His house is getting raided by the cops, based on allegations made by a twelve-year-old boy. That's all I know so far; heard it on the news on my way to work.
I haven't heard if this is a new case or an older one, but if it's recent, then WHY THE HECK DID SOME PARENT LET THEIR KID ANYWHERE NEAR MICHAEL JACKSON?!
Why did anyone ever? It boggles the mind.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:In a statement issued by Backerman, Jackson is quoted as saying, "These characters always seem to surface with a dreadful allegation just as another project, an album, a video, is being released."
Talk about a self-centered world.
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
Is Michael Jackson releasing something? Hm. I think trying to suppress it with an allegation like this would probably be redundant ...
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame singer came under new scrutiny in February, when he admitted during an ABC television documentary that he often sleeps in the same bed with young guests to his ranch.
"When you say bed, you're thinking sexual," the entertainer said at the time. "It's not sexual, we're going to sleep. I tuck them in...it's very charming, it's very sweet."
Holy crimey.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I sure wouldn't let my kid near a guy who looked like that chimpanzee chick from Planet of the Apes. Posted by Occasional (Member # 5860) on :
I am not saying that Micheal Jackson isn't a child molester by a long shot, but he does have a lot of money that parents would love to get hands on using their kids. Of course, he puts himself into these situations.
My point: Jackson is an easy target, and he's innocent until proven guilty (even if found guilty in the past, although not sure if he ever was).
If I had the kind of fame and money he had I would probably be equally self-centered. What millionair actor/musician ISN'T self-centered and egotistacal?
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
"... sleeps in the same bed as young guests to his ranch ..."
Where does he get these apparently parentless guests?!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Starstruck, guileless parents?
Much, much worse, greedy parents?
[ November 18, 2003, 06:38 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Michael Jackson is a scary looking man. I hate seeing him on the cover of tabloids as it makes me jump out of my skin with revulsion.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
The ones mentioned in the interview kat cited were primarily inner-city/disadvantaged kids. He brings 'em in groups to Neverland. Which is a great treat for them, perhaps -- but who the heck decided it was a good idea to let the kids SLEEP there?
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
quote:Michael Jackson is a scary looking man
hmmm...I would say he's a scary looking woman... Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
They said on the news that a therapist reported abuse when his (or her - I don't remember which) 12-year-old paitent confided in him. That suggests that this is not about money.
Dr.M and I had an interesting conversation about it, though. He asked me if I thought the parents should turn him into the authorities or go for the lawsuit. I immediately said that they should turn him in. We've had discussions in the past about whether crime victims can get more justice from criminal or civil courts (the most prominent example being the Goldman family) and I usually lean toward the civil courts. However, in this case the parents have an obligation to do everything in their power to make sure that the person who hurt their child can never hurt another child and that involves turning him in. If they do not, then they are partly responsible for all the children he hurts afterwards. I personally couldn't live with myself.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
I've been hearing that Michael Jackson had left the country either yesterday or the day before after being in Las Vegas. This might be spurious, or just coincidence, or very suspicious. Anyone know?
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Micheal Jackson left this country, and this planet, decades ago.
oh, you mean physically.
Never mind.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
Strangely enough, in the upcoming legal process, he might just use the "I left this planet long ago" defense.
The police have been pretty cagey as to whether Jackson has already left the country or not. He was prepared to the last time and I am wondering if he might have beat them to it this time. Time will tell.
Innocent until proven guilty and all, but there's something about how the DA looked at the press conference that makes me think he smells blood.
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
dkw's link refers to an "unexplained probe".
Did they have to use that precise terminology?
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Michael Jackson seems like a pretty darn weird and naive guy. On the one hand I want to feel sorry for him and suspect he did something without realizing how it would be interpreted by the kid. On the other hand, I'd put nothing past him, if just out of sheer weirdness. And he was probably asking for this...
One thing is a given though - he's guilty in the eyes of the public regardless of what happens.
Posted by celia60 (Member # 2039) on :
Geoff.
Apple cider in the nose stings.
Ouch!
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
For good reason, Tresopax.
The first time we hear about kids sleeping with him, one could wonder if it was just odd behavior. I remember one psychologist saying that MJ in all respects appears to have stopped maturing around the age of 10, when a lot of pressure started getting loaded on him by his parents in show business. Sleeping with the boys was just like a sleep over.
There may be some truth to it. There is probably some truth to that state of mind for child molestors too. Some part of them remains like a child, yet they are sexualized.
