Michael Jackson’s Accuser Didn’t Want Money

The defence in the trial of Michael Jackson have been dealt a severe blow with the news that the mother of the boy he is alleged to have abused refused money from a mystery millionaire.

The Sun reports Jamie Masada, owner of the Laugh Factory comedy camp for underprivileged children, said a “particular person” had offered money to Arvizo’s family after seeing a documentary about the boy who was suffering from cancer at the time.

Masada said that Janet Arvizo rejected the money and only asked for “friendship and prayers”.

Read more »

Recent Entries

10 Responses to “Michael Jackson’s Accuser Didn’t Want Money”

  1. Gail Says:

    probably because she fully intended to go for the “big bucks”.

  2. News from Around the World Says:

    Michael Jackson’s Accuser Didn’t Want Money
    For some reason, we thought we read this this last time we flew to New York:

  3. News from Around the World Says:

    Michael Jackson’s Accuser Didn’t Want Money
    Same old story, same old ending:…

  4. John Henry Says:

    We need to hear from the accuser’s father. He the onlyone who hs not been heard as yet. We all want money, if three people go all out to portray a woman as a no money lover especially when she has a history of making up story to get money from big companies some thing is smelly!!!!!

  5. N. L. Says:

    I don’t really know what to believe about his innocence or guilt. I do think his behavior is inappriate and he is some what of a “freak” (for lack of a better word.) But the people testifying against him I question their credibility. Noone has proven the allegations about the boy he’s accused of molesting. They keep talking about other supposed incidents. All the people testifying were paid. If they come up with a different story now in court it just proves they were taking advantage of him if it happens to not be true. He is a very easy target. And makes hard to believe thier stories. His “pattern” they are trying to prove only proves that so far. I think his perception of reality is not like the rest of most people. But as inappriate as it may be to us does not mean he neccisarily did what he is accused. yes, he may have, but he is also very wealthy and has dealt with these kind of stories. i would think if these peoples children had really been harmed by him they would not just take a pay off and not say anything and let him do it to other children. HAS ANYONE QUESTIONED THAT?

  6. Sally Says:

    If a person wanted money, they wouldn’t care the amount. I’m not surprised that the apologists refuse to give an inch and say, well, I suppose that just MIGHT be something good for the prosecution. There are those on here who of course say ‘I’m not a fan, BUT…’ Of course they are fans. They refuse to concede even one point, and believe me. If you are being open-minded, this is a BIG point. Never believe a person who starts their sentence with ‘I’m not a fan, BUT’. Its obvious they are. Especially when these people make it abundantly and OVERWHELMINGLY CLEAR what side they are STAUNCHLY on, by not having the decency to concede a glaringly obvious point. No one can be unbiased in this case.

    And it is apparent, that the mother is not the money-grubbing ‘leech’ the fans so callously and absolutely disgustingly call the poor family. Of course, his fans come out with the typical ‘it means nothing’ etc. Don’t bother. We can see right through you. And your discomfort at this revelation is all too clear.

  7. HERB Says:

    THE FAMILY IS NOT POOR, THEY HAVE RECIEVED THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. MONEY FROM JC PENNY, MONEY FROM OTHERS. THIS IS NOT A POOR FAMILY SO STOP SAYING THAT. ALSO YOU DO NOT HAVE TO BE A FAN TO SEE THRU THE LIES. SINCE YOU ARE FOR THE FAMILY SALLY YOU TRY TO EXPLAIN THE LIES AND THE CHANGING STORIES, I GUESS THAT MEANS NOTHING TO YOU, AND YOUR DISCOMFORT AT THIS REVELATION IS ALL TO CLEAR

  8. Gail Says:

    ok ok I admit it….”i am bias” Bias about taking in all the facts. Bias about waiting to hear the defence as well as the prosecution, bias about someone having a fair trial, which so far has not been the case at all. And END by saying that I am not a Jackson fan.

  9. Emily Says:

    Sally you also make it “ubundantly and overwhelmingly clear which side you are staunchly on.”

  10. lucy Says:

    I can’t believe so many of you are sooooo caught up in this. I got on to see if there was a verdict, and found that some are obsessed with this. What’s up? Sorry Jacko, I hope your not guilty, but don’t put yourself in this position in the type of society that we live in. You are asking for it whether you are guilty or not.