TheaterFire

Do you think Michael Jackson was guilty to the allegations?

Posted by StunningPizza3747@reddit | AskUK | View on Reddit | 269 comments

[removed]

Reply to Post

269 Comments

Spare_Knowledge_8455@reddit

Yes, it's bizarre they don't treat him now for what he clearly was.
View on Reddit #84539494

HollowForgeGames@reddit

This, Ive raised 3 kids and no adult ever suggested they have a sleep over in their home . WHEN THEY DONT HAVE KIDS Like WTF did they have Michael sleep at their house the next week ???
View on Reddit #84540120

marzilibeach@reddit

Where were their parents?
View on Reddit #84761503

Standard-Box-3021@reddit

You will receive mixed answers on this issue because it's hard to answer; his lawyers were effective, and the fact is the child stopped cooperating, though the original kid is cops are unsure whyhe stopped cooperating. As for the rest, it's difficult to verify facts when the publicity over the last 30 years has used it as sensational, attention-grabbing segments, which sucks because if it's true, he deserved life in prison. If not, then those kids should apologize and make amends.
View on Reddit #87217418

resixresi@reddit

Actually if you read into the allegations it's no wonder he's treated as innocent and got aquitted: * The Arvizos claimed Jackson abducted them (with threats to send them to Brazil in a hot air balloon) yet evidence proved they freely left the ranch on the alleged dates of captivity multiple times to visit shops, lawyers and Family Services regarding a separate custody matter. * Star Arvizo insisted he saw a specific pornographic magazine in Jackson's possession before being revealed it wasn't published until months after he last saw Jackson. * The Arvizo’s credibility is undermined by their history of welfare/insurance fraud and a prior incident with J.C. Penney where they lied in court about SA after being caught shoplifting and faking bruises * Gavin Arvizo’s testimony regarding the frequency of the alleged abuse fluctuated starting at "less than 5 times," then exactly 5, then 7 and finally to 2 times. * Star Arvizo initially claimed to see Jackson’s hand on top of Gavin’s clothes, then changed the story to say it was inside the pants. He also claimed he saw Jackson touch Gavin’s butt and that on the second occasion he witnessed Jackson had his penis out of his underwear; he later denied in court that he ever said or saw those incidents meaning under his own admission they were just fabricated lies. * When Gavin Arvizo took the stand, he claimed that Jackson had told all boys had to masturbate or else they would turn into rapists. But Jackson's lawyer showed that the boy had previously admitted his grandmother made that comment, not Jackson * Robson was asked if he was shopping a book and his emails proved that he had lied under oath and had sent a book to 3 publishing houses who turned it down. In a draft of the book he described himself as "a master of deception". * In his emails (which he tried to conceal but was forced to reveal) he also asked his mother if certain tabloid falsehoods online about him and Jackson were true to which she replied no yet those stories still later ended up in his testimony. * Robson says he was first touched during a 2 night sleepover with his sister however in his 2013 book draft he said nothing happened on those nights. * Robson alleged he was abused at the ranch while his family went to the Grand Canyon, which is contradicted by his mother’s sworn deposition which stated Wade accompanied the family on that trip. * Robson stated he was abused at Neverland hundreds of times contradicting his mother’s sworn testimony that he was only at the ranch approximately four times. * Both Wade and his mother claim he didn't speak up because he felt shame yet in his deposition he claimed he didn't understand he was abused until 2012 and therefore never felt shame. Furthermore in a blog post he said a fear of being labeled gay made him stay quiet however previously in his 2016 deposition he says it was not a factor. Also Robson said he didn't understand what had happened was abuse yet in an interview he said “I never had that experience and I hope that it never happened to anybody else” showing he did understand pedophilia was evil. Furthermore he said that when Jackson asked him to testify he told him the acts were disgusting lies which contradicts Robson’s narrative that Jackson tried to normalise it and make it seem like love * Robson claims he lied as a kid because Jackson coached him for the grand jury testimony however Robson had actually spoken to the authorities 8 months before that testimony. * Robson claims he doesn't care about money and what's to embolden other victims but Robson originally filed a creditors claim under seal, attempting to extract a private settlement from the Estate with zero publicity and only went public with the allegations after the Estate refused to pay. * James Safechuck claimed he was abused daily in the Neverland train station during the late 80s however construction permits and photos prove the station was not built until 1993 and did not open until 1994. * James Safechuck's mother claimed she was happy when Jackson died in 2009, a reaction that contradicts James’s own narrative that he did not "realize" he was abused until 2013. * Safechuck claims Jackson showed him CP movies however after multiple raids that went to illegal lengths no CP was ever found * Jordan Chandler's description of Jackson's penis was incorrect e.g. he claimed it was circumcised but Jackson's autopsy proved he was uncircumcised and he claimed it was black when it was actually white. If there was a match he would've been arrested but instead neither DA submitted the photos as cause to arrest plus the criminal investigation would've had enough evidence to proceed at least with an indictment but it had nothing. * Evan Chandler was recorded on a phone call admitting that helping his son Jordan was irrelevant to him and "If I go through with this, I win big time" or else it would be a "massacre". * Before going public with the allegations Chandler attempted to negotiate a smaller financial settlement which Jackson declined * Police used coercive interrogation tactics with other children including lying about possessing nude photos of them, calling Jackson a molester and saying that he abused Macaulay Culkin and Corey Feldman and if they admit they were also abused it would allow the police save other children yet dozens of children still defended Jackson. They also ignores Feldman telling them someone else touched him as a child and then lied by saying he never told them anything * Jackson was forced to settle the case since the judge ordered a deposition from him but the civil case was before the criminal case so Jackson was forced to give away his defence case meaning the prosecution could then tailor the criminal case to circumvent his defence case. There was an unfair legal disadvantage that violated his constitutional right to a fair trial so he was forced to settle. But Jackson only settled the civil case meaning the criminal case wasn't void and actually continued. However in the end there was no evidence that could've been used leading to 2 separate grand juries to not have an indictment. * Jackson lost all four motions to postpone the civil trial and have the criminal trial first (what guilty rich man would do that?). Additionally, the Chandlers sought a compressed timeline and requested that the civil trial be held within 120 days leaving Jackson's team very little time to prepare for the civil trial while also managing the ongoing criminal investigation. This too at a time when the police had seized all of Jackson's personal records and refused to hand over copies of them or even a list of what had been taken. According to the Chandlers’ lawyer’s legal secretary Geraldine Hughes, “The District Attorney’s office was operating, with the blessings of the Court, in violation of Michael Jackson’s constitutional rights, and the Court was weighing heavily in favour of the 13-year old boy” * 5 former bodyguards sued for $16 million claiming they "knew too much," and had negotiated a $100,000 fee for a TV appearance instead of going to the authorities. * These bodyguards admitted in subsequent depositions that they never observed improper conduct and the group was sanctioned $66k for perjury and hiding evidence, eventually being ordered to pay Jackson $1.4 million * Chacon and McManus who were other employees claimed to witness abuse but failed to report it to police choosing instead to sell stories to the press and file a wrongful dismissal lawsuit which was dismissed as fraudulent and malicious. * Chacon and McManus were found guilty of stealing over $50,000 from Jackson. McManus further admitted during testimony to a prior conviction for defrauding a relative’s children by stealing from their estate * When Jackson's former maid Francia took the stand in 2005 regarding a story about Jackson and Robson showering and laughing she initially claimed in 1993 that she went into the room because she thought the water had been left on but then said it was because she heard voices. Initial mentions of nudity and physical contact disappeared from her testimony. * Furthermore while Francia was on the stand in 2005 it was revealed to her that in her 1994 deposition she claimed she actually only saw a man's shadow in the shower and Robson wasn't there. Plus in her 2016 deposition she claimed she only heard Jackson laughing further contradicting her story. She also admitted to selling stories to the tabloids instead of telling the authorities and when told to bring the tabloid contract to her deposition was found to have lied about not possessing it and instead destroyed it. * Francia also claimed in the 2004 prosecution’s motion and her 2016 deposition that she saw Jackson in the theatre with a boy but in her 2005 testimony said she'd never been in the theatre while Jackson and children were there. She also claimed she stopped working for Jackson due to witnessing abuse but it was revealed that in 1993 she had said it was because of coworker disputes e.g. after getting caught snooping through their purse plus blaming others for her actions and getting them fired. After being thoroughly investigated for decades, having 70 sheriffs raid his home numerous times including areas not even covered by search warrants, having defense documents from the home of his assistant stolen, his private investigators office being illegally raided, millions being spent by the district attorney to satisfy his zeal to get Jackson, the DA fabricating evidence etc... the authorities found no evidence & unsurprisingly he was aquitted on 14 counts despite the judge adding extra charges and a rebuttal case which contained heresay evidence (normally not admissible), prior bad acts evidence being allowed, being in an area with a high conviction rate and the most bias character assassination in journalistic history which even the jury saw despite being told to avoid media coverage.
View on Reddit #84553122

flowersinthedark@reddit

What a wall of copy-pasted propaganda. Let me ask you something: How many people do you personally know who habitually sleep with other people's prepubescent sons?
View on Reddit #84591183

cerberus8700@reddit

If the text is accurate, then dismissing it with your question is odd.
View on Reddit #84859336

flowersinthedark@reddit

It is not. Accurate, that is. But it is a seeminly convincing mixture of lies, misleading truths and one-sided interpretations of events, many of which are taken out of context. I could put a lot of work into debunking these claims, but it would require half a thesis each. It's clear that the user copy-pasted, I could do the same, and the text post would grow into a monster and no one here would bother to read it, let along fact-check it. Just one example: >Star Arvizo insisted he saw a specific pornographic magazine in Jackson's possession before being revealed it wasn't published until months after he last saw Jackson. It was a specific *brand* of magazine, not the specific *edition* that Star recognized, and he even tried to clarify that in cross-examination. And maybe a second one: >James Safechuck claimed he was abused daily in the Neverland train station during the late 80s however construction permits and photos prove the station was not built until 1993 and did not open until 1994. James Safechuck never said he was abused "daily" at the train station, and he did not specify a date of abuse there. In his lawsuit, he says that the abuse was ongoing from 1988 to 1992, and that if finally stopped as he "fully reached puberty", which is far too vague to preclude that Jackson still abused ihm in 1993 or even early 1994. And so on and on it goes. Ultimately, it's all a big distraction from the fact that the greatest piece of evidence is Jackson's own pattern of behavior. Which is what we should be talking about.
View on Reddit #84861934

nefon05@reddit

James Safechuck quite literally did say that he was abused in the train station everyday, it’s on video for fuck sake. I think it’s so ironic that people like you claim that people who think MJ is innocent are delusional when you’re trying to make up that there are no inconsistencies in the accusations.
View on Reddit #86032334

flowersinthedark@reddit

Does he? Which video, precisely, and what time stamp?
View on Reddit #86032475

nefon05@reddit

https://youtu.be/_Zub3XXwTJ0?si=RDj4AUcTT2Gwkxo5 Skip to 11:36
View on Reddit #86032602

flowersinthedark@reddit

Who is that Zombie fan being hysterical on main? 😭 Yeah, no. The "it happened every day" is part of a larger passage that this dude conveniently cuts off. >"There was a castle in the theme park and upstairs had a bedroom, you could see if somebody's was coming.. it had just a small bed.. it's upstairs, and up there we would have sex. The pool and the jacuzzi... oral sex. Like holding your breath and then going down ... kinda like a game. At the train station, there was a room upstairs... and we would have sex up there too. It would happen every day. It sounds sick but it's ... kinda like when you're first dating somebody, right, and you do a lot of it. So it was very much like that." Maybe you shouldn't consume so much fan-made media.
View on Reddit #86034464

NoQuit8614@reddit

there's just no talking with you people. those are facts. legally and logically relevant facts. you make a small blank statement. I don't care either way. Most of my favorite rock bands did really bad stuff in their youth. I still bump them and buy their records, so I really don't care. But god damn it, this guy has 99% of all facts presented on his side. Wtf more do you need ? After the first case, a lot of families left their kids alone with Jacko, does that not make your brain light up in regards to who was the actual predator ? I am taking the list above and sharing it ad nauseum.
View on Reddit #84619301

TX18Q@reddit

Fun seeing you fans getting a reality check every time you go outside of the Jackson echo chamber.
View on Reddit #84865010

NoQuit8614@reddit

I couldn't care less about his community. I just read the facts, multiple times, from multiple sources. Everything you claim is based on speculation. Everything I claim is based on fact. And it's funny you're talking about reality checks, when currently the world is basically rubbing your face in how out of touch his delusional haters are. And the movie will get a sequel, so his haters and accusers will gouge their eyes out for another few years. Billie Jean is #5 globally on Spotify. Bye.
View on Reddit #84869736

TX18Q@reddit

Your comments reads like a copy paste of every irrational fanboy/girl. It is adorable that you think fans buying 3-4-5 tickets is winning the public over. If you want to talk about the truth, you’re welcome! The FBI literally found books like “Boys will be boys”, “In search of Young beauty” and “The boy, a photographic essay”, which featured photographs of boys engaged in various activities clothed, semi-nude, or nude, in some photos with genitalia; or in positions that border on the erotic. AND they found those specific books in a locked drawer in his closet! > And the movie will get a sequel Oh boy… you truly are something else. Do you seriously believe they will make a sequel about a career going down the tubes, child abuse allegations from every direction, horrible plastic surgery, dangling kids from balconies while abusing every drug known to mankind, while [looking like this!](https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/dt0AAOSwPLphWSzM/s-l1200.jpg)! 🤣🤣🤣
View on Reddit #84875854

West-Calligrapher3@reddit

You truly are thick as mince I’m embarrassed at your ignorance.
View on Reddit #85745315

