While I'm not here to defend Michael Jackson, I do think it would be unwise for anyone to rush to judgement over an alleged offence, for which there is absolutely no evidence.
There was of course the allegations made by a teenager (Jordan Chandler), back in the early 1990's. Michael Jackson settled out off court, by paying several million dollars to the Chandlers. This of course, could be seen as evidence that he has something to hide. 'No smoke without fire'. Or it could simply be a multi-millionaire avoiding a court case in which he thinks that his reputation / image, could suffer even more damage, from months of public scrutiny / allegations / insinuations from shyster lawyers looking to make a percentage from a lawsuit.
At the end of the case, even if found to be 'not guilty' of wrong doing, there would still be plenty of people in society who would have concluded that despite the verdict, he was really guilty, and had simply got away with it by using expensive lawyers. Proceeding with a court case could have been a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
As I mentioned before, there are plenty of people in the world, who are capable of stooping pretty low, when they see an opportunity to make money. While I can't say what the truth is in relation to the those allegations, the fact that he paid off his accusers, may be suspicious, but in the real world it's not that unusual. Big business and government depatments pay off claimants on a regular basis - nuisance claims. It's cheaper and often less hassle than going to court, even though the claimant may have no case. It can also avoid the sort of press attention that could damage a company's reputation.
Parents are also capable of using their kids to make a fast buck. Although of course, Jordan Chandler's parents are undoubtably model citizens, and I of course would not say otherwise, some people at the time did have doubts about their claims against Jackson. That money may have been a motivating factor.
Of course that would seem like a very sick thing to do. Putting your son through the ordeal of a high profile sex scandal / court case, in which he has to claim to have been a victim of sexual abuse. I doubt any of you would contemplate doing it to your kids. You perhaps can't imagine any parent doing this, simply for cash. Sadly, that sort of person does actually exist. It is a mistake to underestimate the depths to which people can sink.
Here's a link about how a parent scammed people out off money to help give her daughter cancer treatment. Her daughter didn't have cancer, but that didn't stop her mother from telling the kid, and the local community, that she did...shaving her head to give the impression that she was sick...etc etc etc.....A similar case also happened in the UK a few months ago.
Mother fakes daughter's 'cancer' for cash
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2593691.stm
This link concerns the nightmare ordeal experienced by two teachers in the UK. They were accused of child abuse, and had to prove their innocence, even AFTER the police had cleared them. So much for 'expert opinion'. It's perhaps a useful reminder that we shouldn't be too hasty in passing judgement on others, without evidence. It's easy to accuse, but not always so easy to clear your name.
Teachers clear their name
http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,1074,769443,00.html
Experts also claimed to have found evidence of satanic ritual child abuse in the Orkney Islands (Scotland), a few years ago. Kids were removed from their parents by police / social services etc. Eventually it was found that no real evidence existed. Again, another great job by the experts. There are other examples. Not forgetting 'false memories' planted during hypnosis (Conducted by 'experts'), that have led to people accusing their parents of child abuse.
Social services also make mistakes. Here is one example from the UK (I'm sure there are examples that can be found in other countries).
The Climbie Report
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2703087.stm
This link outlines the events that led to the death of a young girl. The death resulted from prolonged child abuse. It could have been avoided, but the people who should have stepped in and protected her, didn't. The system let her down. It was a disgrace, and not the first time that it has happened. It's been said that Social Services are staying away from Jackson, simply becasue he has money, whereas they would have been more robust in their dealings with a poorer family. Sometimes social services....as the above link demonstrates...simply stay away. The poor do not always receive more attention than the rich.
Here are a couple of more links on the allegations against Michael Jackson The first contains Jordan Chandler's allegations. Are they true? We'll never know.
Jordan Chandler's statement to police
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/doc_o_day/mjdec1.html
The second link is an alternative perspective on the case. Just to provide a counter-view to the allegations that are now the basis for the present controversy over his sleeping arrangements.
Was Michael Jackson framed?
http://members.aol.com/mjnfc/pageone.html
As I said before, I'm not trying to support or defend Michael Jackson, but I also don't want the truth to be lost in the fog of tabloid propaganda. Just imagine, if he is actually innocent of child abuse, and is only guilty of being very naive, by allowing kids to sleep in his bedroom. His lifestyle may be very strange by our standards, but being 'strange' isn't a crime.
Now imagine what it would be like for you to be publically branded by the media, even if just by insinuation, as a child abuser. Then to compound that, you are unable to prove your innocence, even when the police can't prove you are guilty. You are left in a nightmarish limbo. Neither guilty or innocent. Would you want people to be understanding? Open minded?
Personally, I would rather have a reputation clear of accusations / insinuations of child abuse, than have all of Michael Jackson's millions.
Money really doesn't buy you happiness.
:wink:
