…that the allegations against Michael Jackson are true…
…can they prosecute the parents of the child for gross stupidity while they’re at it?
I mean, come on, seriously…show of hands now…how many people here, after Jackson talked about how he cuddles with kids in bed…would let their 12 year old stay overnight with the guy? Do these people have bricks for brains or what?
And no, I’m not saying that (if it’s true) Jackson should be excused because the victims brought it on themselves. I’m saying, geez, where the HÊLL were the parents if/when this happened?
PAD
• 
In the LAW & ORDER episode based around the “Michael Jackson dangles baby out window” (or whatever) event, the parents were handsomely paid to allow the celebrity to, ah, avail himself of their child (they need money to pay for medical treatment for their baby, to add some shade of gray to the situation).
Just a thought….
Maybe the parents were too busy picking out their new milti-million dollar home while they waited for little Billy to return home. A small sacrifice in order to line their pockets with lots of extortion money.
I’ll admit that I’m not a parent, nor do I anticipate ever becoming one. Still…
I can’t see how I’d care if the current allegations against Mr. Jackson are true. Or whether the previous ones are. After hearing all the creeping stuff about sleeping together, I can’t see how I would possibly want any kid of mine (or a relative’s, or a friend’s, or a complete stranger’s) to be left alone with the guy. He’s just too creepy. Even if he were totally innocent, I’d worry that I was teaching the kid that weird behavior like that is okay instead of downright dangerous.
Without knowing what actually happened, it is difficult to judge the parents – if Michael Jackson is indeed guilty in this case.
Unfortunately it is true that a parent can`t watch a child all the time. There is only so much you can do, you can`t live the life for the child.
That the police searched his ranch and that Jackson is wanted by the police now means that they must have found something that prompted that decision.
Hopefully something will finally happen now. For example, if someone who is not a celebrity would publicly admit to take children into his bed and let his baby dangle over the balcony, he would be in trouble.
It’s very difficult for me to have any form of pity for Mr. Jackson. Then again, ANY celebrity who has a Halloween mask made after them can’t expect anything other than pity.
We just had this discussion here at the office, the consensus was one of three things…
1> Parents (and maybe child) see dollar signs (odds 3-1, only because a civil suit would have been better)
2> Parents simply didn’t care. (odds 2-1, sadly)
3> Child originally did not tell parents what was happening (odds 6-1, otherwise known as ‘I am going to the mall with Bobby syndrome).
Then again, ANY celebrity who has a Halloween mask made after them can’t expect anything other than pity.
Hey, that’s not nice to say about Mr Shatner! (sorry, Halloween movie joke)
i will tell you where the parents were, sitting at home with visions of large amounts of cash they are gonna get after false accusations.
While there might be criminal charges that could be persued against the parents, unfortunately stupidity itself is not illegal. If it was, a whole lot of people from middle management positions right on up to the higher tiers of politics would be up on charges! 🙂
Meanwhile, if Michael Jackson is guilty (and remember folks, a man IS innocent until proven guilty, even him) then they should throw the book at him, and his celebrity status and any possible leniency that might grant, be dámņëd!
Don’t you know, Peter, parents aren’t responsible for their children?
That’s why we have people to complain about the content of every television series, movie and CD for, to protect them for us.
Coincidence must be life’s way of making you think.
I just posted on another site regarding the idea of “Innocent until proven guilty” in regards to an assault with sexual circumstances at a local high school. Granted I’m not a big fan Michael Jackson or his… I guess ‘lifestyle’ is the most applicable word. I wonder, however, if such a high-sounding notion such as presumed innocence retains it’s integrity if we decide not to apply it to everyone.
Yes, I believe there to be various issues that tumble about between Michael Jacksons ears and, no I wouldn’t allow a child in my care to be alone with him, not even supervised by me for that matter. I will also not presume guilt, since America has become the Land of the Great Lawsuit.
If the facts clearly indicate his guilt, however, I say hang the bášŧárd.
Salutations,
Mitch
Why any parent would let their child near Jackson is beyond me. I’d say only in Neverneverland (or maybe Neverland Ranch) could you believe Michael Jackson isn’t at the very least obsessively interested in children.
