna research it more and this bull**** that Jackson chased Wade when it was the mother who harrassed Jackson for 4 years straight, in order to get him to meet Wade again and demand he put him into his projects. (He put him in one video but edited him out as he was rubbish)

I’ve read plenty and my opinion is unchanged. Please don’t assume people who think he’s guilty are coming from a place of ignorance.

I don’t think the parents’ behaviour is contradictory. Their behaviour would have enabled Jackson. I don’t see a conflict. Docile parents are exactly what you’re looking for.

MOR316

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’ve read plenty and my opinion is unchanged. Please don’t assume people who think he’s guilty are coming from a place of ignorance.

Never said, suggested or even thought that.
I only said that I used to believe his guilt but, after everything I've read and researched over the last two years, my opinion changed.

James: "I never told anyone about the abuse until 2013. My family never knew Michael abused me or anyone"
James' Mother: "I danced when he died in 2009 as he couldn't abuse anymore kids"

It's a pretty big contradiction

buried

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yes, I consider him to be. Why would that bother you? Seriously? He got his acquittal (in one case). Outside of that, you can’t control what people think about him.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest, believe what you want about the lad. I'll believe the facts. The actual facts of his life and how the abuse he suffered in his youth actually resulted in other characters in his later life trying to grab the same greasy money bag accumulated at the start of his abuse ridden life. That alright with ya?

fryup

MOR316 wrote: »

There is also one aspect that is often overlooked...

Michael Jackson asked Wade Robson to testify for him in 2005. He asked Wade Robson personally to take the stand and defend him...
If Michael Jackson abused Wade Robson, why would he ask him, out of everyone he knew, to testify for him in court?

It makes no sense

and Wade Robson willing obliged to take the stand to defend Michael Jackson

....but years later with MJ long deceased Robson does the dirty on him, why ?
cause he's skint and out of spite to the Jackson family who didn't back him for the tribute show in Las Vegas

MOR316

fryup wrote: »

and Wade Robson willing obliged to take the stand to defend Michael Jackson

....but years later with MJ long deceased Robson does the dirty on him, why ?
cause he's skint and out of spite to the Jackson family who didn't back him for the tribute show in Las Vegas

Indeed!

Also, why is asking people to donate money for abuse victims, through a link on his social media pages, that is not attached to any abuse charity?

It's dodgy as ****...

Whatever about people thinking Jackson is guilty/not guilty, Wade Robson is an absolute charlatan and those who have worked with him in Hollywood say the same thing!

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

buried wrote: »

It doesn't bother me in the slightest, believe what you want about the lad. I'll believe the facts. The actual facts of his life and how the abuse he suffered in his youth actually resulted in other characters in his later life trying to grab the same greasy money bag accumulated at the start of his abuse ridden life. That alright with ya?

I believe the fact (right from the horse’s mouth) that he shared a bed with boys and I feel comfortable in saying that that is deeply abnormal behaviour that being beaten as a child does not excuse. Unfortunately for Jackson’s defenders, that can never be taken back and I bet they curse him every day for making that admission. It can’t be explained away.

fryup

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I believe the fact (right from the horse’s mouth) that he shared a bed with boys and I feel comfortable in saying that that is deeply abnormal behaviour that being beaten as a child does not excuse. Unfortunately for Jackson’s defenders, that can never be taken back and I bet they curse him every day for making that admission. It can’t be explained away.

he was a man-child, he wasn't fully emotionally mature (more than likely died a virgin)

because of his child like persona i'm convinced he wasn't capable of abusing anyone adult or child, it just wasn't in his nature

MOR316

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I believe the fact (right from the horse’s mouth) that he shared a bed with boys and I feel comfortable in saying that that is deeply abnormal behaviour that being beaten as a child does not excuse. Unfortunately for Jackson’s defenders, that can never be taken back and I bet they curse him every day for making that admission. It can’t be explained away.

Wouldn't say curse him for admitting it. Curse him for doing it alright.
I can't explain it away and don't want to as I think it's inappropriate. End of!

However, if 99% of those who were in his company and their families say it was innocent and nothing happened and their parents knew/gave permission and had access to the room at all times and still defend him today, whilst it doesn't make me agree with it, it eases my mind some what.

I was reading an interview with his accountant a few weeks back. He said he would meet him in his bedroom (Apparantly it was massive) and he would spend the evening hanging out with him and they would curl up eating junk food, watching movies.
Some nights Jackson couldn't sleep and would ask the bank manager to read him a story.