The second time, he's already been burned by that fire and shouldn't engage in that behavior again, at all. Unless he can't help himself. The temptation is too great.
We want to know that he is naive. We don't want to know that there is a monster there. So many times these predators are the sweetest, nicest guys in all aspects. You don't expect it of them.
He should still have a trial. I can imagine scenarios where he is innocent of perversion. But I doubt it.
If he is guilty, think of those children who've now been molested by him. Both their parents and they have been smeared as liars and money grabbers, and they are outcasts in society.
What can avail us? There is no revenge, no anger, no law, no forgiveness that can keep it out of the world and stop it from happening.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
quote:On the one hand I want to feel sorry for him and suspect he did something without realizing how it would be interpreted by the kid.
Yesterday I heard a commentator read from the original charges and depositions against him ten years ago. They were disturbingly explicit.
Very explicit.
I suppose it's not inconceivable that the multiple accusers are all lying.
But this is definitely not a misunderstanding. The actions described were not open to misinterpretation (like, say, misinterpreting a football-player style slap on the butt for sexual groping); they were pretty unambiguous sexual acts.
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
According to USA Today, he and his lawyer are setting the terms for his surrender to arrest sometime today.
[ November 20, 2003, 09:45 AM: Message edited by: prolixshore ]
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:But this is definitely not a misunderstanding. The actions described were not open to misinterpretation (like, say, misinterpreting a football-player style slap on the butt for sexual groping); they were pretty unambiguous sexual acts.
You forget - this is Micheal Jackson, a guy who doesn't seem to realize the potential problems associated with dangling babies over balconies and having young kids over for sleepovers.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
Does he understand drinking a twelve-year-old's semen?
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
Tresopax,
You are putting the very first action he would take to get kids in his control under the category 'naive, doesn't understand what he's doing' things. If he is guilty, he has sleepovers so he can take advantage of these boys.
This happens so much in this kind of crime. It goes on for years because people don't think that such a person could do such a thing. Successful pedophiles are successful because they also gain the trust of the adults.
The pedophile's process is to get the kids to trust them, to have the kids like them and want to be with them. They are seducing children, and so they use the devices that work with children. Let's play. Giving them a toy they really want. Owning an amusement park and zoo. Neverland is a pedophile's dream.
If he is guilty of that, he has a very poor sense of what appropriate behavior is, and dangling a baby over a balcony is an indication of that. If anything, that action proves to me not that he is merely naive, but he is disturbingly out of touch with reality. Not in a sweet wierd artistic way, but in a way that can harm others.
[ November 20, 2003, 10:47 AM: Message edited by: Amka ]
Posted by Traveler (Member # 3615) on :
Here's a link at The Smoking Gun to some info on this whole case: The Smoking Gun
What a scary individual. I also wonder about ANY parent that would let their child spend many nights with Jackson. I can only assume that they are either completely clueless and idiotic OR they are basically prostituting their son in hopes of getting a 15 million dollar out of court settlement like the last case against Jackson.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
I don't think I've ever felt so disgusted and so dirty as when I followed that link and saw what had been alleged. I see now why they changed California law after this case was whisked away from the courts.
If he is guilty of the crimes, will the punishments come anywhere close to what should be done?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh my stars. If that is true, he needs to be locked up somewhere very, very tightly. Why on earth?
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
Why on earth what?
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
I'm all for public castration. Fill a stadium, drop his pants, slice it off, everyone cheers. I see it as a fair solution. That is, of course, if he guilty.
[ November 20, 2003, 11:15 AM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Why is he still walking around? Why would any parents let their child sleep with an adult man? Why is he such a manipulative creep?
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
Would you set him free after this event?
I think it's worth noting that most of the allegations do not involve his own private parts, but those of the boys.
Posted by msquared (Member # 4484) on :
Who says he has anything to castrate?
msquared
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
I wish I could take my brain out and scrub what I read from it. I really do.
In my line of work, I've read depositions from child molestation and child rape cases before. I've sat in courtrooms and heard the testimonies. Each time it has left something in me that I wish I could get rid of. As horrible as those were, this one feels even worse, more abhorrent. Perhaps because of the ease at which you can conjure up a mental image of Michael Jackson, hear his voice, etc. He's made himself so everpresent in our culture over the decades, whether as freak or hero, that you can't get him out of your mind.
