Macaulay Culkin says allegations ridiculous!
Home Alone actor Macaulay Culkin has told the jury in the Michael Jackson trial that allegations he had been molested by the singer were “absolutely ridiculous”.
Culkin told the court he had never witnessed any improper behaviour by Jackson with anyone.
“We had a really close relationship. We kind of understood each other,” he told the jury, describing the fun of water-balloon fights and visiting toy stores after hours.
Culkin, dressed in a black pinstripe suit, said he had occasionally shared a bed with Jackson during numerous visits to the singer’s theme park-styled Neverland ranch. But it was never planned. “I fell asleep basically everywhere on that ranch. I would basically flop down anywhere.”
He said nothing improper happened between them, adding that even if asleep “I think I would realise if something like that was happening.”
Asked by Jackson’s lawyer Tom Mesereau if Jackson ever molested him, Culkin said: “Never.”
Recent Entries
- Michael Jacskon Shuts Down Neverland House
- Neverland Nevermore for Michael Jackson
- Two plead guilty to recording Jackson
- Macauly Culkin - “Michael Jackson’s isolation is Regrettable”
- Michael Jackson Gets 24-Hour Extension From State
- Jermaine Jackson: ‘I fear Michael is guilty’
- Michael Jackson Considers moving to UK
- Michael Jackson to face suit for unpaid cash
- Reality check for Michael Jackson as Neverland shuts
- Michael Jackson Faces Deadline To Pay Workers
May 12th, 2005 at 6:01 pm
hello, i would like to say that i believe that this young man is telling the truth. Everyone is out to get michael for being a nice guy and that is not right..please quit praying on the nice. how about going after the evil.. I say the truth will come out in the end and i pray michael is found innocent.. i do believe he is innocent..
May 12th, 2005 at 7:12 pm
This will be my last comment on this board. I am female, and not that I am the most beautiful girl in the world, but, everytime I have gone to sleep with platonic male friends, they have always tried to get SOMETHING in the middle of the night. I have spent many sleep filled nights with girls with no problems, but…. All you guys with testosterone = where do you aim it at, your desires!
May 12th, 2005 at 10:40 pm
How do you all know that the accuser and his family have perjured themselves? It seems logical that if they did and you know about it then the defense would know about it and be able to prove it. I know one thing for sure. If Michael is truly a child molestor, then he will definitely be in legal trouble again. He won’t be able to change his ways, and we will have another trial to watch. Please notice that I did say “If he is a child molestor”. Also, Yvette you can keep your credentials to yourself, because as bad as your English is I find it hard to believe you have any kind of education.
May 13th, 2005 at 1:39 am
Wendy, I think you should say more, you have something to contribute.
If I read it right, what you are saying is that MJ may start out sleeping platonically with kids but then, in the night, he is bound to have made a move on the kids because of his testosterone and his desires.
It’s a good point, based on personal experience.
The fact that MJ has all that heterosexual porn around says to me that he thinks about women, not boys. So if he’s aiming his testosterone anywhere, I thinking it would be at a girl like you!
May 13th, 2005 at 3:29 am
This sleeping withkids stuff.. who’s he kidding?who would go to bed with a child without understanding how it will be seen by other, more responsible adults? I think MJ is guilty because everything he says reminds me of the stuff my abusers said when I was a kid.In a way , all this trial stuff is going to be useless because if he’s found guilty then his money and fame will lessen the sentence.If he is guilty the man should do HARD TIME, I mean it , mabe 20 yrs is not enough.If you are abused when you are a kid , it affects you every day for the rest of your life.Personally, I would execute child abusers , why not, they take lives don’t they?
May 13th, 2005 at 3:54 am
Rafe - Im not sure where my posting went - floating in cyber-space somewhere Im sure. In case it never reveals itself, allow me to recap my reply to you.
Basically - My drawing assumptions of possible scenerios in favor of the prosecution is no different than you doing so to support the defense. In other words Rafe, don’t knock it - especially when you do yourself.
Another point - I was watching a news program last night w/ a panel of specialists discussing the horrible man who stabbed his daughter and friend to death. This man gave a verbal, written and recorded confession to the crime. However the defense attorney on the debate panel said that the weapon has not been found and therefore the charges can be fought.
No weapon=no crime?? this attorney also pointed out the Miranda wrights may not have been given and also the THREE confessions make the prosecution confesssion appear odd. What a hideous example of how our system can be abused and manipulated to protect a criminal. Not that I am comparing what those 2 girls went through with the MJ trial, (Im not) but I couldnt help to notice similar defense tactics between the 2 - the search for any pathetic loop hole to save the criminal.
Rafe - Please do not reply with “give examples of how mj defense is searching for loop holes…” becuase they are - they already tried to have the case tossed - evidence tossed - distorted the constitutional rights to fit his life-style in attempt to dismiss charges. etc..
hope this makes it to the board!
May 13th, 2005 at 3:56 am
Wow Mike - Thanks for sharing your point of view and experience - so far you are the only person whose opinion is from the “victim” stand point.
May 13th, 2005 at 3:57 am
Another point - I was watching a news program last night w/ a panel of specialists discussing the horrible man who stabbed his daughter and friend to death. This man gave a verbal, written and recorded confession to the crime. However the defense attorney on the debate panel said that the weapon has not been found and therefore the charges can be fought.
No weapon=no crime?? this attorney also pointed out the Miranda wrights may not have been given and also the THREE confessions make the prosecution confesssion appear odd. What a hideous example of how our system can be abused and manipulated to protect a criminal. Not that I am comparing what those 2 girls went through with the MJ trial, (Im not) but I couldnt help to notice similar defense tactics between the 2 - the search for any pathetic loop hole to save the criminal.
Rafe - Please do not reply with “give examples of how mj defense is searching for loop holes…” becuase they are - they already tried to have the case tossed - evidence tossed - distorted the constitutional rights to fit his life-style in attempt to dismiss charges. etc..
hope this makes it to the board!
May 13th, 2005 at 4:23 am
Mike, your out there dude. Sorry for past life experiences but if I were you, you should do more reserach on the MJ trail to learn more of the truth and how the media only plays in favor of the prosecution!
May 13th, 2005 at 4:27 am
yvette - your not only stupid but your obnoxious as well. your such an ass.
Mike - do not let yvettes’ posting represent the other participants in any way - yvette brings nothing to the table but stupidity.
don’t say it rafe
May 13th, 2005 at 4:39 am
Mike, I do understand that it’s a bit personal for you because of your past. But you should speak for yourself. There are 3 young men who were said to be molested by MJ. It does not seem that the abuse has effects on them everyday. (Or were they really abused????)
May 13th, 2005 at 5:02 am
Mike, I do understand that it’s a bit personal for you because of your past. But you should speak for yourself. There are 3 young men who were said to be molested by MJ. It does not seem like the abuse has effects on them everyday. (Were they really abused???)
May 13th, 2005 at 5:09 am
That’s a bit crazy. I just recently visited my brother who lives out of state and while I was there slept in the same bed with my nephew (he’s 7, I’m 36). YIKES, I must be a child molester - NOT! I remember one time that my boyfriend and I fell asleep on my bed when I was living with my parents (we watched TV in my bedroom all the time by the way) and my father game waltzing in all upset and yelling that we were sleeping together. Hello, we were sleeping. My best friends daughter sleeps with her and her husband all the time, they must be having orgies every night - NOT! People associate the phrase “sleeping together” with sex. People sleep together all the time and don’t have sex. Maybe, just maybe (not making excuses just saying maybe) maybe like my friends daughter sleeps with her because she’s scared - maybe a little 7 or 10 year old would be scared sleeping in a big place like he has with all the creepy noises and stuff and would rather sleep in MJ’s room. Plus add who he is and what fun it must be fun to hang out with MJ. We don’t know what happened we were not there. Maybe it is innocent just like me sleeping with my nephew when I visited, or with my boyfriend when we were sleeping or with my friend whose daughter sleeps with them. OK I know maybe my nephew is related, my boyfriend was my boyfriend and my friends daughter is her daughter but don’t you think these kids were really close to MJ. Like they almost loved him like a relative and that he loved them like maybe I love my nephew. It’s not like he abducted them from the street. These kids had relationships with MJ, spent lots of time with MJ like they might a friend from school. I used to sleep over my friends house all the time and have slumber parties - nothing weird happened. We’d always sleep in the same bed. Maybe, not making excuses, but maybe that’s what happened.
May 13th, 2005 at 5:23 am
Roseena, You have no idea if Mike is the first person that had bad experiences as a child. He may be the first to share it, but not the only one. I can tell you are a big MJ fan.
May 13th, 2005 at 5:36 am
Wow! I expect Rosie to come out with both guns blazing after Terell’s comment.
:-o)
May 13th, 2005 at 5:41 am
Terrell - I said Mike was the first who said he was victimized as a child - not merely had “bad experiences”
Mike was molested as a child - therefore his input concerning the offender (oops im sorry, the accused) is a little different than what mine would be - and appreciated. Big difference -
MJ WAS fortunate enough to have me as a fan ….. not any more.
May 13th, 2005 at 5:42 am
Rafe - Im not sure where my posting went - floating in cyber-space somewhere Im sure. In case it never reveals itself, allow me to recap my reply to you.
Basically - My drawing assumptions of possible scenerios in favor of the prosecution is no different than you doing so to support the defense. In other words Rafe, don’t knock it - especially when you do yourself.
Another point - I was watching a news program last night w/ a panel of specialists discussing the horrible man who stabbed his daughter and friend to death. This man gave a verbal, written and recorded confession to the crime. However the defense attorney on the debate panel said that the weapon has not been found and therefore the charges can be fought.
No weapon=no crime?? this attorney also pointed out the Miranda wrights may not have been given and also the THREE confessions make the prosecution confesssion appear odd. What a hideous example of how our system can be abused and manipulated to protect a criminal. Not that I am comparing what those 2 girls went through with the MJ trial, (Im not) but I couldnt help to notice similar defense tactics between the 2 - the search for any pathetic loop hole to save the criminal.
Rafe - Please do not reply with “give examples of how mj defense is searching for loop holes…” becuase they are - they already tried to have the case tossed - evidence tossed - distorted the constitutional rights to fit his life-style in attempt to dismiss charges. etc..
May 13th, 2005 at 5:43 am
Another point - I was watching a news program last night w/ a panel of specialists discussing the horrible man who stabbed his daughter and friend to death. This man gave a verbal, written and recorded confession to the crime. However the defense attorney on the debate panel said that the weapon has not been found and therefore the charges can be fought. No weapon=no crime?? this attorney also pointed out the Miranda wrights may not have been given and also the THREE confessions make the prosecution confesssion appear odd. What a hideous example of how our system can be abused and manipulated to protect a criminal. Not that I am comparing what those 2 girls went through with the MJ trial, (Im not) but I couldnt help to notice similar defense tactics between the 2 - the search for any pathetic loop hole to save the criminal.
May 13th, 2005 at 5:44 am
Tammy: Your post introduces something new into the forum - sanity: sleeping with kids does not always mean abusing them. All kinds of ordinary folks sleep with their kids in certain circumstances.
