10
   

Michael Jackson's Life: What No One Wants To Discuss

 
 
Reply Sat 27 Jun, 2009 10:29 pm
Yes, he was a talented musician and dancer. I don't think there's any argument about that.

But there is also the big elephant in the room that everyone's trying to ignore now. The allegations of child molesting.

I believe the allegations are true. There wasn't just one allegation made against him, there were several, and they were consistent. I also remember reading (among other things) that child porn was found in his home. And I can't help thinking that where there is that much smoke, there's got to be some fire.

I have also heard all the rumors that Jackson was himself molested as a child. If that's true, then he was following the path that many (but not all) victims of sexual child abuse often take -- acting out and becoming the perpetrator.

But here is the question that I am left with. Why didn't he seek help? He certainly had the financial resources. Why couldn't he have gone to a therapist and said, "I have this terrible problem. I know it's wrong, it's awful, but I can't seem to stop it by myself. I need help."

Obviously, he was afraid that if word ever got out that he did indeed have this very disturbing problem, his career would be forever destroyed.

I am wondering what a psychiatrist would do in this situation? If someone like say, Michael Jackson, came to them and admitted to having this problem, would the psychiatrist be compelled to report it to the authorities? If so, then that too would be another reason that Jackson may have been too afraid to seek help.

So he just kept going on and on with it. Too afraid to seek help and afraid that anyone might find out. (Although, there must have been people around him who knew what was going on.)

I'm not trying to be an apologist for Jackson. In my book, molesting children is the worst thing any person can do short of murder.

But I'm trying to understand. Money wasn't an issue for him. He could have afforded any type of help he needed. So why didn't he get it? What are some steps that he could have taken to help himself?

Any thoughts?
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Jun, 2009 10:41 pm
@Lambchop,
Money ultimately was THE issue. He had no ore and couldnt return to a life without scads of it. Of course he diddled liddle boys, he was a pedophile who was only "not proven guilty" (I prefer that to proven Not Guilty). Id just as soon forget him and just remember his music. Remember, singers provide a large sample of deviant behavior. (Johny Cash, Ray Charles, Jerry Lee Lewis, Rudee vAlee, Bing Crosby, Bob SeEger, Elvis, Fatty ARbuckle,Tiny Tim etc etc). I can separate Jerry Lee from "Splish Splash" (which I love). JAcksons dead and Ive got my Thriller CD
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Jun, 2009 10:51 pm
@farmerman,
Not to be too nit-picky but Jerry lee lewis didn't do splish splash...that was the Bobby Darin. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMCsc4Iqvqc

How was Johnny Cash and Bob Seeger or Tiny Tim deviant? Tiny tim was odd, but not deviant.
Robert Gentel
 
  6  
Reply Sat 27 Jun, 2009 11:12 pm
@Lambchop,
Lambchop wrote:
I believe the allegations are true. There wasn't just one allegation made against him, there were several, and they were consistent.


I used to think he was guilty but I now lean the other way. The father of the boy in the 1993 allegations had fought with Jackson and leveled the accusation before then drugging the kid with sodium amytal, which can lead to suggested memory, to get the kid to disclose that Jackson had touched his penis.

He was then recorded saying he didn't care about the effect the attempt to extort money out of Jackson would have on his kid but that he was getting the meanest lawyer on earth to ruin Jackson in the press if he didn't get what he wanted. Here is a quote from the recorded call:

Quote:
There was no reason why he [Jackson] had to stop calling me...I picked the nastiest son of a bitch I could find [Evan Chandler's lawyer, Barry Rothman], all he wants to do is get this out in the public as fast as he can, as big as he can and humiliate as many people as he can. He's nasty, he's mean, he's smart and he's hungry for publicity. Everything's going to a certain plan that isn't just mine. Once I make that phone call, this guy is going to destroy everybody in sight in any devious, nasty, cruel way that he can do it. I've given him full authority to do that. Jackson is an evil guy, he is worse than that and I have the evidence to prove it. If I go through with this, I win big-time. There's no way I lose. I will get everything I want and they will be destroyed forever...Michael's career will be over.


The father tried to extort the money out of Jackson first, and didn't go to the authorities until Jackson repeatedly refused to pay the asking price.

Jackson also submitted to a rather invasive strip search, where his penis, anus and basically every square inch of him was photographed in the nude and said "if this is what I have to endure to prove my innocence, my complete innocence, so be it."

The reason that search was done was because according to the allegations the boy could describe something specific about the nude Jackson which would have proven the allegations. It seems to me that if this were the case, and it wasn't just part of what the lawyers were doing to pressure Jackson he would have broken and paid up before it got this far. But he didn't .

