- NEW!
by unknown on March 6th, 2007
I feel pretty safe saying that he did. In fact if I had to place a bet on it I would place it on yes.
by Magenta on November 28th, 2007
"A" little boy?
No, I don't think he molested "a" little boy.
I think he molested a bunch of little boys and then paid their parents off, thus making the kids into whores and their parents into pimps.
by Vashtar on May 16th, 2007
Yes, the child identified a birthmark on his penis.
-
Duplicate. http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/120582
I'm sure that's what you meant anyway (yes yes, I know there's a difference between pedos and molesting pedos, so no need to reply about that).
by Babycakes on August 19th, 2008
He may not THINK what he was doing was wrong but I believe he is a perverted adult and guilty on all counts.
by Mirage V2.0 AWOL on March 6th, 2007
He sure gave them "Jesus Juice".
That was a strange thing to do.
His motivations are questionable.
by flo on July 29th, 2007
My classmate and I were assigned to write an essay about this topic (debate). Basically prosecution v. defense. Guess what? We read it aloud to the class. Not only did I get a 98% on my paper, I got an astounding response from my peers. Anyway, here is a sample summary of it:
Contrary to popular belief, Michael Jackson is NOT a pedophile. I know this is common public perception, and many might assume that I only believe in his innocence because I happen to be a "fan" of sorts, but I know he and why he is not, and this is truly my unbiased conclusion.
The parent of the first accuser, Evan Chandler, forced his son (Jordan) to make the child molestation allegations in 1993. He had requested money, he was not offered or "payed off" (another popular mythos). He was actually caught on tape during a telephone conversation, speaking about his plans of extortion but this news report got little play. The case settled out of court, and Michael's insurance company paid an undisclosed amount of money to Evan Chandler (much to Michael's dismay, which he legally cannot speak about in public). Listen to the telephone conversation in a news report here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIUdghjwn3E
Jordan Chandler did not testify. Who accuses someone of a crime but does not testify? Someone who knows that said person did not harm them or anyone, thus feeling too guilty to be held lying under oath. Evan Chandler got his money and ran. More untold details and information about this situation hasn't made the general public (surprise, surprise). In 2005, when [Jordan] he was called to be a potential witness in the 2005 case, he again, did not testify and went out of his way to make it known that he would not.
In 2006, Jordan Chandler accused his father [Evan] of abuse. The accuser, now 26, says his ex-dentist dad Evan Chandler "struck him on the head from behind with ... (dumbbell) weight ... sprayed his eyes with Mace or pepper spray, and tried to choke him" last year, according to court documents filed in New Jersey. This too, was not reported to mass media.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Chandler
In 2003, a mentally ill mother Janet Arvizo -- who has a past of similar extortions and coaching her children to lie under oath as well -- was aided by the help and was actually sought out by Santa Barbara California district attorney [Thomas Sneddon Jr.] in 2003; and in particular, making her son Gavin Arvizo [the child sick with cancer who was a part of the 'Make a Wish' foundation, seen in Martin Bashir's documentary of that same year; he had recovered from Cancer later by than. His family formed a relationship with Michael in the course of a few years. His last dying wish was to meet a few well known peoples, which included Michael Jackson and Chris Tucker. This is why Chris Tucker was asked to testify in court as a witness. He was on the defensive] to make the accusations playing the 'victim'.
If you read the testimonies from Gavin and his brothers and sisters, all their take on what [supposedly] happened not only contradicted each other's, but that of the mother's too. They were often speaking with many "ums", "like" "I don't remember" and were often rewording their answers or took them back when asked the question(s) for a second time. Later on, they came out admittedly while tearing, that nothing happened to them.