But Rosie and others will point out that there’s a difference between innocently sleeping with family and boyfriends and sleeping with kids NOT in a family.
May 13th, 2005 at 5:54 am
Tammy - Yikes is right! I understand the examples your using to make a point in MJ defense - but there is much more to this trial than snuggling-up to a child at bedtime. I am not going to list all the key factors - Im sure you know them by now - My point is, it is simply not the definition of “sleeping together” or circumstances when an adult can sleep with a child under innocent conditions that has out MJ infront of a jury. Mj sits in the courtroom today for molestation. There would NOT be a trial taking place if there wasn’t enough evidence that pointed in that direction.
The debate over defining
“sleeping together” and using the play on words to sway towards innocent or guilty reminds me of a recent past play on words - when pres clinton said he never had sexual relations with Monica- blow jobs, anal sex, and oral doesnt count… isn’t that still cheating???????????
People will play with words and scrounge any loop hole that can be found to protect their ass.
May 13th, 2005 at 5:56 am
Roseena, Let remind you of your comment. These were your exact word.”So far you are the ONLY person whose opinion is from the “victims” stand point. Keyword: ONLY!
May 13th, 2005 at 5:56 am
come on rafe - your too smart to make the defination of “sleeping together” the issue here - you KNOW there are other facts that brought this man to court.
May 13th, 2005 at 5:59 am
terrel - im not sure what your getting at - i think we are misunderstanding eachother - mike was the only person who stated on this forum he was molested as a child and then he gave his opinion about the case - i appreciated that from him - and actually, to me, his opinion carries more weight than others because he is speaking from a victims poiint of view. I in no means, meant to insinuate there were no other people abused who participate onthe forum - he is the only i am aware of who shared it. thats all.
May 13th, 2005 at 6:05 am
Sounds like somebody is starting to feel that “sleeping together” is not such a bad thing. The facts that brought this man to court are slowly turning into opinions or lies. Were they facts to begin with?
May 13th, 2005 at 6:20 am
I was referring to Mikes comment This sleeping withkids stuff.. who’s he kidding?who would go to bed with a child without understanding how it will be seen by other, more responsible adults?
May 13th, 2005 at 6:23 am
ANYONE ELSE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THEIR POSTINGS NOT SUBMITTING? I POSTED SEVERAL THAT JUST SEEM TO STAY IN CYBER-SPACE!????
May 13th, 2005 at 6:24 am
Terell they are talking about Mike Losben a person who posted on this forum not Mike Jackson.
May 13th, 2005 at 6:24 am
No problems here
May 13th, 2005 at 6:25 am
see, chatting on a forum vs in person loses human element! it is easy to be misunderstood.
Is it freakin’ friday yet.
May 13th, 2005 at 6:51 am
Tammy, I’m not getting what your comment #22 is refering to. Do you know what you were replying to? Who is they?
May 13th, 2005 at 7:21 am
Roseena, your # 17, I agree absolutely.
1. an overzealous prosecutor who wants to “nail a big one.”
2. a lying kid and his mother who are slavering to get millions from Michael Jackson.
3. A grand jury system which does not allow the defendant to make a case.
4. A media that wants to see illicit kinky stuff at every turn to sell papers.
all of those are part of why we are having a trial today.
May 13th, 2005 at 7:31 am
Terrell, your #19… There are few real facts. MJ slept with kids in his bed. There is no hard physical evidence of abuse (no DNA, no sperm tracks, no pubic hairs…. nothing). There is only testimony. A 15 year old says he was abused. His brother confirms but the dates and places don’t jibe. There’s a mother who says she witnessed kinky stuff with her son (but didn’t do anything to stop it) There are 10 charges, including: he fed alcohol to kids to groom them (mostly discredited), he imprisoned a family to make them record a video for him (totally discredited). To prove their case the prosecution has charged there is a pattern of grooming and abuse. Grooming? pretty well discredited… Abuse? the jury is out… There is nothing definitive established and it’s a case of which witnesses you believe.
May 13th, 2005 at 7:36 am
Rosie, obviously you’re hurting inside and angry as well. As I have said before your words mean nothing to me. I hold a MS Degree in Child Development and own my own private day school. Currently woking on my doctorate at Pepperdine Uinversity! The families I deal with a a daily basis have chosen me to be responsible for their children and they DON’T think I’m stupid. Only you!
That is the Gospel TRUTH!
May 13th, 2005 at 7:40 am
…Rossena, Mr. Jackson is INNOCENT!
Sorry honey child, face up to it. Go get yourself to “sleep with you” sounds like that’s what’s missing in your life girl. lol
May 13th, 2005 at 7:52 am
Oh, yeash, did you buy that DSM- IV-R yet? In case you haven’t heaerd of it, it is a Diagnostic And Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. We as Therapist have to know that book inside and out! I know what the hell I’m talking about , I’ve been in this business since 1985 and I have two sons 19 and 22 years old. I have had the pleasure of meeting the Jackson family many times, in fact their parents home is less than 10 minutes from mine! Take that to the bank and smoke your crack pipe on the way because I can analysis you just from your postings!
May 13th, 2005 at 7:55 am
RAFE - in rebuttal to your 27-
1. How can you blame a prosecutor for being passionate for the cause? If I had a person commit a crime against me or a family member, i could only hope for representaion that is over enthusiastic.
2. The media - well that would be very very hypocritical for you to say the media is an enemy of MJ -the media sways BOTH WAYS, wherever the ratings may be - Dont act like MJ has not used the media to his benefit as well. tsk tsk.