And where he did break also might hint at motivations for doing so. He stated that it was to get the ordeal past him, and to avoid the media circus (and remember, the lawyers up against him were eager to use the trial by media as an additional way to force Jackson to pay) and his friends stated that his health had deteriorated under the stress to the point where it was necessary, but at least one person close to Jackson said it was about not having to disclose his personal finances in court when he said: "you can take pictures of Michael's dick and he's not gonna like it, but once you start trying to figure out how much money he has, that's where he stops playing around."

Quote:
There wasn't just one allegation made against him, there were several, and they were consistent.


But they really weren't. For example, one of his employees attempted to sell a story to a tabloid alleged that Macaulay Culkin was involved, which he denied. And the police questioned dozens of other kids who'd stayed at the ranch when the accusation was made and all of them denied that anything took place.

If anything is consistent about the allegations, it is that in each case an attempt to make money off them is made. Instead of going to the cops people are asking for settlements or selling stories to tabloids.

Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia's article on the first accusation, which is where you can also source all my claims made in this post.

Quote:
A number of Jackson's former employees"most of whom had worked at his ranch"sold stories to the tabloids of alleged prior sexual misconduct on Jackson's part, instead of reporting their claims to police. One couple initially asked for $100,000 claiming that Jackson sexually caressed Macaulay Culkin. They were prepared to expand upon this allegation for a fee of $500,000, whereby they would allege that Jackson put his hands down Culkin's pants. When the story broke, Culkin strongly denied the allegation, and did so again in court.[30] A former security guard made various allegations about Jackson, saying he was fired because he "knew too much",[32] and alleged that he was ordered by Jackson to destroy a photo of a naked boy. Instead of reporting this to police, Hard Copy accepted the story in return for $150,000.[32] Afterwards, Jackson's maid, Branca Francia, alleged that she "quit in disgust" after seeing Jackson in a shower with a child, but did not inform the police. It later emerged that Francia was actually fired in 1991, but nevertheless sold her story to Hard Copy for $20,000.[32]


Quote:
I also remember reading (among other things) that child porn was found in his home.


I remember reading about that but I think I remember it being a dubious claim of the tabloid sort or having been debunked, but either way the prosecutor seemed to have it out for Jackson (he said "We got him" and called him "Wacko Jacko" before the cases were conclusively documented) and I imagine that if this were really true that we'd know about legal repercussions and not just rumors.

Quote:
I have also heard all the rumors that Jackson was himself molested as a child. If that's true, then he was following the path that many (but not all) victims of sexual child abuse often take -- acting out and becoming the perpetrator.


His sister La Toya put that one out, and was trying to sell "proof" for $500,000 to tabloids. She later claimed that her husband had forced her do it for the money.

Quote:
Obviously, he was afraid that if word ever got out that he did indeed have this very disturbing problem, his career would be forever destroyed.


Well why didn't he just pay in the first place? They were willing to settle for $15 million and that's less than a year of Jackson's shopping habit. This effectively ruined his career, and why wouldn't he pay up before the story broke instead of after it was raging and destroying his career? He reportedly said "No way in Hell" when they demanded payment the first time and the fact that he let the second one go to trial with no settlement even though he could have been imprisoned leads me to believe that he was fed up with that kind of extortion. He could have easily just stayed out of the country (he left the country after the acquittal) or bought off the new accuser but he ran a significant legal risk (in comparison to what it would take to settle) to get an acquittal and it's important to remember that he was acquitted.

I'm no real fan of his, and I hate child abuse as much as the next guy but there really does seem to be a corrupt motive behind these accusations, and while I used to think he was guilty I now reserve my judgement and lean toward the accusations being partially or wholly false.

There's certainly some huge issues he has, and even some of the lesser charges such as giving children wine should give anyone pause but I'd not rush to judge him based on the trial by media. There were a lot of people fanning those flames for profit and it is wise to be skeptical of the clams given some of the motivation behind them.
Ragman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 27 Jun, 2009 11:42 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert: well stated. It's so easy for majority of people to believe media's sensationalism. If there's one thing about media to be learned (and relearned) it's clear that the more that media repeats a lie, the more people will believe it and then swear to it even when presented with real facts.

I think that he's to be pitied because of his drug addiction and his poor connection with reality and his alleged "Peter Pan" syndrome . I never have seen a law against that -- not a crime. have no idea if he let small boys sleep in his bed (not a crime either) and have no knowledge that he molested anyone ...not does anyone else.