Do I think he’s a pedophile? Gut reaction is yeah but I can’t prove it. I think back to when I was a kid 20 years ago. I liked his music then. Now anytime I think of him, undoubtedly when his name pops up over some weirdness or police action, I just get disgusted.
He needs to be kept away from the public at large, and children completely. He also deserves a fair trial. If he is somehow found innocent then such is life. If he’s found guilty he needs to go away for a long time. Hopefully until his kids are adults and beyond his caring touch.
This time they cant be paid off thankfully. The parents only see dollar signs in front of their eyes. Really a shame. I think his children should be taken away too. He hasn’t surrendered yet that I know of. No 20 million dollar pay off this time around. Im tired of people making excuses for hi,. He is not normal. No 45 year old man sleeps with children.
Unless of course they are pedophiles. Jackson pedophile? No, just an out and out nutcase? Yes. Would he hurt children? Hard to say but just look at they way he dresses his own kids??? He has a serious illiness that needs to be adressed and no want seems to want to address it.
There really are some people who still adore Michael. His fans are , like, harcore. They sent death threats to the family of the kid that got settlement dough over an abuse case. Maybe these parents beleive MJ innocence. Or maybe they callously sent the child in with Michael in order to sue him afterwards.
Let’s see,…
He admitted to sleeping with kids;
he dangled a baby from a building;
he gave a 20 million $ pay-off to the family of a kid he “allegedly” abuse.
I dunno, why would he even give that money if… He doesn’t seem to live in this world… I know, it’s all speculation.
Is he really Peter Pan, like he says, and if so, what is his secondary mutation?
I used to be a hardcore fan in the 80’s when Thriller topped the charts. I was always a fan of his and his brother’s music but thats no excuse for his behavior.
PAD,
The most surreal quote I saw on this Michael Jackson situation was from Uri Geller (an alleged friend) who said that Michael is “gullible and naive”. I guess he is, if the notorious fraud Uri Geller is his friend. Strangely I recall a Marvel comic from the 70s where Uri Geller appeared and demonstrated his “mental powers”. I have it in my collection somewhere. Anybody remember where he appeared?
Dennis
Stupidity? Try sending the parents up for pimping.
Geller appeared in an issue of Daredevil; I’m thinking around the early #120s.
From what I understand, the child told their therapist, who then went to the police/DA’s office.
Now, I don’t like Michael. He’s an incredibly talented genius, and a freak to the tenth power. I also don’t like his antisemitic comments of days past. All that aside, let’s play hypothetical:
He honestly doesn’t think he’s capable of harming a child. His home is a giant playground an amusement park. If the parents know Michael, i.e., record executives, fellow celebrities, what have you, this becomes less farfetched. I can see leaving a child (not ALONE with him) among other people at Neverland. This actually seems more realistic to me than an episode of Days of our Lives.
Having said all that, he’s a creep. I think he did it, and I don’t think he’s capable of understanding why he’s wrong. And he’s a top-notch performer; maybe part of this was a performance for the parents. Get me an IV thorazine drip and a straitjacket, stat.
To be honest, I’d love to see them sock a 12-gauge shotgun in his ear and pull the trigger.
Sure, the resulting spray (or shower, even) of blood, skull fragments and brains would be messy -and would surely stain a shirt if some happened to land on a person- but the world would be better off if the better portion of Jackson’s skull were vaporized.
While I’ll wait for some evidence of guilt first before siding with Andrew, the minute that evidence is found (I don’t need a “legal conviction”, look at O.J. Simpson), THEN I say put this (and ALL) child molester(s) down permanently.
Gut reaction with all I’ve seen and heard of MJ, is that he’s a sick, guilty freak. Being a “rich eccentric” is NOT a license to do any gøddámņ thing you want, despite the way this country (the USA) appears to work….
So…is it wrong that I’m kinda hoping we get a high-speed freeway chase out of this?
It is? Oh. Sorry.
On the subject of evidence: They apparently had enough for an arrest warrant. For whatever that’s worth.