3. Let me sum it up with this buzz: showing pornography to minors, flocking to young, ill, poor boys, having a child be able to identify your penis before and after an erection (hhmm), having staff admit to seeing “contact” with boys, paying millions of dollars to the last accuser/victim, manipulating the family into getting time alone with the boy, weeping when he couldnt see him - oh god, i could go on forever -
May 13th, 2005 at 7:59 am
aagghhh - there is a crazy woman stalking me in this forum - will someone please tell yvette to get control of herself.
Gees, if you actually do work with children, i fear for their safety - if you get this angry and psycho over a trial debate, imagine how you deal with real life. scarey…. very scarey i say!
May 13th, 2005 at 8:03 am
Your point three of course is all a mixture of conjecture, perjured testimony and lies. One might call it a pattern of lies. You want to believe the grifters, it’s your choice Roseena.
May 13th, 2005 at 8:07 am
Yes - You call it a collection of lies - I call it the prosecution working hard with the evidence and witnesses they have to put a child molester where he best belongs - jail.
May 13th, 2005 at 8:24 am
Roseena, I’ve been sitting back listening. I think you are a just a tease. In your heart MJ is inocent. You have said so much in favor of the prosecution that you cant back down. I know by now you can sense the roof caving in on the anti-jackson clan. All of the so called “FACTS” should be re-named! Accusations would be a better fit. I don’t recall any BOMBS that the prosecution dropped on mike before they went to rest. FACTS=TRUTH
May 13th, 2005 at 8:24 am
Roseena, darling , step back and take a close look at yourself… don’t turn the tables on me, your the one with the delusional behavior. Just face the facts, Mr. JACKSON IS innocent! Sounds like your very disturbed…you really need to see someone for your strange mood disorders.
I will continue to post my opinions, if you donnot like them, just ignore them. You sound like you need therapy right now badly. Seriouly … girl before you have a break down over this trail issue. Geesszzz!!!
May 13th, 2005 at 8:28 am
The prosecution shoukd e ashamed of themselves. It’s awful how they have made a mockery of themselves in Santa Maria.
Terell, you are so right on. The Facts!
May 13th, 2005 at 8:37 am
And they are ashamed! Face it! Thanks Yvette, for holding Roseena down while I taped her mouth shut.
May 13th, 2005 at 8:58 am
Roseena, please stop attacking me-I don’t appricate your harness. I’ll call and report you to the internet police!
May 13th, 2005 at 9:00 am
Terell, you’re welcome. She out there!
May 13th, 2005 at 4:21 pm
You guys are really tough ganging up on Roseena. Typical of a Jackson fan to try to intimidate the opposition. Just like the other fans that send death threats to those that speak out against Michael. You people are always saying wait till all the evidence comes out yet you claim to already know the verdict even though it hasn’t been determined. You Jackson fans are so emotionally driven it’s nearly impossible to have a logical discussion with you people. Don’t let the blinded fools get you down Roseena. There are those of us out there that still desire to see justice served.
May 13th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
As for you Yvette, you seem less like a therapist and more like a high school dropout. Next time you feel like throwing your credentials around make sure you do your degree justice by sounding like you earned it, instead of paid for it.
May 13th, 2005 at 8:22 pm
Hi everyone! It’s interesting to me that most people who believe MJ is guilty quickly disregard anyone that believes he’s innocent saying something like ‘you’re just a fan’. Most people I know say ‘he’s a freak, he’s guilty. I mean what adult in their right mind would spend so much time with children? Just look at the guy!’ Most people I know judge books by their cover and I don’t know why. In my opinion it’s nothing but a witch hunt. Am I a “fan”? hmmmm……I don’t own nor have I ever owned a MJ album. I’ve never seen him in concert. A song of his has never been on my top 10 or even top 20 list. I’m not a fan of pop music at all. (I like the Grateful Dead, Led Zep, The Who, Guns and Roses, Def Leppard…..stuff like that)
However, anyone that would claim they’ve never been completely mesmorized while watching MJ dance and sing is either numb or a liar. That’s just my opinion. I’ve heard doctors say that MJ “fits the profile” of a molestor and people hear that and it’s coming from an expert so they think it must be true. Sorry, I don’t buy it. In the early 90s when the first accusation of child molestation was made against him I tried to imagine what it might be like to be MJ. All the fame, stardom, adoring fans screaming for more and loving every minute of it and yet yearning as any child would for a simpler life without the adult pressures. Carefree and relaxed. Maybe it would be nice to be famous 2 or 3 months out of the year….but it doesn’t and didn’t work that way for MJ. Why is it so hard to assume he’s innocent until proven guilty? Because of the way he looks, because he likes hanging out with kids and he’s not a kid. Well, in his heart he must be a kid. He missed it when he was growing up. Totally missed the being a kid thing. It makes a lot of sense to me that he’s being a kid now. Not a molestor. Simply eccentric and nothing more. That’s what I’ve always thought and then and still believe now. I need some hard core evidence. Sure it’s possible that someone that hangs out with kids, travels with kids and showers kids with gifts is a molestor. Maybe even probable. But not in this case. It seems much more likely to me that people that surround MJ see him as an easy target because they know that people are quick to judge based on how someone looks and how much money and success they have. Dirty laundry sells and the media works it big time for ratings and to sell magazines and newspapers. From MJ to west nile virus, to earthquakes, the media works very hard to push our buttons.