The blood suckers that brought him to trial him were just plain extortionists. At first, I had concern about him being a pedophile. Their story seemed plausible at first blush...to me. But the more you heard the extortionists story and their and their history, the more you got the idea they were just scum and liars out for a big winfall from this pathetic, childlike lost soul. The fact that he paid them off to make it all go away could have been a calculated risk but he was in a lose-lose scenario --- so it seems.

Admittedly, back then (and later on), I didn't rise to his defense quickly or easily; however, I did eventually. There seemed to be a 'cottage industry' (like JFK conspiracy theorists) built up off preying off him (and others), aided by the public's gullibility and maleability, There's a public willingness and lynch mob mentality. People will believe anything about anyone who differs from the "norm"...especially if they happen to look a little weak to them in some way.

Oh yes, and then there's the desire to bring down and crash to the ground someone who made it to the top as he did. I can easily see these as the same ones who are quick to try to bring Obama down (and make nasty jokes about him or his race) before he's been in office for a year; however, many will swear there's nothing racial about it.

It's just humor... right?
Ragman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Jun, 2009 11:53 pm
@Ragman,
Can you believe there's now a poll on Youtube asking you to vote whether or not you feel sad that MJ died? What a sick society! Evil or Very Mad
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 12:32 am
@Ragman,
Bobby DArin, right.

There were all kinds of stories of Johny Cash and cousins and "kin" . Seegeras and his deug addled years was not exactly an " arc of pride". Tiny Tim? he had all kinds of stories about him about his totally creepy lifestyle.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 12:39 am
@Ragman,
Quote:
Quote:
Can you believe there's now a poll on Youtube asking you to vote whether or not you feel sad that MJ died? What a sick society!
Nah, were just quick to build up and then quickly tear down and move on. The press and internet sites can easily manipulate their target audience and we ,as target audiences allow ourselves to be manipulated. Nothing unusual ,


msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 12:43 am
@farmerman,
Yep. That's media business these days. So it goes ....
0 Replies
 
Lambchop
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 06:10 am
Robert, you made some very good points in Michael Jackson's defense. I will admit that I'm not as well versed on the details of the case. I'm operating strictly from memory here, too, and it's been a while since that trial took place.

I think the problem is that there are still so many unanswered questions about Jackson's life. It's strange when one realizes how little we knew about his life, considering how famous he was. And yet, so much of his life seems to be shrouded in mystery.

Jackson admitted that he had slept with children on occasion (but denied that it was anything but innocent). However, if he knew how controversial that admission was, and how it could potentially damage his image, why did he continue to do it?

Why did he "buy" three children rather than having any of his own?

Other than his marriage to Lisa Marie Presley (which struck many people as a "fake" marriage), Jackson didn't seem to have any (romantic) relationships with other adults (of either gender). Does that automatically make him a pedophile? No, but it fueled the speculation.

So many unanswered questions.

Quote:
There's certainly some huge issues he has, and even some of the lesser charges such as giving children wine should give anyone pause but I'd not rush to judge him based on the trial by media.


I remember reading an interview with Michael Jackson (I believe it was in Rolling Stone magazine) well before any of the child molestation allegations occurred. I was struck by how isolated he sounded. He seemed to be so far removed from everyday life and everyday people. He seemed to be living in his own little world, with his own little reality going on.

Yes, even if we could be absolutely sure there was nothing to the molestation charges, there is no doubt that Jackson desperately needed therapy. I think he definately had mental illness issues.

And once again, I can wonder why he wasn't getting the help he needed.

0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 06:31 am
@Robert Gentel,

Money is the root of all extortion.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 06:54 am
Quote:
But there is also the big elephant in the room that everyone's trying to ignore now. The allegations of child molesting.


This is what i cannot swallow. No one wants to discuss this? It's just about all people have been talking about. Certainly there is no reason not to discuss it. But to claim that no one wants to discuss is, shall we say, naive?
0 Replies
 
Lambchop
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 09:34 am
I guess it's because from the news coverage I have seen so far, the emphasis has been mostly on his music, and his general life history. Plus, lots of interviews with anyone and everyone who felt influenced by his music. Blah, blah, blah.

On the internet, there have been plenty of people making jokes about him, etc., but I wanted to have a serious discussion about these allegations that were made against him and get some input from everyone else.

Michael Jackson's death has raised so many questions for me, I just needed to talk (or post) out loud about it.

I'm not a big fan of his (but I have the Thriller album, of course. Who doesn't?). But, probably like a lot of people out there, I feel conflicted towards him. I needed to ask some questions and figure out some things.