Read the court transcripts here:
http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/08/09/flo-anthony-and-dr-lieberman/
http://www.mjjforum.com/main/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=0&func=selectfolder&filecatid=5
and here, if you care to know what a mother's feelings on this subject matter:
http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/07/11/mama-jackson-defends-her-son/
Michael was later proven innocent and vindicated on June 13th, 2005. Before anyone concludes that it was only his fame and money that got him to walk free, please note how the justice system in America works. No you can't "pay" the judge or jury like so many people try and justify his verdict; the accused on trial has no contact with either one of them to do such a thing. I've heard that excuse too many times than I care to be reminded of them. The jury was full of Caucasian, conservative, and non Jackson fans, who were seriously dedicated (did not read newspapers, magazines, television or any biased or tabloid media) to their jobs. As well as Judge Melville, who made it clear that his celebrity would not factor in his verdict. There was no evidence in neither case, no proof, nothing.
Both cases and fake "witnesses" and "victims" have been led and sought out by the same district attorney Thomas Sneddon Jr. of Santa Barbara County, California. Who in opinion, seems to have some vendetta against Michael Jackson for over a decade. He has been seen to attempt desperate cases on Michael Jackson since 1993, and than again in 1994, 1996, 2001 and finally, 2003, which he again, lost. He denied this, but was directly proven wrong [see bottom].
They ran a search warrant at his request several times, extensively, spent more amount of money in any other crime convicts, and never once found a shred of evidence (the report that they found child pornography was also false. What they did find, was actually heterosexual and legal pornography such as Playboy. Interesting that they found a way twist a fact around in attempted benefit for the media to sink their teeth into). Trust me, if you read the court transcripts, you'd be surprised how much of the real 'proof' is literally contradicted word for word, everything we heard on any sensationalized mediums.
Thomas Sneddon Jr.'s statements concerning the case were all proven either to be contradictions or plain false by several transcripts? Watch here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch
Last, but not least, most logically; Michael Jackson's Neverland Ranch is 3,000+ acres with nearly hundreds of employees (from chefs to his nanny Grace Rwaramba to maids, etc). This means nearly hundreds of people who are witness to any possible inappropriate behavior that dealt with children. These children are underprivileged kids from inner cities or other circumstances, come in bus loads with their parents or entire families to visit the Ranch.
His house is large enough for guestrooms; the children and their parents stay in those rooms -- NOT Michael's own personal bedroom. When Michael said he was sharing "a bed" with them in the documentary, he was referring to this; his room is actually two floors. He was in no way implying that he slept in the same bed. He specifically said he slept on the floor if the any guest decided to stay with him; which his ex-wife Lisa Marie Presley has supported stated in an interview with Diane Sawyer in 1995, that she has witnessed this. They follow him everywhere they go. She also included that had she seen anything wrong, she would of "hang him from a tree'.
Other common mythos like 'jesus juice' or 'homosexual porn' were propaganda from the prosecution side. In fact, in the court transcripts again (I wonder if anyone ever bothers to read them to back up their "guilty!" claims) it was revealed that he did NOT have any homosexual or child pornography [isn't that illegal?] it was heterosexual magazines, like Playboy. Everything that you've heard [rumors] that people use to dispute his innocence were sensationalized unbiased "news" reports, which people mistakenly take it and run with it.
Regardless of what others may claim, he is 100% innocent without any doubt. In addition to Michael's family, many well known people who know him on a personal level and/or people who were called and testified -- all of them were on the defense. Some examples were Jay Leno, Macaulay Culkin, Wade Robson, Brett Barnes, ex-wife Debbie Rowe (his other ex could not testify under legal 1993 situation) Chris Tucker (whom was apart of the Make a Wish Foundation with Michael as I mentioned earlier) other families who've visited the ranch on more than one occasion, and so on and so forth. Many of whom have been to Neverland many times -- who again, would be witness to anything inappropriate. There is NO way he could of gotten away with any said crimes. All the people on the prosecution were proved wrong. Unfortunately, the only reason you rarely see newscasts reporting on these is because of media bias. Theres obviously no ratings in the truth.
by HappyJeans on March 7th, 2007
I honestly don't know, I think he's a very weird man, but i'm sure alot of people jumped on the bandwagon to try and make money from him.
