Does An Accused Child Molester Deserve Our Adulation?
CELEBRITY JUSTICE
Victim Or Predator? Making Sense Of The Good, The Bad & The Ugly Of Michael Jackson
DOES A DEAD ACCUSED CHILD MOLESTER DESERVE OUR ADULATION AND SYMPATHY?
As the media feverishly feed us titillating tidbits on the bizarre life and death of Pop's most compelling personality, competing storylines boil down to that question.
The most viperous attack on the collective hagiography compiled since Jackson died June 25th comes from U.S. Rep. Peter King (NY-R), who posted a video on YouTube excoriating the media for being "too politically correct" in its posthumous coverage of Jackson.
"This guy was a pervert," King says. "He was a child molester. He was a pedophile. And to be giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country?"
Keeping King company is former music executive John Niven, who wrote a scathing editorial about media coverage for the Independent.
"From every news channel to all the quality papers, there has been wholesale collusion in the notion that 'he was a great artist and, yes, there was some, umm, troubling stuff later on, but let's forget all that right now," writes Niven, described as a "writer and former A&R (artist and repertoire) man."
"At this point let me state my own position baldly,'' Niven goes on. "I believe that, at least in his later life, Michael Jackson was an active, predatory paedophile…Personally I believe the allegations are very real. Child sex experts will tell you the same thing over and over again: kids don't make this stuff up."
King and Niven's venom contrasts sharply from the image of loving father and gentle soul portrayed by Jackson's friends and cohorts.
"My family always maintained our belief that Michael was innocent in both (sexual exploitation) cases," Deepak Chopra's daughter Mallika, who grew up visiting Neverland, purportedly wrote. "Those that were close to Michael, all would admit he was quirky and had bad judgment at times. But to think Michael could abuse a child was unfathomable in my mind.''
Brad Sundberg, the technical engineer for several of Jackson's projects, also dismissed the abuse charges in an interview with an Alabama newspaper.
"There's a huge difference between loving kids and wanting to be around kids and any level of sexuality," he said. "Did he make some mistakes in judgment? Absolutely. But, he was not the reclusive monster he was made out to be."
The verdict is unanimous about MJ's talent. As Los Angeles braces for an onslaught of postmordem Jacksonmania, and celebrities line up to once again crown the deceased "King of Pop," what remains unresolved is whether he was victim or abuser.
Though twice accused of sexual molestation, Jackson was never convicted by a jury. And though America's jurisprudence is based on the belief that suspects are innocent until proven guilty, we all know the truth is fluid and hard to prove incontrovertibly.
Despite King's protest, it seems pointless to suggest that people stop celebrating Michael Jackson. The more interesting question is this: if we assume he's guilty, do we ignore his music and his magic? If "Wacko Jackson" was really a manipulative child abuser, do we deny his contributions to pop culture, dance, video?
Is a suspected child molester also entitled to our adulation? Or do we integrate both the "good" and the "bad" to reach a more unsettling, mysterious and complex picture?
That's the question that each of us has to answer -- and will likely be wrestling with for years. For as the Los Angeles Times' Mary McNamara writes, "The excavation has just begun because Michael Jackson is a national mystery, his death of Rosebudian proportions."
Tags: Michael Jackson
Comments
1.You really got to admit that he was the most famous person ,since you that hate him know just what happened with so many details. 2.To make it clearer:there are 2 cases that refer to MJ and pedophilia.1A family threaten to sue him in 1993 ,because he molested their son.2.There is a criminal trial against him for him raping a boy in 2005. 1993 case:He pays 20 million to the kid & his family so they don't sue him for pedophilia and that's all.And many people say:he paid ,then he's guilty.First of all if an asshole rapes your underage kid what do you do?You get 20 million and say fine,for some more money you can rape him once or twise more.If someone molests my kid I would sue his ass and make sure that he stays in jail till he dies. 2.When someone kills a person and pays his family some money what do you think that the goverment and the court does?They say fine ,since you've paid and the agree's not to sue you ,ok.No matter how much you've paid the family has no right to make a civil case against you ,but the court starts a criminal one and you got to prison no matter. So naturally neverlend ,Jackson and everything else was searched.They found NO DNA ,NO EVIDENCE ,no nothing.Otherwise there was going to be a criminal case against him and he would be in jail. Of course there are other things like the kid admiting that everything was a scam 2 years ago,because of that him not talking to his parents since 10 years ,and a phone conversation in which the father says that he's gonna make big money and his gonna ruin Jackson...
2.2005 case.Here the goverment serches neverland ,Jackson ,questions some whitneses and the family that wants to start a trial against MJ.And they start a criminal trial.There are many things to say about it.Too many facts that the family states don't match and are false.99/100% of the whitnesses against Michael are ex,fired employees from Neverlend,or people that lost cases for money against MJ.The D.A tries to falsify evidence against Michael(showing a porn magazine to the kid in court ,without him wearing gloves and THEN thesting it for prints).The fact that the mother has other false cases she started just for money.The fact that they claim MJ raped the kid after the film Living with MJ,the fact that they made a video before the trial in which they say that he's 100% innocent...But the main thing is that we have a verdict that says :NOT GUILTY. And of course everybody could say :yes ,but i think he's a pedophile But 1 of all you disagree with the american justice system. 2.Why don't you think for a moment that he's innocent?Why don't you look from the other point of view?Don't you know that people can LIE just for money?After all the man had billions of dollars.Why work work when you can sue Michael Jackson? 3.MJ was beaten by his dad,he had to perform all the time since the age of 5.He was fowelled by paparazzi all the time since the age of 5.He had no normal life.Imagine if you can't do anything wrong because 100 photographers are taking your picture all the time.He had no childhood at all.That's why he loved kids.They're very innocent,fair and good.They were his only friends.But in todays world there's no such thing as innocent and pure.A grown man plays with a kid.There has to be something really wrong here.
And i don't think that if he was a pedo he would have donated so MUCH money to charity and specifically to kids charity.He would say he loves kids ,and would visit sick kids and help them.If i was a pedophile i would do my "work" hidden and quick and hope nobody understands.And would definetly not say that i love kids in fron of the whole world. I have made tons of research and read a couple of books before forming my opinion.I think everybody who says MJ is a pedo should do the same ,because: Just because you read it in a magazine Or see it on the TV screen Don't make it factual
Posted by: eva | January 27, 2011 07:20 PM
MJ was a crowd pleasing performer.
As a human being he was a failure.
I don't care how bad his childhood was. None of us chooses our parents or they way we're raised,but as adults we can choose the way we react to any bad situation.
In his mind, I'm sure that he did not hurt any children. But grown men do NOT invite children to sleepovers. In their beds. Period.
Grown men don't give "Jesus Juice" to children.
Grown men just don't behave the way did around children. I don't care how fucked up his childhood was. There are child abuse cases way worse than his...he is not unique in that respect.
Was he this virtuous father that everyone is painting him to be?
I don't know how good of a parent one can be when they're high on narcotics and in and out of plastic surgeries all the time. And every time they go out they have to drape themselves in fabric or feathers. To avoid the paparazzi? To avoid kidnappers? Like he is the only rich and famous person to have kids that would be of interest to unsavory elements? Please.
How screwed up do these kids have to be when their black father, who looks like a white woman has several white kids and one of them doesn't even have a mother named on the birth certificate. A book could be written about that fuckery.
Give Jackson his kudos for being an entertainer...but beyond that, this idolization is just sick and does not say much for the collective humanity of this world. We are sorely lacking in role models and heros when the likes of Michael Jackson has people weeping in the streets...people who never even met him. It's pathetic.
Posted by: S | July 7, 2009 07:50 AM