As far as the folks: Sadly, making incredibly stupid decisions is not a crime. Knowingly and willingly putting a child under your care in a potentially harmful situation, however, is. So the question becomes, “What did they know, and when did they know it?”
Either way, as I see it, they could be judged unfit to care for a child, and have the boy (it is a boy, right?) removed from their care.
CBS announced that they’re going to pull their upcoming TV special on Michael Jackson. Where’s the mass outcry against this move? Where are the cries of censorship? 😉
First, many to most parents are idiots. True story: I work in a retail store, and a woman walked up to me with the HULK dvd, asking me if it was appropriate for her son. Assuming she knew nothing about her son, I explained that the movie was rated PG-13 and that it meant it could be too intense for anyone under thirteen. I then asked how old her son was.
“He’s three.”
I could have slapped her. A PG-13 movie (a rating supposedly called for by parents to protech kids) about a rampaging, bellowing, giant monster smashing everything — FOR A THREE YEAR OLD???
Now take that stupidity, and add in star power. Many fans of entertainers cannot imagine their idol doing anything wrong. (I’d bet there are football fans who’d love their daughters to date O.J.) I’m sure there are folks who see Michael Jackson as an erratic genius, someone persecuted by the press, someone they’d be honored to leave their children with. None are so blind as those who will not see.
And if we were arresting parents for stupidity regarding their children, we’d have to start with children’s beauty pageants and parents at kids’ sporting events shouting over a certain decibel level.
I have to say now that all this has gone down, I can’t help but wonder if Michael is eventually found guilty does the law have any ability to go after the parents of the child from 93′ who settled out of court?
I’m aware that you can’t be tried twice for the same crime but that particular accusation never went to trial, so if while searching his ranch they come across evidence on that case and with the new laws now forcing children to testify couldn’t that case be recalled now?
I also hope this dosen’t turn into the new O.J. distraction. It somehow feels wrong when all of our attention (mine included) gets pulled into these cases. This isn’t a movie–it’s a future for a person (celebrity or not) not to mention the lives of children.
First, many to most parents are idiots. True story: I work in a retail store, and a woman walked up to me with the HULK dvd, asking me if it was appropriate for her son. Assuming she knew nothing about her son, I explained that the movie was rated PG-13 and that it meant it could be too intense for anyone under thirteen. I then asked how old her son was.
“He’s three.”
I could have slapped her. A PG-13 movie (a rating supposedly called for by parents to protech kids) about a rampaging, bellowing, giant monster smashing everything — FOR A THREE YEAR OLD???
My friends have a 2 1/2 year old who loves the Hulk, Spider-Man, Harry Potter, and even LOTR. They own the Hulk DVD and they have shown PARTS of it to him. They don’t show him the dog scence or anything really violent, but the Hulk vs the tanks is not that bad.
David
First dibs that Roman Polanski will direct “The Trial of Michael Jackson.”
If not “gross stupidity” how about “child endangerment”? At the very least, if I ever lost my mind and decided it was cool to let my son spend two or three days unsupervised locked up in some adult guy’s bedroom, I would hope that the governmental powers that be would at least take my son from me for his own safety.
Lee Houston, Jr: Meanwhile, if Michael Jackson is guilty (and remember folks, a man IS innocent until proven guilty, even him) then they should throw the book at him
Ghoulish as it sounds, the general sentiment at my workplace is that he’s going to run, or leave open the option to run. As I write this, Jacko’s lawyers are negotiating a settlement for his arrest (and not that I’m a big advocate for a police state, but big money or no big money, since when do cops negotiate with a suspect on the terms of their arrest? What is our legal system coming to?), and Jacko’s retention of his passports seems to be a big sticking point.
Now, getting back to the concept of a fair trial, the thinking is this: Jacko’s going to run, because what jury in America wouldn’t convict him on child molestation charges? I mean, given his past behavior, his ‘reputation’ as a parent, and his general high-strangeness approach toward to world at large, who would refuse to believe that Jacko is a pedophile? I don’t think he could get a fair trial in America if he tried, regardless of the flimsiness or strength of evidence against him. I wouldn’t be surpised to hear that he’s pulled a Roman Pulanski and fled to Europe within the next few days. It may be the only option he sees as a viable one.