And you can't get all of those images of children he was around out of your head. That adulation he's received, the extroverted hermit lifestyle, the transformations again and again.
Sheesh, this is just bothering me to no end. It took time to put all of those prior cases I saw away, to where I could go on without that slightly sick feeling in my stomach always rolling around. Now I wonder, how long will this be a daily struggle? How long will a court case be drawn out? How long will it be forced on our collective psyches? How long will I have to taste bile each time I see his face or hear his name?
Sorry for the rant, just trying to get it out of my system.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
quote:Who says he has anything to castrate?
Hmm... the man does like his plastic surgery. He may well have beaten us to the punch on this one.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
The big question is why adults in these kids' lives allowed this to happen. As others have said.
So my question is this: should DCF hold those adults responsible? It seems like criminal negligence/irresponsibility with a child entrusted to ones care.
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
quote: should DCF hold those adults responsible? It seems like criminal negligence/irresponsibility with a child entrusted to ones care.
As much as MJ disgusts me and as stupid as I think the parents of these children are, I think it would be difficult to hold them responsible legally. MJ was cleared of the charges 10 years ago, whether or not this was the right thing to do. There is only suspicion that was never allowed to be proven.
Plus MJ is a manipulator. He has obviously gained the trust of these people over a long period of time. Look at the alligations from the last time. MJ slowly built the trust of the mother in that case. In the new case I would assume a similar situation. A slow building of trust that allowd the parent to say, "well, he is a nice man and so caring. Those past charges must have really been a money thing" or something to that effect. People like MJ are preditors, hunters. They know how to lead their prey.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
The people I’m thinking of aren’t the parents, who may have been fooled/seduced, but Jackson’s staff. There had to be multiple people who knew that something inappropriate was happening and helped to cover it up.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
Well, I might lose this argument, but here goes . . .
DCF has a different standard of proof than a criminal court does. You look at the preponderance of evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Here is a man who has been acused multiple times of hild molestation, and has openly expressed some reasonably unusual views about what is acceptale when dealing with children. None of this means he should be in jail, but I think they are all good signs that one shouldn't let children in ones care spend the night, or be with him unsupervised.
I think you could make a pretty good argument that parents who are foolish/gullible/greedy/stupid enough to have given Michael Jackson unsupervised access to children in their care are not competent to be trusted with children, and share guilt for exposing their children to risk.
If you leave your children with a babysitter who is under thirteen and DCF finds out about it, you could be in hot water. DCF policy says kids under thirteen should not be left alone at home period, let alone in charge of other kids. Which is more irresponsible . . . trusting the ten-year old girl next door with your kids, or letting Michael Jackson be alone with them? To me the answer is pretty clearly the latter. So how come you can get in legal trouble over the former but not the latter?
It's also troubling that many of these kids were already apparently in some sort of government care. I'm not positive, but I have heard many references to the fact that many of the kids he spends time with are "disadvantaged" kids, which gives me a sense that something is systematic enough to identify and bring thee kidds to him . . . like DCF or a childrens' home or something. Shouldn't a child-welfare employee who exposes kids to this risk be fired?
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
IMO, Icarus is completely correct and any parents who allowed their children to be put in a situation - where they are alone with someone who has had so many rumors about their behavior with kids, and who has made such questionable statements about behavior with kids - should be charged with child endangerment. The point is not whether or not any of these rumors or accusations are true; the point is, if one cares about one's children, one don't take the chance that they are true. If one does take that chance, and then something untoward happens, some of the blame should fall on those parents. And I don't think that any such parents can claim ignorance of the charges and rumors - anyone who doesn't know about those rumors has been living off-planet for, what, the past ten years or so.
Edited for stupid punctuation.
[ November 20, 2003, 12:28 PM: Message edited by: littlemissattitude ]
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
Eeww... If those charges were true, one could hardly chalk it up to naivete.
Having said this, even if he had been found guilty of all that, calls for castration and other cruel or unusual punishment aren't appropriate either. Even murderers don't get that.
------
Oh, yeah, also... the news is beginning to annoy me. I mean, there are OTHER stories going on. Bush in Britain? This isn't even the first time this happen to Jackson.
Posted by Megachirops (Member # 4325) on :
Actually, my preferred news sources have not particularly been emphasizing this over other news stories. It's been the third or fourth story down everywhere.
It's on AM radio where this story seems to be all they're covering.