I can't pretend to understand it but, hey...I wasn't forced to sacrifice my childhood to sing in strip clubs. I wasn't battered through all my childhood by my Father. I never witnessed my Father banging other women behind my Mother's back. I didn't sleep with other male and female adults as a child, when on the road to hide from my Father as he scared me. I didn't have various physical issues and injuries. I wasn't the most famous man of the 20th/21st century...I'm sure that's going to cause some kind of psychological trauma. I can't understand it

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

fryup wrote: »

he was a man-child, he wasn't fully emotionally mature (more than likely died a virgin)

because of his child like persona i'm convinced he wasn't capable of abusing anyone adult or child, it just wasn't in his nature

What does that actually mean? What psychiatric disorder did he have? What is this mysterious ailment?

buried

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I believe the fact (right from the horse’s mouth) that he shared a bed with boys and I feel comfortable in saying that that is deeply abnormal behaviour that being beaten as a child does not excuse. Unfortunately for Jackson’s defenders, that can never be taken back and I bet they curse him every day for making that admission. It can’t be explained away.

I'm not trying to excuse it ODB, I actually resent the fact you are trying to make that equation when all I am doing is trying to explain it. Put yourself in his shoes for two seconds or how ever long it takes you, imagine being beaten with a leather strap, by your own kin, your own father, your FATHER, for nothing but to perform to strangers on a stage, for nothing but money, pathetic money. This to be done at 5 years of age, an age when you are just realising and imagining the world, imaging it how a child, every child, innocently should be able to imagine so. That was taken from Michael. Taken violently. Maybe, maybe you can imagine the damage this could have done to his innocence, his very childhood innocence that me and hopefully the likes of yourself were able to enjoy but he could not? Think about that. Those incidents where he shared beds with children were more than likely himself trying to reclaim the childhood innocence he never had any inclination of? Granted, and you are totally correct and right, it is not the best thing, even abhorent for the young people he did that with in his adult life but that is FAMES fault, Fame resulted in Micheal being the way he was and it was FAME that drew the people that wanted to be so desperately involved with him.

There is one and only guilty party for me in this whole sorry affair. Fame.
Well two others also, Money and Celebrity.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

I’m willing to bet if you peered into the childhood of many a non-famous child molester, you’d find a troubled childhood. And would people make allowances because of that? The allowances made for Jackson are sickening. I believe he had a horrendous childhood. The fame element makes it a bit more unusual. But it’s still an abusive childhood and sadly, they are not that unusual. But no way would Joe Obscurity be given as much leniency as Jackson with the same facts presented.

Nobody can even point to what this apparently unique mental illness is. What’s it called? Michael Jackson Syndrome?

buried

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’m willing to bet if you peered into the childhood of many a non-famous child molester, you’d find a troubled childhood. And would people make allowances because of that? The allowances made for Jackson are sickening. I believe he had a horrendous childhood. The fame element makes it a bit more unusual. But it’s still an abusive childhood and sadly, they are not that unusual. But no way would Joe Obscurity be given as much leniency as Jackson with the same facts presented.

How many actual child molesters would freely admit to sharing beds with children in person let alone on television? Think about it. Jackson's case is a damnation example of modern celebrity and fame. But those elements are controlled by the mainstream so they'd rather you talk about something else instead.

MOR316

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’m willing to bet if you peered into the childhood of many a non-famous child molester, you’d find a troubled childhood. And would people make allowances because of that? The allowances made for Jackson are sickening. I believe he had a horrendous childhood. The fame element makes it a bit more unusual. But it’s still an abusive childhood and sadly, they are not that unusual. But no way would Joe Obscurity be given as much leniency as Jackson with the same facts presented.

I'm afraid you've lost me here. Could you explain?

No one is giving him any leniency. No one here has agreed with him having sleepovers with unrelated kids. We're all agreeing with you in saying it was wrong.

However, he was acquitted in 2005. Robon and Safechuck had their cases thrown out, 3 times, in the last 7 years, due to there being no evidence whatsoever.

I'm not really sure what else there is to prove.
If the courts have said he's innocent or not guilty of these accusations, if there is no evidence of any wrong doing, I'm not sure how it's sickening to accept it

MOR316

From 1988...



I assume if we're believing all allegations, this is true too?