Regarding PAD’s thoughts, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that this kid bringing charges against him was either set up or closely monitored by the Justice Department… they’ve been after Jackson for years since the trial with the other child who claimed to be molested was settled out of court. In fact, one of the prosecutors from the first incident has gone on record stating that the original case was not closed, but put in suspended animation.
I hate to be this cynical, but perhaps the parents of this new child volunteered to use him as bait for the Justice Department, and saw the million dollar ‘sleepover payment’ as an bonus. I know that sounds both incredibly conspiratorial and unlikely to boot, but if we can have the kind of bad parenting that led to the Columbine shootings, can ‘bait for Jacko’ parenting be that far behind? I mean, what other reason would a decent, God-fearing parent have for letting their child sleep over at Michael Jackson’s?
The OTHER John Byrne
He’s a sick fûçk, period, and I’m sick of this moral relativist bûllšhìŧ that his rich and famous friends are using to defend him, like comedian/actor Eddie Griffin, who says the Jackson is a close personal friend of his.
Sure he is, Eddie. The vast majority of molestors know their victims, and loads of sex criminals typically have crowds of neighbors who invariably say, “I couldn’t believe it, he was such a nice, quiet guy.” I’d like to know how these people think such criminals are really supposed to behave. Most of them don’t stand out in the middle of the street in a trenchcoat with candy in one hand and their dìçk in the other. They’re typically normal-seeming people who have lots of “close personal friends,” and while the latter can be said of Michael Jackson, the former certainly cannot.
Baerbel Haddrell: Unfortunately it is true that a parent can`t watch a child all the time.
Luigi Novi: Yeah, but that doesn’t mean you have to leave the child with Michael Jackson any of the time.
Michael C Lorah: Don’t you know, Peter, parents aren’t responsible for their children? That’s why we have people to complain about the content of every television series, movie and CD for, to protect them for us.
Luigi Novi: Not to mention a certain other pertinent medium that you haven’t mentioned…… 🙂
Dennis Donohoe: Strangely I recall a Marvel comic from the 70s where Uri Geller appeared and demonstrated his “mental powers”. I have it in my collection somewhere. Anybody remember where he appeared?
Luigi Novi: Tom provided the rough numbers, but I know it was in 1976. Magician and debunker of all things supernatural James “The Amazing” Randi mentioned it (and displayed two panels from that issue) on his site in his Weekly Commentary for July 12, 2002 at http://www.randi.org/jr/071202.html
Okay I still love the man’s older work.
But he’s become some weird freak bizarro version of what’s before…and honestly the parents should be beaten along with Michael.
I could have slapped her. A PG-13 movie (a rating supposedly called for by parents to protech kids) about a rampaging, bellowing, giant monster smashing everything — FOR A THREE YEAR OLD???
Geez, calm down. At least the woman had some sense to ask if it was appropriate or not (she could very well not be familiar with the movie rating codes – or unaware they were printed on the package).
I have to say now that all this has gone down, I can’t help but wonder if Michael is eventually found guilty does the law have any ability to go after the parents of the child from 93′ who settled out of court?
I’d like to see that family donate the $20 mil they received from Jacko to a childrens abuse fund (or something similar). Oh wait, they’d have to first sell their new multi-million dollar homes first.
“I could have slapped her. A PG-13 movie (a rating supposedly called for by parents to protech kids) about a rampaging, bellowing, giant monster smashing everything — FOR A THREE YEAR OLD???”
I am that lady, and I’m going to have a firm talk with your manager about getting you fired, James Lynch.
nekouken
Dammit, I signed it. Otherwise, the perfect crime.
Anyway, on to the topic:
Who would leave a kid with Michael Jackson? Forget about that; who would leave themselves alone with Michael Jackson? He could be %100 innocent, never having intended anything sexual with any of those children, but he’s still a creepy bášŧárd.