However, what I do know, is that if he had not been a huge celeb, he would not have been given the benefit of the doubt, and probably would have been put in some kind of mental institution.
by R U Sirius on March 6th, 2007
Do you think a guilty man would admit to it?
I think in a society where appearance is everything that he made some really foolish and bad mistakes. Even if it was just some good wholesome sleepovers he was going with honesty instead of political correctness and thats what got him in trouble.
Whats worse are the parents using their kids as pawns so that they could score a big pay day. The parents are worse here.
by katie7576 on August 19th, 2008
is the sky blue? Pope Catholic? grass green?
by Snowman on November 28th, 2007
Yes I do. BTW, what does this have to do with music theory???
by Anonymous on January 19th, 2007
Weird (or... "eccentric") enough for people to believe anything about him, yes. Child molester, no.
The family that accused him in the trial from 2005 admitted they lied under oath and made allegations like that against others to get a big settlement, and the mother pleaded guilty last year to fraud and perjury charges. They changed the time-line and charges and stories many times and the way the DA handled the case came across as very shady.
The accuser from the 90's had endless chances to testify in criminal court (regardless of any civil settlement) but he refused and even escaped the country to avoid subpoena. That case went to two grand juries in the mid 90's and neither believed there was enough evidence to indict.
The DA in the case created a high profile, international telephone line and website to find more victims in 2003, and even traveled to other countries over the years to find some more victims, and still found nothing.
Six dozen police officers spent a whole day raiding Neverland Ranch and went back a second time, and still found not one trace of child pornography, or Jacko would have been charged for it (a federal offense).
And I think these "little kids" were actually almost as big as he was, and probably much stronger :)
That's what I think.
by TheJoker on June 26th, 2009
Personally I think he did. He clearly had no idea whatsoever about how to act in society & his continual protestations that he 'loved' children is chillingly similar to what convicted paedophiles say. They don’t think they're hurting children either.
by -O-uknow on May 19th, 2008
Molesting? He said it was a beautiful thing.. almost spiritual.
He should've been jailed.
by Anonymous on June 16th, 2007
I don't think that Michael Jackson molestedd those little kids.
by Squirrel Face on August 19th, 2008
Yeah. I mean, the first time, ok, yeah, it could be a misunderstanding, probably not, but whatever. But a second time? Are you kidding me? Seriously? You think someone said to him at some point "You know, you kind of almost got charged with sexual molestation charages of a little boy awhile back. Maybe it's not such a good idea to be sleeping in the same bed as other peoples kids? I'm just sayin."
by Ec-nal Licensed Bootie Inspector on August 19th, 2008
No, I KNOW he IS yo...
by jake on August 19th, 2008
ABSOLUTELY!!!!WHY ELSE WOULD HE HANG WITH BOYS?
by maS elcnU on August 19th, 2008
Yes, and a pervert.
My 2 cents.
by Heo1. on August 10th, 2008
I do.That guy's sick.
by Squirrel Face on May 19th, 2008
Even if he didn't, I think it was incrediably stupid of him to let another kid sleep in his bed after the first scandal. If someone claims you're an alchoholic, and you weren't, but it caused much stress and aggrivation for you, wouldn't it be kind of stupid of you to hang out in a bar every Saturday, even if you weren't drinking? Of course it would. Based on the past, people would think you were drinking. Honestly, I don't know if he did or didn't, but he sure as hell wasn't smart about the entire thing, either way.
by MJJ on November 5th, 2007
He is Innocent!!!!!!!!! Anyone should know that!
by MJJ on November 5th, 2007
Definitely Not I KNOW he didn't I have proof his lawyer knows he's innocent and he should know.Don't worry he definitely is innocent. Trust me he is one of the sweetest people in the world.
by Kevisaurus is a Carnotaurus today on May 16th, 2007
After all Billie Jean isn't his lover, right.