‘Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority it’s time to pause and reflect.’ ~Mark Twain~
May 13th, 2005 at 11:03 pm
m.j is only being hunted because of one thing it seems he is in possesion of something that certain people need very badly the beatles catalogue give it up m.j and it will go away
May 13th, 2005 at 11:08 pm
please no one can say hands down that they have been abused by wacko ,its all just barmy about one of themost prominent white figures please chill he is not black anymore
May 13th, 2005 at 11:09 pm
anyone come on i dare u
May 14th, 2005 at 1:10 am
Im back! what a treat in the morning! I check the site for some new and offensive postings by the town-idiot yevette, who seems to have found an equally challenged partner in terrel - What a team you two make - im sure together, maybe the 2 of you now stand a chance of combining thoughts and managing to post “something” that now will make sense…. ah, or at least be in proper english! lol
May 14th, 2005 at 1:22 am
Now to comment on the “real” postings - Jill, you should not discredit the experts who inthe past stated MJ fit the molester profile - I am sure there are indicators that are used to profile various types of offenders - and if he has those traits, then maybe it is so. Jill if those same experts would have said “mj does NOT fit the profile of a molester” I am certain the MJ supporters would then consider the evaluation acceptable.
Also, a childhood deprived of what can be considered as “normal childs play” does not mean entitle an adult to push the envelope by endangering children while they try to regain a taste of their lost childhood. If that were true, we woudl have a large majority of adults behaving inappropriately - MJ is not the only person who didnt get to “play” as a child.
Jill you seem to put much empathy into what it must be like to be MJ (AH, that poor victim) and im not sure if i can respect that attempt for to try to see things from his point of view or if im offended that you didnt put equal amount of effort into showing empathy for the victims (i mean the accusers), what about seeing life from thier point of view.
May 14th, 2005 at 1:25 am
jill - dirty laundry couldn’t sale without there being customers - the same media you bash is the same group that can help MJ’s case - hell, it was one of the vehicles he used to get to pop-stardom.
May 14th, 2005 at 1:38 am
If you look at cases of serial pedophile abusers, when they are at last unmasked, that literally scores of victims come forward… not one or two but a flood of them. In MJ’s case, here’s a man who had all the opportunity in the world to abuse kids and yet, the only ones to come forward are those who want money. The testimony of those who accuse him in this case (the accuser, his brother, his sister and his mother) have given testimony that is contradictory and hard to believe: ie, did the mother really see MJ lick her son’s face and do nothing to stop it? Did the brother really see MJ abusing the alleged victim, even though an alarm must have gone off, signalling his approach? Was the family really being held prisoner at Neverland, even though they went out on shopping sprees, visits to the orthodontist, and the mother visited a beauty parlour? The accuser several times denied abuse and then turned around an alleged it. That’s the testimony on which the prosecution is hoping for a conviction. Then there is all the testimony about previous cases of so-called abuse: all by discredited witnesses, former Neverland employees, who had tried to extort money from MJ before. Then there is the fact he paid off $20 million before: Would he have done this if he was innocent? My thinking is, yes: pay the money even if you are innocent, and get on with your multi-billion-dollar career. Trouble is, when you pay once, others think they can get you to pay twice, or three times. This time, there’s no deal and so you get all this unconvincing testimony.
I started out thinking the man was guilty. Now, I am leaning towards thinking he’s not. And I can’t see this changing, unless those dozens and dozens of victims start coming forward, as they do in other cases of pedophile abuse. Where are they?
May 14th, 2005 at 1:57 am
Qauntity? Since when does a crime require a minimum number of victims to be a crime? Rafe, what if MJ did in fact only molest several boys over his lifetime? does that mean he is less guilty because he spared the others and didnt seize every opportunity to molest more children? You are looking for dozens of other proclaimed mj victims to convince you of the abuse.
I get the impression that you truly believe this is without doubt, a conspiracy against mj for personal financial gain. well if that were true, where are the other trials against other movie or pop stars? well where are the dozens dozens of similar cases in hollywood? there are many stars with deprived childhood and plenty of cash to go after. where are they?
May 14th, 2005 at 2:23 am
When does quantity count? When it is one of the defining hallmarks of similar crimes. As always, you slip past the main point and attack a secondary issue, an imputed position that I do not subscribe to. Of course he would be guilty if he committed only one atrocity in an otherwise blameless life. I’m not an idiot. All I am saying is that the MJ case does not fit the pattern of other cases of serial pedophile abuse that I have read about. (There are lots of cases of incestuous pedophilia where there’s only one or two victims, but that’s a different matter). But if MJ is a serial pedophile, as I think you (and the prosecutor and many others) have suggested, where is the series?
Your second point will not get good marks in logic class. “Where are the others?” In fact, there have been lots of false accusations against movie stars in the past. Douglas Fairbanks Jr was always fighting a paternity suit, So was Errol Flynn and Clark Gable and Charlie Chaplin (they were actors - before your time). They won some and they lost some. Do you think that this would be the first time that somebody targetted a big star, or a business leader or anyone else for that matter, in hopes of a payoff? You don’t think that happens in the world?
May 14th, 2005 at 3:32 am
Roseena, What are the facts that will bring this man to justice? WHAT ARE THE FACTS? Not accusations! THE FACTS!!!! Cut the crap and don’t dodge this one. What bombs did the prosecution drop?
May 14th, 2005 at 4:06 am
My god Terrel - The prosecution had hundreds of pieces of evidence submitted, numerous witnesses and enough evidence to allow the trial to continue. No matter what evidence/facts i would list, you would not believe it because you choose to not believe and refuse to consider that, yes, MJ could be a molestor.
Please check out the smoking gun site link to the right - this is a quick and dirty way to take a glance at the legal/police docs and reports on file. Some docs list very disturbing details.