For instance, what if he actually was a pedophile? Could he have realistically obtained help for that problem without the whole knowing about it?

I'd say that if someone is a pedophile, they should get help for that problem, no matter what. But is it actually realistic for us to expect someone in his position to come forward about it?

There are other things too: yes, celebrities can be taken advantage of and exploited. But they are often given a free pass even when they do abominable things.

It seems to be very difficult to get a celebrity convicted when they are taken to trial. We love our celebrities in this country; we go overboard about it. No doubt the average celebrity has a distinct advantage when facing a jury than the average joe would not have.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 09:36 am
I think that the consensus is that if jackson was abusing kids then he would have gotten to a lot of kids. He had so much access to kids for so many years. And yet not only have the claims of abuse been very rare, but most of the kids claim that Jackson was great to be with. I think that we don't talk about the child abuse charges in part because we no longer think that he ever was an abuser , and in part because we feel guilty for having assumed that he was based upon him being weird.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 10:00 am
Jackson was the on the weird fringe of gay society later in his life but always trying to put out a smoke screen by marrying and having children (still a matter of contention as to whether it's actually his seed or how the women were impregnated). It's the pea brain notion that all homosexuals are pedophiles and therefore they should all be kept away from children. Nonsense -- there'a a large percentage of heterosexuals who should be kept away from children and not just because of pedophilia. I think the Quincy Jones interview on Larry King was good evidence that Wacko Jacko was not so wacko that he would endanger his own career by having sexual relations with underage boys. However, his ego was big enough that he believed he could play the Peter Pan part without the bigoted thoughts floating through the minds of judgemental religious wackos that he must be doing something evil. It's obviously possible to be gay and love children but only show a normal and appropriate affection without some malevolent intent. Children before they are consenting adults are still morally and ethically off-limits for any sexual involvement and it's a psychologically ingrained in the psyche of nearly every human adult. "American Beauty" was a story of a man who let that line become fuzzy but when it came right down to it, couldn't bring himself to actually act on it.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 10:13 am

Regardless of innocence or guilt:
anyone who is accused of sexual child abuse,
is smeared with tar that, even under the best of circumstances,
will not be removed, jury acquitals to the contrary notwithstanding.

No person can possibly be innocent enuf to get THAT tar off of him.

0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 10:37 am
I always thought he was asexual.

Does anyone remember the asexual poster we had on here for a while? It was always interesting to read their posts as they tried to explain. So many people didn't believe that someone could simply not have sexual feelings.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 10:47 am

I was only peripherally aware of Michael Jackson.
His art was not to my taste,
but I doubt that he was ever associated with any homosexual lover.

If he had been, that probably woud have been much mentioned in the news.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 10:48 am
@boomerang,
I know two men who are asexual and they explained it to me once. And I would consider one of my sisters asexual now. Absolutely no interest in men or sex or relationships of that sort. The two men have never even dated a woman.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jun, 2009 11:32 am
@Lightwizard,
Quote:
However, his ego was big enough that he believed he could play the Peter Pan part without the bigoted thoughts floating through the minds of judgemental religious wackos that he must be doing something evil. It's obviously possible to be gay and love children but only show a normal and appropriate affection without some malevolent intent.

Okay - here's my take on it. I watched an interview in which I heard with my own ears Michael Jackson admitting that he invited underage young boys to sleep in his bed with him.
I don't care if he's gay, heterosexual, asexual- whatever.
And I'm not a judgmental, religious wacko who assumed he 'must be doing something evil' because he decided to be different.

I liked Michael Jackson - between Michael Jackson, David Cassidy and Donny Osmond - I was firmly in the Michael Jackson camp as a preteen girl.

BUT- when I heard him say that he felt that it was fine for him to have young children who were entirely unrelated to him sleeping over his house and in his bed - his credibility as a sentient adult was absolutely blown in my mind.

And any mother or father who sits here and says that if some guy off the street approached them and asked if their son or daughter could sleep over his or her house and in his or her bed and says -'but it'll be okay because I'm asexual- I just love to be around children...'
that they'd say,
'Okay yeah - you seem to be asexual - fine....'

WHAT?

He's getting excused for what would be unconscionable and inexcusable behavior in anyone else who wasn't a celebrity - I mean, he's MICHAEL JACKSON....and now he's dead...

That's as twisted as he obviously was. The guy was obviously mixed up and in pain. But in my mind, that doesn't excuse what I heard him say he did.

My view is- Let him rest in peace - finally - but thank god there will be no more sleepovers.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Michael Jackson's Life: What No One Wants To Discuss
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/17/2022 at 08:52:25