-o-
I'm all for cruel and unusual punishment, actually. I'm just not sure castration will really accomplish anything. But I've been down that road on Hatrack before.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Don't turn on Fox news, then. He walked into the back of the police station in handcuffs around 3:30 and they've been showing that two-second clip since then, nonstop, in slow motion.
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
[ November 20, 2003, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: Ralphie ]
Posted by Traveler (Member # 3615) on :
I think prison would be punishment enough for him. He'll be someone's bitch in minutes flat.
Then HE will get a taste of what it is like to be sexually molested.
Posted by skrika03 (Member # 5930) on :
was that a typo ralphie, or yet another link i really would regret clicking?
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
Typo.
Are you really a newbie? You seem almost too good to be true.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
She's pooka.
*eyes own post number nervously*
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
Ahhh, pooka.
I still think the link was funny.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
It was.
It's just that, considering the subject of this thread, MJ on a lamb is something we (well, at least I) REALLY don't want to see.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
BWhahahhahaha!
That's the funniest photo I've seen in weeks, Toni. Thanks, I was having a bad day and it cheered me up. Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
The mug shot is out. Is it just me or does he look like an angry Carol Channing?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:asked me if I thought the parents should turn him into the authorities or go for the lawsuit. I immediately said that they should turn him in.
A lawsuit and criminal prosecution are not mutually exclusive. If Jackson is found guilty in a criminal court, there will be no need to present evidence on whether or not the child was molested in a civil trial - the only issue will be injury and damages, which should be slam dunks.
Dagonee
Posted by Mrs.M (Member # 2943) on :
quote:A lawsuit and criminal prosecution are not mutually exclusive.
You are right, Dagonee, and we actually knew that - Dr.M is a lawyer (as well as a legal ethicist) and I put myself through college as a paralegal. We were having more of a philosophical conversation and Dr.M was asking me which I'd choose if they were mutually exclusive.
Good point.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
You know, I feel incredibly sorry for Michael Jackson. I have no idea whether he's guilty of what he's being charged with, but regardless of whether he is or isn't, he strikes me as one of the most miserable, pathetic figures in public life today. I think that being him would be a horrible thing.
Posted by Youth ap Orem (Member # 5582) on :
In the comic strip, are those the end of broom sticks on his shoulders?
Posted by beatnix19 (Member # 5836) on :
quote: I feel incredibly sorry for Michael Jackson
Although I agree his life can't be all that great right now I still can't feel bad for the guy. If you look at his life, there is only one person to really blame for all that's going on in it. I know there are people out there that will argue that the stress of his childhood and being in the public eye has played a part in his , um, shall we say unique views. But the bottom line is that he is still in control of his own actions. And some of his recent actions do not allow me to sympathize with him
[ November 21, 2003, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: beatnix19 ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I do think he's incredibly sad, and he's endured a lot. He hasn't cornered the market on sadness, though. He can be in a dream world all he wants. However, it's lonely in a dream world, and instead of coming out of it, he's dragging truly innocent people in with him.
I'd hate to be him, but in his world, I don't think he is as miserable because his world makes sense to him. If the scales ever fall from his eyes it'll be awful, but he's practically delusional. I don't think they've fallen.
I feel much worse those he's dragged down with him.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Oh, I'm not arguing that he didn't create the life he's in; most people are at least partially responsible for who they are as adults, but that doesn't mean that I don't feel pity for some of them.
And of course, if he has abused children I feel even worse for them than I do for him, but it doesn't stop him from being a pathetic figure in my eyes. I hope you're right, kat, and he's as oblivious to it as he seems to be (and really he must be, or he wouldn't be like that).
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Here's a reprint of a post from another forum. It sounds like he knows what he's talking about.
quote:We're talking about a man whose centire life has been devoted to image-manufacture. So to judge him as "delusional" by normal standards is to miss the point. He's not delusional in the sense of a plumber who suddenly decides Jesus told him his customers were demons and he should kill them with his wrench. He's a man who has been allowed to give his own, er, idiosyncratic view of things a reality. He did not want to grow up--but certainly is comfortable with the power of BEING the kind of grown-up he is. In his world his behavior is entirely sane, indeed his right. He lives in a different world. It's just that it intersects with ours and is dangerous to some of the members of it.
He's very aware of how to deal with the press--but the problem for him is that the press are not as compliant about him as they used to be. The delusion he suffers is that his magical innocence bullshit still works in today's media. You could call him a relic in that sense. He's used to a world in which money would always make this go away, either money paid out or money extracted.
