Take away the fame and the millions and what have you got:
A self obsessed 40 year old man who sleeps with children...as simple as that.
His money and power have allowed him to build his fantasy world, and buy silence and collusion. He is not innocent or childlike...he's an astute businessman. He has displayed peodophillic behaviour for years!
It's interesting that the defense has been able to show that the kids testifying (the cancer patient's brother) has already shown himself to be capable of lying under oath. So his entire testimony is suspect and the defense will undoubtedly build on that in a big way.
If there are people who want to bring down Michael Jackson, and I'm sure there are, using this family to do so was an extremely poor idea. Those people should have been vetted, and instead a family should have been found who did not have that kind of baggage.
Do I think Jackson is guilty? I don't know, I have not heard all of the testimony, nor have I seen all of the evidence. But I can tell you that the prosecution has been significantly harmed by the showing that their star witness has no qualms about exposing himself (pun slightly intended) to charges of perjury. The defense is going to try to show that this is a family of golddiggers, and the lying under oath bit supports the defense in a very big way.
Even though the parents are at fault, and the kids are capable of lying, if they can establish certain facts, the jury will have to convict. Even if they are a family of gold diggers, it is still unlawful for Jackson to engage in these activities - sex, liquor, whatever. Being able to describe Jackson's genitalia in detail might be enough, on the one count.
Not necessarily edgar. How differently can you descripe
what every man has? Unless there are certain characteristics no other penis has, I'd say, it is not exactly indicative that Jackson exposed himself.
Most public restroom for men have these urinals and
everyone can see the neighbor's anatomy. Don't boys
go there too?
In Europe, most parents shower and bath with their
young children, nothing wrong with that.
It is unlawful for anyone to engage in activities like sex,
and drinking liquor with children, regardless who it is,
however nothing has been proven yet. Until such time,
Michael Jackson is innocent.
In my experience, adults don't go around exposing themselves to other people's kids, even to urinate, except in the briefest unintended instances. In all my years using public restrooms I can truthfully say, I have not had a look at another man's genitals in the process. I also only offered that as one piece of evidence. There are going to be a lot of people not known as liars testifying for the prosecution in the coming days.
edgar, You are going by American standards. In Japan, even today, many men and women share the same toilet. Until recent times, families bathed in public bath houses. They are becoming more rare today, but that was in their culture. People make out the human anatomy to their own perspectives - which is usually wrong.
I am writing from an American perspective. I have been in Japanese public restrooms in the 60s, but that bears little resemblance to what goes on at Neverland.
What most of us heard about Neverland and Jackson is 1) he slept with children, and 2) he took personal interest in some with health problems. Whether he molested them is one fact we are not sure of. To that extent, I'm not ready to crucify him without facts. That's where I stand.
Well, I have been following Jackson's career with children for many years. There have been accusations from more than two boys. In the past he paid them off rather than risk a trial. I ask you, CI; if there was no proof you were guilty of such a thing would you pay off people like that, especially since there is no privacy to be gained once the stories went public? There is far too much smoke for there to be no fire.
That analogy of "where there's smoke, there's fire" is a false one. Apples and oranges in my view. Accusations hurt as much as the denials; many lives have been ruined, because a child falsely accused somebody of molestation. That doesn't deny that molestations does not happen. If the accusation is based on truth, it should come out by confession or a court of law. I just want to see this current trial play out, before I come to any conclusions about Jackson. I'm not saying he's innocent; just that he must be considered innocent until proven otherwise.
I don't know the truth of the matter, and await a jury's vote, not that that always elicits truth, but it our justice attempt. I have my private concerns re what seems likely, but the legal system will set the gate height.
My own feared scenario is that he will be found not guilty but will still descend into some endless despond and thus become a martyr of sorts, not being able to come out of it if he is indeed actually innocent, and becoming heroic if he indeed isn't. I wish the case would turn out to be more conclusive than I think it is, either way.
osso, Our legal system is not perfect. Nothing we humans do are rarely, if ever, perfect. We must rely on our court system with all it's weaknesses, but that's the best system us humans have to determine the innocence or guilt of somebody charged with a crime. At the moment, that's all we have.
Uh...no. I don't believe he's f*cking those boys. He's too dainty for anything quite that raw.. he's still in the early stages of his sexual "experimentation" --playing with their little weenies, getting them to touch his, perhaps a little oral action. Penetration-- I doubt it, and it would be easier to document, wouldn't it?
Sad thing. This guy has real talent and shitloads of adoring fans. What a f*uckup, really.