Better yet - can you list fact of why he is innocent (NO) - Other than the repeated excuses and defenses that have been posted 100 times. you know, the excuses the MJ supporters cling to - you heard them before(their only after his money, he is witch hunted, he is living his childhood now..)
Those reasons are bullshit and are not reasons for a not guilty verdict - but the incidents leading to the trial is plenty for a GUILTY vedict.
May 14th, 2005 at 4:30 am
For whatever reason (It can’t be the non evidence and the shoddy testimony presented by the prosecution) Roseena wants Michael Jackson to be guilty and that is it. If, perchance he is found guilty, they she’ll say justice has been done. If he’s found not guilty, she’ll say that Jackson got off because he got himself a good lawyer.
So it doesn’t make sense to argue with her. Despite all the testimony and evidence to the contrary she will continue to believe Jackson is guilty.
If I suggest that one of the defining characteristics of the trial of a serial child abuser is a flood of victims coming forth, she slips the point and accuses me of saying that I am demanding a large quantity of victims before I will consider MJ’s guilt.
She imputes to me the belief in a conspiracy against MJ and then says,” well if that were true, where are the other trials against other movie or pop stars? well where are the dozens dozens of similar cases in hollywood? there are many stars with deprived childhood and plenty of cash to go after. where are they?”
The logic is so faulty it’s amusing. But accepting it for a moment, the fact is that lots of people have tried to use to the courts to extract money from well-known people. Errol Flynn, Douglas Fairbanks Jr., Clarke Gable, Charlie Chaplin were up on paternity suits many times. Sometimes they won, sometimes they lost these cases. But this has nothing to do with my position at all. It’s all just smoke.
To make it clear: one of the defining hallmarks of successful cases against serial pedophiles is that many, many victimes, with nothing to gain, come forward to testify against the abuser. So far, this is not true of the Jackson case. That’s all I said.
May 14th, 2005 at 4:50 am
Once again! You cannot point out any facts. Not even one! I’ll give you one giant fact. “He is innocent until PROVEN guilty.” The defense is just going through the motions because the prosecution has not PROVEN anything. You still have not givin me one rock solid, no doubt piece of evidence. Those docs that you suggested I look at are bogus. Every wrongfully accused man has a file containing false reports/documents. There are fictional books that contain disturbing details.
May 14th, 2005 at 5:03 am
If the smoking gun stuff was credible, don’t you think Sneddon would have used it?
May 14th, 2005 at 6:16 am
rafe- the documents i am referring to on the sg, are acutal police reports. The docs I am referring to that contain offensive and disturning facts about mj are in fact credible.
May 14th, 2005 at 6:31 am
your good rafe - good at repeating the same bullshit excuses for MJ choices. I have not heard one valid or substantial reason why you think he is inncocent and should be exonerated. Even if a portion of the prosecution witnesses testimony was “less” than expected (for whatever reasons), that DOES NOT mean MJ is innocent.
Rafe - your comment 58 you said i for whatever reason want him to be guilty - that is partially true - What I want is a jury to be able to clearly see the facts without being distracted with his career. and if they are capable of doing that, then yes, he will be found guilty. And if he is found guilty I would not sum it up soley on his attorney - I am fearful people are more concerned about explaining and justifying MJ actions until the actions are reduced to simple childs play instead of applying our laws to the pedophile pop-star.
May 14th, 2005 at 6:38 am
Rafe - i will again defend my point about you inappropriately looking for a “number” of victims to substantiate molestation - You said it rafe as a defense for MJ. You tried to dismiss the case by claiming they just want his money..as a defense for MJ. Unless there was something I missed in your posting, it was very clear - You are trying to discharge the case based on quantity of victims and money-motive. Both irrelevant - both is not an adequate defense - both just plain old excuses.
May 14th, 2005 at 6:50 am
omebody-Say has a ush-cray on afe-Ray.
May 14th, 2005 at 6:54 am
yes - he is my on-line crush.
Isn’t he everyone’s ush-cra
May 14th, 2005 at 7:03 am
actually Eby day, its me that has the ush-ray. I’d like to get her on a low say oat bay to hina Cay and [the next part of this sentence has been struck by the forum’s morality squad and rafe has been issued a stern warning and slapped with 14 demerit points]
May 14th, 2005 at 7:06 am
hhmm can’t say i ever heard of the slow boat to china saying before. whatever.
May 14th, 2005 at 7:09 am
lol!
May 14th, 2005 at 7:14 am
sweetie, it’s a song. “I’d love to get you on a slow boat to china, all to myself alone.” Much before your time, and even before mine.
I am going to read for awhile. Everybody knows what I think.
May 14th, 2005 at 7:44 am
Wow Roseena, you keep squaking to Rafe about how he hasnt given you one substantial reason to believing MJ is innocent, yet as I read through all the previous comments I noticed that you were unable to give a direct substantial or valid answer to proove why he would be guilty..?? except for all the bs excuses that you have nothing to back them up with that you keep repeating over and over! lol..so 2nd of all…the issue of PROOF..there really isent physical evidence in a case like this…its one word against another and then the jury has to decide whos words they like better..WAIT..we have witnesses!!…too bad they have no credibility (which you know if you have been following the case) ..oh wait..the defence witnesses like Macaulay Culkin for example denies anything appropriate happening to him..yet the prosecution says different..hmm..why would the source, mr. Culkin, lie??