I don't know if he is or isn't but he has an odd obsession to have children sleep with him in his bed at night.
Anyone else see the striking resemblance in these two pictures.
by faceshutup on April 18th, 2007
He totally did
by Vashtar on April 18th, 2007
The last kid described his penis with a birthmark on it.
/Nuff said.
by wobalome on March 7th, 2007
Let me start by saying that I am not, never will be and never have been a MIchael Jackson fan.
Look at it this way, if he has reverted to a childhood that he never had and is acting this childhood out then no I don't think he molested children, I think it was more innapropriate behaviour for an adult. After all when you were young did you not have sleepovers?. I think a lot of the accusations were money grabbing parents trying to earn a quick buck.
by cezzer on March 7th, 2007
no, i think he is just very mixed up and naive.
by American idle on March 6th, 2007
D-I-D...just look at "him"..
by devildan0269 on March 6th, 2007
He did, he's a great singer and all but I'm sorry he did it and I'm not afraid to amit that.
by xxxxxxxxxx on January 3rd, 2007
i think that yes he did do it, or he is a man that has never matured. he never really had a childhood and hes had a rough life. i can see how he could be so insecure that he feels like he can relate more with a child. to me thats the only explanation as to why he would have sleep overs at his house, and not be sexually abusing those children. either way i think the man is disturbed and needs help.
by beenaroundtheblock on January 3rd, 2007
Duh! I'm sorry, yes I do.
There's been way too much smoke for there not to be a fire somewhere, and nothing that even looks like exculpatory evidence(that marriage to Lisa Marie was pretty much a joke).
Maybe everything in the press isn't exactly the truth, but I would bet there was a lots we never even heard about.
by Lil B on June 29th, 2009
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO HE DID NOT!!!!
by pagan-babe on June 26th, 2009
Yes he did!But money talked so he was let off!
by Anonymous on April 10th, 2009
i honestly dont think so
if he did why would he admit to sleeping in the same bed as a child
if he did why would he say he loves children and perform with them
if he did why would he tirelessly promote childrens charities and donate millions of dollars to them
its easy to think he did because hes different. but he truly is a loving, caring and kind person.
by CuddlyCarla on February 27th, 2009
Considering BOTH of his accusers had parents with criminal histories for SUING PEOPLE FOR FALSE CLAIMS in their pasts, I would say anyone who believes Michael Jackson is a pedophile has either been reading too much National Enquirer or is superficial enough to think that anyone with too much plastic surgery or eccentric behavior must be a perverted criminal. A Peter Pan complex isn't a crime, nor is cosmetic surgery.
by CuddlyCarla on January 3rd, 2009
I think it's so comical that all these people are saying that he did, and yet none of you raise an eyebrow about the fact that BOTH of his accusers had parents that had criminal histories of suing people for false claims in the past. What are the odds that of all the millions of kids Jacko is exposed to a year, he decides to molest the only two who have criminal money-grubbing parents?! He's either not a pedophile or he's the most unlucky pervert in the world.
by Anonymous on December 25th, 2008
Ok this is coming from a fan...but also a guy that once believed he was a pedophile/freak. It wasn't until about a year ago that i got curious one day and decided to learn a bit more about the guy whose music i love. Believe me when you read about both cases of child abuse allegations i think you'll find that there is a lot more to the stories than the media is letting out.
Not about the child abuse cases but also learn a bit about him and his life, his childhood in particular and learn about what he has to endure every single day of his life.
I found that after i learned about him i saw that he's not what people say about him...he's actually a very decent guy with some unfortunate psychological and physical problems that are beyond his control.