When the original allegations surfaced against him, I concocted a theory that to this day remains unproven: I think Michael Jackson is insanely jealous of Bill Cosby, and has tried to replicate the Cos’s career for himself. Not the comedy part, obviously (though that laughable duet he sang with Eddie Murphy, also around that time, comes close), but the kids part. Cos has been hanging around with and telling stories to children for the better part of thirty years. The Great Gloved One also loves kids, and wants people to see him as this great fatherly figure the way we do Bill Cosby. Unfortunately, Joe Jackson permantly screwed up Michael’s ability to understand what makes a person “fatherly,” and instead of endearing, we just found it disturbing.
In short, I think he means well, but he’s got no perspective.
That Uri Geller fellow is equally pervy in my opinion.
Anytime over here in England there is a discussion about Micheal he is trotted out for his comments as Micheal’s best friend. He is a debunked psyhic who acts like we have forgotten about his being debunked.
He appeared on the English version of “I am a celebrity get me out of here” and acted like a total perv. to point that he creeped some of the ladies out!
They deserve each other.
> i will tell you where the parents were, sitting at home with visions of large amounts of cash they are gonna get after false accusations.
In which case, Jackson’s the one who is incredibly dim because, after the first time he got in hot water, he should bloody well make sure there were ALWAYS independent witnesses around to corroborate his side of such potential messes. Unpleasant, but always a possibility when you’re a rich celebrity. (Note to possible detractors: I don’t care about the guy and haven’t followed the cases, so I have insufficient data for a meaningful response vis guilt or innocence.)
(Hmm … maybe I shouldn’t have written that. Now they’ll be after me as a potential juror? No, wrong country. *sigh of relief*)
>On the subject of evidence: They apparently had enough for an arrest warrant. For whatever that’s worth.
Or they think they did. Given how many wrongful arrests there are in any given year, we can’t be sure. Though this time one would hope they’d learned from the OJ case.
> CBS announced that they’re going to pull their upcoming TV special on Michael Jackson. Where’s the mass outcry against this move? Where are the cries of censorship? 😉
Unsure about the laws down there, but maybe they did it as a pre-emptive move to avoid the Dept of Justice doing it to them to help prevent [further?] jury tainting?
Besides, the film will probably be worth more AFTER a possible trial.
>I could have slapped her. A PG-13 movie (a rating supposedly called for by parents to protech kids) about a rampaging, bellowing, giant monster smashing everything — FOR A THREE YEAR OLD???
Nonsense. Note the following.
“… a frightful giantess, with one great eye in the middle of her forehead.
…
‘Fe, fa, fi-fo-fum,
I smell the breath of an Englishman.
Let him be alive or let him be dead,
I’ll grind his bones to make my bread.’
‘Wife,’ cried the Giant, ‘there is a man in the castle. Let me have him for breakfast.'”
(Exerpt from Jack and the Beanstalk)
We grew up on a diet of such things and I don’t recall any of my friends needing therapy or turning into serial killers because of it. Are kids that much more more delicate nowadays?
since when do cops negotiate with a suspect on the terms of their arrest? What is our legal system coming to?
It’s not that uncommon for a suspect to make arrangements through a lawyer to get arrested at a certain time and place. I’d imagine that any person with access to a lawyer would contact the lawyer as soon as they learned an arrest warrent had been issued for them, and the lawyer would negotiate the surrender from there… whether to insure the safety of the arrest or to minimize embarrassment.
Haven’t read much on Jackson’s negotiation, but at that level of wealth, I’d imagine he’s got a better class of lawyer, thus the negotiation process is more elaborate.
PAD,
My thoughts exactly… I have a 7 year old girl, No way, No how would she ever be within a thousand feet of this lunatic.
I think it’s a sorry thing to say this, but it’s probably true that the parent$ were most likely meeting / planning with their lawyer$ for just such an event.
I can’t help but be reminded of the Bill Mumy (?) all-powerful kid in the Twilight Zone episode. Smallish child is given awesome power and becomes utterly corrupt.
Jackson is just such a person. Pre-pube singing sensation, with no sort of childhood whatsoever, in a make-believe world called Hollywood (or whatever the recording industry is). He has enough money and talent for just about anyone to do whatever he asks, and all he tries to do is recapture a childhood he doesn’t understand, unfortunately hampered with adult hormones and desires the he probably also doesn’t understand.
