maybe he did get accused twice for molesting boys but do you think they're parents did it for money or is Michael really a molester?
2006-07-01 21:36:22 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
Hell no. He admitted it and then when he realized his mistake he tried to back pedal and say those things never happened. He is totally guilty...I just don't think he realizes how wrong it is and that's the only area where I sympathize with him. He's become so far removed from the real world that he doesn't realize when he's hurting people.
2006-07-01 21:40:43 · answer #1 · answered by contrafilms 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Regardless of how we feel about it, Michael Jackson is innocent. Flip the script. (The following example is hypothetical, please don't take it seriously... it's just that... an example.)
For example, you're at school and James has a pen and is using the pen. When James isn't looking, the pen falls on the ground. James looks back, and the pen is gone. James says that you took the pen. James looks behind him and asks Laurie did you take the pen. Laurie says yes because she doesn't like you. But the pen fell on the floor!!
This was just an example, but use it in Michael Jackson's scenario. The facts of the most recent case.
-Gavin spent several months at Neverland with Michael, his sister, his brother, and his own mother!
-They did spend in the night in Michael's room (as most of the kids that stayed at Neverland)
- There is NO proof that Michael gave alcohol to the minors (no eye-witnesses). The witnesses that they had in the case were not creditable.
- There is NO proof that Michael molested that child. Remember the DNA evidence they took in December, 2004? Remember the matching fingerprints on the magazines? Remember the internet cache of the porn sites? NONE of this was creditable and linked Michael Jackson either molesting this child or doing anything improper with this child.
SO HOW can you convict a person based on the evidence at hand. Use the example of James and the pen. He accused you of doing something improper without having the necessary evidence to prosecute!
Making an argument that he is guilty because he is weird, strange, and what 47 year-old-man likes to play with children other than a pedophile. Michael Jackson, by the evidence, is neither a pedophile nor homosexual. Please people, look at the evidence before you convict someone of anything improper.
Below is a hyperlink to the detailed facts of the case: Michael Jackson v. People of California
Source(s):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/michael_jac...
2006-07-04 10:16:27 · answer #2 · answered by Marcus W 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's guilty as hell.He gets on national tv and say it's ok for a 45 year old man to share his bed with 12 year olds?That has child molester written all over it.The parents didn't sue him for the money....If that was the case,how come,when he got accused the first time,he paid that family millions of dollars of "hush money"?And,when he got accused the first time,his popularity went down the toliet big time.He's not even living in the United States anymore-he moved to some country-now he is getting ready to move to Europe.After he made "Thriller",he just got stranger and stranger by the day.
2006-07-01 21:48:28 · answer #3 · answered by the_silver_tin_man 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would like to think he was innocent as far as that case of molesting boys was concerned, but on second thoughts one may wonder about the saying "theres no smoke without fire", do you agree? If you argue that the parents concerned did it for money, why didnt this type of case fall on other celebrities? Anyone can just claimed of being raped by any big-time celebrity and sue him for money?
2006-07-01 21:48:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
From what I know about Michael Jackson, I think he is innocent, along with my family. I actually met Michael and he was one of the SHYEST people I'd ever met. I just don't think he has it in him to molest children.
2006-07-01 22:00:07 · answer #5 · answered by flooter07 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think he is TOTALLY guilty and I think some of the parents did let their children get molested for money, I think they should be imprisoned right along with Mr. Jackson
2006-07-01 21:43:59 · answer #6 · answered by tatgirl66 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he is anything but innocent,
i cant say anything on the child molestation case it could be a millioner over night plan for the parents but he has admitted to the crimes he commited. n the weird things he does like changing religions all the time makes everyone agree he's whaco jacko!!!
2006-07-01 21:46:36 · answer #7 · answered by chaitanya 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah he's innocent if you think that sharing your bed with little boys that have no Business in his bed.is okay.. and showing lil' boys porn (which is child abuse.) is okay.. having lil boys ID marks on Wacko Jackos body where NO child should be looking at on a grown man...then yeah hes innocent.......as for the parents they were being sidetracked but they money, however if they knew ( and they did) that Wacko Jacko was being investigated for child molestation then why would they even think that it would be okay for their son so stay at his house.... i think that Wacko Jacko blinded them with money and Jesus Juice
2006-07-01 21:52:28 · answer #8 · answered by Ce-Ce 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
INNOCENT!!!
â¥â¥We Love You Michael!!!!â¥â¥
2006-07-02 04:13:37 · answer #9 · answered by ♥Stranger In Maine™♥ (Thriller) 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not sure, but I hope either he'd hurry up and get lost, or the media should stop following him. He's a real disgusting eyesore.
2006-07-01 21:40:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