Yeah sure the guy is weird, but that doesn't make him a bad person.
by roadpup2 on August 19th, 2008
In my opinion, yes. He is a creep.
by Jane on August 19th, 2008
i'm not sure. He's definitely creepy. I dont know why he wants to hang out with little boys.
by Ese1Pac on July 30th, 2008
I think he felt sad or frustrated with being a has-been and took out his anger on the little kids {poor little boys :( }
by Twista on May 19th, 2008
I do not think he molested those little kids. I think Michael Jackson was molested by those who brought him to court. For his money.
by Vampyre Bat on November 28th, 2007
He fits the classic signs of a pedophile. For years people made excuses and called him eccentric or pitied him for loosing his own childhood. While practicing law I have had these individuals as clients. If you have any individual of his age behaving in this manner with kids, while not conclusive proof, certainly would make me very suspicious. No child of mine would be in that guy's presence, let alone in his bedroom much less in the same bed with him. No one could see this coming from about 10 miles off? Wow! greed blinds people who sacrifice anything to say their son or daughter knows a celebrity much less micheal jackson. The man needs help. I hope for his sake and those of children around him he gets it.
by MJJ on November 5th, 2007
Definitely Not I KNOW he didn't I have proof his lawyer knows he's innocent and he should know.Don't worry he definitely is innocent. Trust me he is one of the sweetest people in the world.
by Nitroduck on May 16th, 2007
Yeah... You know, when I was a kid, it was always the one giving away lollipops. "here little boy... hmmm... Want a loooooolly pop?"...
Now they build "Neverland" Peter Pan themed amusement parks in their back yard.
And someone thought it was cool to let him watch the kids for the weekend... I wouldn't let him watch a video clip of mine, much less actually put them in his presence.
by unknown on May 16th, 2007
Yes I think he is. I wouldn't let my kid withing 50 miles of that weirdo.
by Whatever on May 16th, 2007
Yes I do think he is. Keep your kids away from him....
by kitty loves you on May 16th, 2007
Yes and whats more, a paedophile with lots of money which is even worse.
by El Soupy spanish for the soupy on May 16th, 2007
he certainly acts weird... and he has publicly said some STRANGE things in that regards..
by Friartuck on March 8th, 2007
Yeah, I think so. I'm certain not all of the allegations were true but something must have happened.
by Anonymous on March 7th, 2007
NO I do not think he did abuse children, money that,s what alot of people are looking for.
How Many Copies Of The Thriller Album Were Sold?
by Answerbag Staff on February 1st, 2011
| 2 people like this
What high school did singer Chris Brown attend?
by Answerbag Staff on January 31st, 2011
| 1 person likes this
How many albums has relient k sold?
by Answerbag Staff on November 8th, 2010
| 1 person likes this
Whitney Houston Died (CNN), you Would Think CNN, the Decency Not to Advertise the Scam By "Passages Malibu" When Reporting her Death?
by mdGreg on February 11th, 2012
| 1 person likes this
Remembering Whitney Houston at the height of her career, which of her songs was your favorite?
by Bornabrit on February 12th, 2012
| 4 people like this
You're reading Do you beleive that Michelle Jackson really did all thoughs things to little kids?
- which can also be phrased in the following ways:
Your favorite Q&A site is on Facebook! Become a fan to connect with the ever-growing community of Answerbaggers, share your thoughts and find out what Answerbag's up to next!
Comments
How can you be so sure?
by Boycott on August 10th, 2008
Because the things he admitted doing. It doesn't stretch the imagination to think he did more than that.
by unknown on August 10th, 2008
He admitted molesting the kid? i didn't know that!
by Boycott on August 10th, 2008
No, he admitted to sleeping with them and cuddling them. The way he talked about it was freaky to say the least. It just wasn't what normal people would say.
by unknown on August 10th, 2008
i cuddled my grandad when i was young......... SHIT........
by vigier on January 30th, 2009
It wasn't "grandfatherly" cuddling.
by unknown on January 30th, 2009
how would you know he said that it was granfatherly cuddling and later on he said it was grandfatherly touching....and later on....
by vigier on February 1st, 2009
He is creepy and his interview was creepy and he is just creepy.
by unknown on February 2nd, 2009