This is in no way a defense of Jackson, but he is so far out of touch with the world that jail is not appropriate for him, a mental ward is. I can’t help but wonder if the DA wanted Jackson to run and take the whole mess out of their hands. Otherwise, why issue an order for arrest when the guy is out of jurisdiction and has the ability to snap his fingers and be whisked away? A trial will be a circus; sentencing will be impossible (Jackson in prison? No way, kiddies. That’s a death sentence.)
Can an insanity defense be used in this kind of case? I think he qualifies. I also think his parents should be thrown in jail for giving Jackson the (lack of) childhood they gave him.
He has no clue of reality or morality. The guy is a danger to himself as well as others. This is going to be an ugly tragedy and Jackson is utterly uncomprehending of it all.
My wife Laura and I have been following this since the story broke here in Italy last night. I just want to share my thoughts and opinions.
First of all as someone here said, Michael Jackson is innocent until he is proven guilty. For this reason I will think he is innocent until someone shows solid proof that the man molested children. I said this in 1993, and I’m saying it now. So far, I’ve seen nothing that says they found anything Neverland. The arrest warrant could be based something else. Speaking of the arrest warrant, why did they not issue it right away instead of waiting till yesterday to issue it? That seems a little strange to me. There’s so many unknown factors in the Jackson case.
JHL
That the police searched his ranch and that Jackson is wanted by the police now means that they must have found something that prompted that decision.
“Still a Rookie…”
BTW, According to The Sun, the parents in question in this case aren’t in it for the money, but for justice…
Then again, typing that last sentence, I’m not sure I can believe it…
This whole matter was under investigation prior to the airing of the Martin Bashir documentary. And the alleged event occurred long before an investigation took place.
The more logical question would be why would anyone expose their child to Jackson *after* the 1993 allegation. That’s just too problematic.
As for why he settled originally, he probably believed it was cheaper than a court trial and would allow him to go on with his life. Obviously, if he were innocent, it was a boneheaded move, as it ruined his career and reputation (being perceived as “weird” is different from being perceived as a sex offender).
It’s difficult to apply common sense to the world of Michael Jackson, but I don’t think an actual child molestor would be so… flamboyant. I think he’s really a tremendously maladjusted, socially retarded man who certainly shouldn’t be allowed to have children (he will lose all interest in the ones he has once they hit puberty most likely) but it’s possible that he wouldn’t hurt a child and people simply take advantage of his bizarre nature. There’s no screening process on this “make-a-wish” kids or their parents. But we’ll see how this case plays out and as the evidence is released.
Wacko Jacko is a sick little monkey. It’s not the 1993 allegations weren’t front page headlines for months. The fact that the parents let their kid within 50 feet of that freak shows gross inexcusable negligence on their part.
Even though the previous allegations never resulted in any charges, what parent in their right mind would take the chance that there may have been something to them?
I figure, though, that while his lawyers are “negotiating” his surrender (why is it that only rich defendents have the right to negotiate the terms of their arrest?, he’s on a plane to France so that he can rent Ira Einhorn’s old apartment and hang out with Roman Polanski.
If he does go to prison, though, at least we’ll spared the annual updates from the media on whatever plastic surgery this nutjob is doing to himself.
Oh, and his music sucks, too!
two or three days unsupervised locked up in some adult guy’s bedroom
One point to note, at this time I don’t think we know what is alleged to have occurred and over what time frame… That’s a key point.
since when do cops negotiate with a suspect on the terms of their arrest
Well actually, it makes a great deal of sense from the law enforcement side. 1> They don’t have to send out an arrest squad (saves money and time and is much safer for the officers) 2> It’s a PR plus for both sides (‘our client is cooperating fully’ versus the ‘perp walk’). Negotiations are often over things like bail, media access, security, etc.
What’s a heck of a lot more disturbing to me is that we have again as a country shifted into Media Circus mode. While we all wonder ‘What did WackoJacko do’, complete with breathless reports on that bastion of journalism, Extra or whatever, Congress passed a 23 billion energy bill with Tax cuts for oil companies. Anyone read anything about THAT on the front page?