The plastic surgery, the arrested-development aesthetic, the manufacture of a personal world in which only old people, children, and maternal women exist, the careful methods of facilitating his molestations(he certainly targeted sick little boys quite heavily--but then, why did Willie Sutton rob banks?)--these are not the acts of a man falling apart exactly. In the sense they are all means to a desired end. (no pun intended, sorry) These are the acts of a man who knows what he wants and knows what he has to do to get it, and also knows he's in a position--usually--of virtual invulnerability because of his importance to the entertainment industry(which has gone away though he doesn't seem to realize it--probably spending too much time in Germany) and because of many still having a sentimental attachment to him, as icon, singer, cultural hero, what have you, that seemingly will not allow them NOT to make excuses on his behalf. That guy on South Park you may remember--"So he touched some children. He's MICHAEL JACKSON, man!"--I hear echoes of this in every excuse I've heard made for him. The not-so-unspoken root is this: Michael Jackson has earned the right to molest children.
But now he can't buy his way out and those who might have helped him--apart from his fans, who can do nothing--he's alienated long ago. Being a celebrity only keeps you invulnerable if you remain a good employee of the industry. As you know, he's been more like a petulant child toward it in the past 5 or 6 years. He's expendable; everything important about him is already the property of Epic anyway. And here's the point of delusion: he refuses to understand this.
I didn't see naivete in his interview with Bashir. I saw playing TO the naive. Carefully-calculated and phony, though. I saw arrogance; I saw "I can almost CONFESS it to you and still remain free, hee hee." He knows his image and he knows what worked. He knows how he looks. He's ****in' with us, has been forever. Very few "naive" musicians are as concerned with money and sales as he. The naive type more often stupidly sign away their rights and royalties. I'd call the Jayhawks "naive," for instance. I'd call Robert Johnson "naive." Not Jackson.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:You are right, Dagonee, and we actually knew that - Dr.M is a lawyer (as well as a legal ethicist) and I put myself through college as a paralegal. We were having more of a philosophical conversation and Dr.M was asking me which I'd choose if they were mutually exclusive.
Ahh, I get it now. Then I'd go criminal, all the way. If he's found guilty, life in prison, no parole.
Dagonee *Has no patience with people who hurt children.
Posted by Eruve Nandiriel (Member # 5677) on :
We were watching TV when Micheal Jackson came on. My little sister walked in the room and said "that's an ugly lady."
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Have I mentioned lately how we need to pass a law prohibiting mention of anyone merely charged with a crime in the press?
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
Holy crap, what would happen to Michael Jackson in prison? I hope they put him in isolation for his own protection.
Posted by Celtic Flame (Member # 5556) on :
"If I had the kind of fame and money he had I would probably be equally self-centered. What millionair actor/musician ISN'T self-centered and egotistacal?"
How about Heidi Klum? I've heard people usually like her, and that she isn't full of it. I'm sure there are other people...like...
Help me out here. Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Me, I'm hoping he does hard time, hits the weights, gets a gang tattoo on his face, and comes out with a new music concept: Gangsta Pop.
"I Just Did a Drive-By to Say I Love You"
(and this would have been what I wrote about if I wasn't on vacation this week )
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
quote: Memo Could Hurt Prosecution's Case
By MARTIN KASINDORF and CESAR G. SORIANO
LOS ANGELES — The boy who is alleging that Michael Jackson molested him told Los Angeles authorities in February that the singer did nothing inappropriate, according to a confidential government memo revealed Tuesday.
After interviewing the Los Angeles boy and his family, child welfare workers determined that allegations of sexual abuse at Jackson's Neverland Ranch were "unfounded," the memo says. The summary of a Feb. 13-27 investigation was disclosed on the Web site thesmokinggun.com.
The memo is authentic, says the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services, which is investigating the leak from its "sensitive case" unit.
Jackson's defenders seized on the memo as evidence that Jackson, 45, is innocent of the child molestation charges that the entertainer faces in Santa Barbara County, Calif., where he was arrested on Nov. 20.
"This is a real smoking gun," said Stuart Backerman, Jackson's spokesman. "This only corroborates and reinforces what we've said from the beginning: that Michael Jackson is innocent." Jackson has called the charges "a big lie."
The Los Angeles memo was written at a time when the boy and his family were defending Jackson from allegations of abuse — and before Santa Barbara authorities say the boy told a psychiatrist in June that Jackson had molested him.
Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon said the memo was insignificant. He has said he plans to file formal charges against Jackson next week on multiple counts of child molestation. The boy, who is suffering from cancer and is among the sick children Jackson has entertained at Neverland, is a cooperating witness, Sneddon says. The boy is now 14.
Jackson will be arraigned Jan. 9 in Santa Maria, 60 miles north of Santa Barbara. The case will be tried there because his ranch, which has a zoo and an amusement park, is in that part of the county.
To the Los Angeles investigators, the boy, his 34-year-old mother, his younger brother and his older sister denied any form of sexual abuse and spoke glowingly of Jackson. The statements were consistent with comments the family made about Jackson in the weeks after Feb. 6, when ABC broadcast a British TV documentary on life at Neverland. The show triggered investigations of the onetime "King of Pop."
On the program, the boy, who was 12 at the time, called Jackson "Daddy" and told interviewer Martin Bashir that he had slept in Jackson's bed, but that Jackson had slept on the floor.
Jackson told Bashir that there was nothing wrong with having children in his bed. "Why can't you share your bed?" Jackson asked. "The most loving thing to do is to share your bed with someone."
A Los Angeles school official who saw the show called a child-abuse hotline and alleged that "an entertainer" had abused the boy and that the boy had been neglected by his mother, the memo says.
The mother, a former waitress, supported Jackson in February when he complained that Bashir's documentary was unfair. Jackson hired criminal defense lawyer Mark Geragos, who according to the Associated Press got the mother and the boy to sign affidavits and to videotape statements in which they said Jackson had done nothing wrong.
But the boy began telling a different story in June. Santa Barbara authorities say that during a session with a psychiatrist, the boy said Jackson had molested him. The psychiatrist, as required by California law, reported the alleged abuse to Santa Barbara sheriff's deputies. They launched their own investigation. Local newspapers said the boy told authorities that Jackson had given him wine and sleeping pills.
Sneddon said Tuesday that the judge who issued warrants for a search of Neverland and for Jackson's arrest had seen the Los Angeles memo. "Given what we know, we do not consider the ... statement a significant factor," Sneddon said.
The Daily Telegraph of Sydney reported that during a 13-hour search at Neverland, investigators seized letters and poems from Jackson to the boy, along with videotapes. The boy's 12-year-old brother saw one incident of molestation and is a potential witness, the Los Angeles Times reported.
In 1993-94, Sneddon investigated a 13-year-old boy's allegations that Jackson had sexually abused him. The case collapsed after the boy's family reached a multimillion-dollar settlement with Jackson. The boy declined to testify in court.
AOL NEWS
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:"This is a real smoking gun," said Stuart Backerman, Jackson's spokesman. "This only corroborates and reinforces what we've said from the beginning: that Michael Jackson is innocent."
Wait—I thought smoking guns were incriminating, not exonerating.
But this quote gives me the jibblies:
quote:Jackson told Bashir that there was nothing wrong with having children in his bed. "Why can't you share your bed?" Jackson asked. "The most loving thing to do is to share your bed with someone."
[ December 10, 2003, 10:26 PM: Message edited by: Jon Boy ]
Posted by odouls268 (Member # 2145) on :
Michal jackson is creepy.
What happened to 'Off the Wall' mike? "Thriller" mike? "ROCK WITH YOU" mike?!
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
Yeah, saxony, you used to be cool. What happened?
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
The article doesn't mention it directly, but apparently the kid went to the LAPD with the same story that he's using now, and they didn't find enough evidence to charge Jackson with anything. Like, nothing.
Let me just say that the reaction to this case bothers me a little as it seems to presuppose that men are some kind of unstoppable lust machines. Jon Boy's reaction to the quote about Michael Jackson liking sleeping with children is indicative of this. I've heard similiar responses by many people on the various talk shows, so it seems to be pretty common. If it were a woman that had said those things, I just can't see that the reaction would have been anything similiar.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
But men are unstoppable lust machines.
But it's more than just a fear of sexual abuse: Normal men simply don't invite little boys over for sleepovers and then share a bed. It's pretty far outside of accepted behavior. It really makes you question what's going on in the mind of someone like that.
But heck, if it were a creepy, surgically altered woman who had such a rabid love of children, I'd still be pretty creeped out.
[ December 10, 2003, 10:32 PM: Message edited by: Jon Boy ]
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)