anyways..a little off topic, while the thought is in my head…just say MJ is a sicko.., lets put it out there, k..well, cetain people who are defending the prosecutors and the boy and his mother etc here are disgusted and outraged by his sick desires..he should go to jail, he should pay for what hes done..b/c hes sick..is that correct? SO..i just wanted to point out the contradiction here..those in agreement with the prosecution are saying ‘No to sick freaks who play with little kids’ BUT you are saying ‘Yes to sick freaks who play with little kids’ dont you see..you are agreeing with a woman who., if indeed she is telling the truth, sat back and watch her OWN child be abused, licked,..she continued to let him stay with MJ at the ranch even when she felt her son was in danger, then we have the lady who gave into MJ when he started crying and sobbing (LOL, im sure) and let her own son, despite the fact that she felt is was wong, sleep with him. HELLO..is this mother SICK? I dunno about you but i sure as hell would not allow my kid to be in that position. OR how about all the maids , security guards, cooks, etc etc…maybe im too ‘nice’ being from canada and all..lol, but if i walked into a room and saw a grown man doing something inappropriate to a child, like so may of them witnessed, i would get that child away from that situation right that second..i would literally walk up and removed the child, call the police or hit the guy with an object near by..it amazes me that NO ONE said anything except to tabloids..and that NO ONE cared enough about the welfare of young innocent children who were being abused before their own eyes to do anything about it..now thats sick..
And last but not least..everyone has the right to their own beliefs..but according to the law (not me..not u) the law states that you are innocent until proven guilty..and the grass is green..lol, so deal with it..I personally hope that this trial leads to the truth or as close to as possible, but on many of occasions have innocent men and woman gone to jail, have rich celebrities or just well to do gentlemen bought their way through the courts..Im going to leave ‘changing the legal system’ for another day.
‘ i say NO to adults who let children be abused in front of their own eyes’ …you know..if he is guilty and all….
or maybe..he never did anthing…except enjoy the company of children and despite his awsome vocal talent, has a bad way with words..
May 14th, 2005 at 8:05 am
cheeka - dont be so cheeky! just kidding.
I have never denied that the mother of the accuser should be prosecuted as well, for child abuse and neglect.
I support the prosection - period.
I was not attacking rafe -i was only defending my opinion.
May 14th, 2005 at 10:24 am
I think, if this whole thing is true, than the people that knew about these acts, witnessed them and so on are MORE quilty than the person doing it. IF MJ did do all these things than he is a sick, sick man. To witness these acts and do nothing and not be “sick” is even worse.
I wonder if he is found quity if he will plead insanity. It could probably build a strong case with all the weird stuff he does not to mention what could be called self mutilation of by way of all his cosmetic surgery.
May 14th, 2005 at 10:47 am
Its not worse…but close. Michael robbed the bank; the parents drove the get-away car.
May 14th, 2005 at 12:08 pm
Anthony, sounds like your jeolous! I did not say I was a Therapist, I said I own my a Private Day School, you know? The CEO! I do indeed have a MS degree…Sorry dude you’re ofended!
Furthermore, I don’t need to prove myself to you or anyone else in this form. As long as the truth is told, I have no problems with you or anyone else. It sounds to me like you are a red-neck anyway!
Mr. Jackson is INNOCENT!
May 14th, 2005 at 12:20 pm
Right, Terrel, you tell her, (Rossena Girl),
Mr. Jackson is innocent until prven guilty!
That’s all I need to say…
Have a good week-end folks!
May 15th, 2005 at 11:21 am
Hello all, hello Roseena, You know I’m sorry if it sounded like I was discrediting the expert or what the expert said regarding the profile thing. (One of the traits molesters have is that they themselves were molested. To my knowledge this is something MJ ever fell victim to.) I just believe that if you’re looking for something then you surely will find it. Whether it be evidence of guilt , innocence or truth. It will be found. A profile alone isn’t enough to say if someone is or isn’t a child molester. A profile isn’t considered evidence, it doesn’t reveal it only suggests and or /supports a theory. My theory, being that he’s not a molester he’s an adult acting out his childhood but never at the expense of a child. This is based a person in my life who is not a “fan” of MJ but on a much smaller level can relate to MJ’s childlike adulthood as he had an adultlike childhood like MJ. This person doesn’t have a Neverland Ranch or residual income so again he acts out on a much smaller scale. He devotes much of his spare time as a youth counselor, a SeaScout leader. He takes kids fishing, snowboarding, to the beach and really enjoys them, in a HEALTHY way. This person I know is 51 years old now and yet kids relate to him. He’s my oldest brother by the way. And although I don’t know MJ as well as I know my own brother there are obviously common “traits” that these 2 have in common and for the same basic reason, just on different levels. I don’t see in either case that an envelope is being pushed, that children are being endangered or exposed to inappropriate behavior. I see that they both have a genuine appreciation for kids, that they have something to contribute. They just so happen to enjoy kids company but it is their hearts focus to provide opportunity for fun and enjoyment for the kids sake not their own. Helping others is a gratifying experience in itself. In MJs case I don’t see sleepovers as inappropriate or unusual. He does it because he can. Because he has the resources and because of who he is he knows that he can offer fun, memorable, once in a lifetime experiences. I have empathy and feel heartache for anyone that has ever been abused, especially children. But in this case Roseena, I don’t see any victims here. Only accusers. I see children that have been prodded and convinced that something was inappropriate. The empathy I have for the accusers in this case has nothing to do with MJ and everything to do with the self-serving adults in their lives. Why do people settle out of court rather than defending their own innocence? I think it’s reasonable to say that possibly it has more to do with cutting losses and moving on. Unfortunately most people seem to think it’s a sign the accused was afraid of being convicted.
May 15th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Hey, I thought I would check this website out one last time and you all drew me back in! Ever hear of the date rape drug that you can put into a drink? Maybe that’s why Macauly (sp?) passed out while playing video games??? I am sure MJ had resources for that. This IS getting better again.
May 15th, 2005 at 6:14 pm
Okay, where did my comment go? I will try again. Has anyone ever heard of the date rape drug? You can put it in a drink and do what you want. Suppose MJ let the “boys” play video games for hours, set it up so their cokes had date rape drugs, and then he could fondle to his hearts content. The whole Jesus juice thing made me wonder about what else he could put in a coke can.
May 16th, 2005 at 7:49 pm
Cheeka, your comment is right on the money! I honestly can’t say whether Michael is innocent or guilty. I think he is more than likely innocent however, many people are jumping on the band wagon of guilt because he matches the profile of a child molester. However, that being said, IF Michael is found guilty I think the parents that pimped their children should be prosecuted as well.
I don’t let my children spend the night at friends homes because I don’t know the families that well. I was actually very surprised at the number of parents that let their children attend my 6 year olds slumber party. I had not even met the parents before. I agreed to a slumber party with the assumption there wouldn’t be one because I didn’t know any of the parents. It was then that I realized that the parents were happy to unload their kids for the night, free babysitter and all…. well with Michael they had a free babysitter and some grand shopping sprees on top of it. I think if anything Michael was buying friends and he chose to spend time with kids because they aren’t conniving enough to use him for his celebrity.
May 17th, 2005 at 1:49 am
BRING IN THE CLOWNS! Looks as if the defense will be parading a string of celebrities through the circus, ah I mean courtroom, in attempt to woo the jury into an innocent verdict. Who cares what a celebrity has to say about their personal or professional relationship with MJ. A celebrity claiming MJ is a “good” person or “good” father cannot erase the evidence and history that exists that supports mj is a molester. Also the defense will be sharing entertaining video clips – how much more glam and irrelevant bullshit can we shove down the jury’s throat? It is obvious what the defense is trying to do – they are using his celebrity contacts to appear powerful in court – Does anyone realize that if MJ was truly innocent, he would have actual proof and valid witnesses to support his innocence. I think it would mean much more if he had 10 joe-shmoes testify in court on his behalf – I find playing the “celebrity” card is low and dirty. Funny how MJ can claim the same industry that robbed him of his childhood (boo-fucking hoo) is the same industry he is leaning on now.
The defense’s approach (as far as I see it) is a pathetic, weak defense. Where is the damn evidence that he is innocent? It does not exist. So far I have not heard anything and it appears they plan on bringing in celebrities hearsay as a defense. I’m not impressed.
May 17th, 2005 at 9:32 am
Roseena, The defense does not have to prove anything to prove he is innocent. It’s obvious that he’s innocent. Actually he is innocent unless you all can change it with lies. Do you think mj even knows 10 joe-shmoes?
May 17th, 2005 at 1:15 pm
Its amazing that people want to believe MJ is innocent. He is a gay pedophile. Anyone else would have had that old book thrown at him. Wake up everyone, MJ is no dummy. He knows exactly what he’s doing. Throw him in jail, where he deserves to be.
May 17th, 2005 at 3:24 pm
Micheal is a sicko and it’s time that people see him for what he is. He’s gotten away with this behavior for years. This isn’t a one time situation. It is wrong for him to sleep with children. It is wrong for him to think it is ok. It is wrong for him to show kids porn and provide them with alcohol. He has a motive for doing these things. He is bizzare and should be prevented from contact with children, including his own.
May 17th, 2005 at 3:44 pm
There is no white glove with a brown finger to be found, and the prosecution is just wasting tax payers money with this trial.
May 17th, 2005 at 9:02 pm
Joy, your comments about MJ are disturbing. You are prepared to condem him for simply being bizzare. His behavior does not prove him guilty of these charges, as the truth unfolds. It would be a sad world if everone jumpt to conclusions, by judging the book by it’s cover.
May 18th, 2005 at 6:19 am
Paul: What are you talking about. You think MJ is innocent? Bizzare? Who’s jumping to conclusions. Look at the Wacko, you consider that normal? The guys is a sicko, he is 46 years old and wants to sleep with young boys. Maybe, one time he was a victim, more than three? He is most certainly wacked. How many men do you know, that are 46, sleep with young boys? Think about it.
May 20th, 2005 at 4:13 am
but sick and wako is not a crime, he is not charged with sleeping with boys but molesting them. this case is over, hate him if you want but, as i have said befor the prosecution has not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. hate it that some may but, that is the law of the land
verdict——NOT GUILTY
May 20th, 2005 at 11:21 am
Niether has the defense proven without a reasonable doubt that he is NOT GUILTY. No one has said anyone hated anyone. Right is Right and Wrong is Wrong. Which side of the fence are you on?
May 20th, 2005 at 11:23 am
That is true, however that is not what the legal systems are based on. The system *assumes* the person is innocent and the prosecution must build a case that shows they are guilty beyond resonable doubt.
May 21st, 2005 at 5:32 am
I understand the system and how it works. This is not a law class, thank you. My comment was to make a point about MJ’s innocence, and I don’t feel he is.
May 24th, 2005 at 10:16 am
Marsha man are you harsh. I agree with a person can be strange and still be innocent.
May 24th, 2005 at 1:11 pm
We are talking about MJ here. True strange can be innocent. MJ is strange, but he is not innocent. He knows exactly what to and what not to do. He is a genius… remember!!!
May 25th, 2005 at 7:54 am
Hey Marsha, Do I know you?
May 25th, 2005 at 7:55 am
Anyway, after keeping up with the news I am starting to believe that family was only after money.
May 26th, 2005 at 11:24 am
It looks good for MJ, the defense rested today, I will be shocked if MJ gets any jail time