NoQuit8614@reddit

They already filmed an extra hour and a half, they just took it out of the movie, due to legal issues. I never said how they would portray that time period. They will make it more glossy and friendly than it was, which is why I don't like the fact that the estate is doing the movie. But talks have already started. They originally covered until 1995. But now since it's another movie, hopefully they will cover the next 20 years. " every drug known to mankind " this is why there's zero credibility with you folks, you just make stuff up, no wonder you believe his accusers, you are like them The important thing is, his accusers feel like shit tenfold right now, thank god. Like, I am seriously not concerned about their mental health. Must be horrific to see
View on Reddit #84877056

TX18Q@reddit

Michaels crimes against children is getting more publicity now than ever. Literally in every thread I see people being astonished about the facts they didn’t know about, like the creepy books or the alarm system, or the nude photo of Jonathan Spence that the FBI found (try challenge me on that one!) Just look at this post alone. The overwhelming majority agrees it is OBVIOUS he is guilty of being a child abuser. Again, outside of the Michael echo chamber nobody believes Michael is Peter Pan 😂
View on Reddit #84886012

No_Hurry7691@reddit

\>there's just no talking with you people. The literal fucking irony.
View on Reddit #85010378

flowersinthedark@reddit

I take it that you probably do not know anyone who habitually sleep with other people's prepubescent sons either. That's because the only people who would would have an interest in doing so are pedophiles. Oh, and Michael Jackson. 🙃
View on Reddit #84620506

NoQuit8614@reddit

" That's because the only people who would would have an interest in doing so are pedophiles. " Too bad science disagrees with you. Fast&Furious-level-of-intelligence type of reply incoming:
View on Reddit #84622830

flowersinthedark@reddit

Oh, I am sure that you'll have scientific papers on that to share. Feel free.
View on Reddit #84623840

NoQuit8614@reddit

You are dismissing mountains of solid facts against your position. Research isn't your strong suit. You have google, so I don't need to share anything with you. I just need to see a record-breaking crappy movie to make sure the sequel gets made, so that I can prolong the crying of this dude's accusers.
View on Reddit #84624337

flowersinthedark@reddit

No sources? Yeah, that's what I thought. >*I just need to see a record-breaking crappy movie to make sure the sequel gets made, so that I can prolong the crying of this dude's accusers.* Kudos to that level of pettiness, really. Do you think it will impress a lot of people in this comment thread?
View on Reddit #84625804

ProfessionFancy7021@reddit

Shoot or the two books of teen boy nudes they found in the first investigation? Or the creepy baby shrine he has in his room when he od All the creepy hand written notes about love not violence 
View on Reddit #85619211

DoNotMicrooowave@reddit

Can I ask you to address any of the points made above instead of dismissing them as “propaganda”?
View on Reddit #85047181

flowersinthedark@reddit

I did that, partly, in other replies to this user's comment. You might want to read that threat, it's mostly very civil.
View on Reddit #85048864

Pussilamous@reddit

that's weird but it doesn't automatically equal to him raping kids
View on Reddit #84640183

flowersinthedark@reddit

How many people do *you* personally know who habitually sleep with other people's prepubescent sons? Would you let your little boy sleep in the bed of a good acquaintance, if the guy wanted it really much, and maybe gave you a gift or two? If he told you that he loved your son so much?
View on Reddit #84640832

AaronRulesALot@reddit

Is it impossible that nothing bad happened? I think it’s sus af but it’s not impossible that it really was just innocent. I’ll give it a 70/30 rn for it likely being pedophile shit.
View on Reddit #84670032

flowersinthedark@reddit

I'd estimate the probability much higher, based on Jackson's observable pattern of behavior, which does not just include sleepovers. Based on the Duck Test, Jackson doesn't just look, walk, and quack like a duck, he has also been accused of being a duck by witnesses, paid money for these witenesses in order not to testify to his duck-ness, and very much likes to swim.
View on Reddit #84670478

SatisfactionEast9815@reddit

If you don't mind, what do you have to say about the facts presented here: [https://www.tumblr.com/sprinkledsalt/814423585883078656/10-undeniable-facts-about-the-michael-jackson](https://www.tumblr.com/sprinkledsalt/814423585883078656/10-undeniable-facts-about-the-michael-jackson) I don't really know who to trust on this topic.
View on Reddit #85626921

resixresi@reddit

They are either completely incorrect or have missing context purposefully left out. Unsurprising given the author made baseless claims that Jackson bathed in sheeps blood and sacrificed cows to cast a voodoo spell. https://meanmachine829.medium.com/10-undeniable-fake-news-about-mj-an-easily-debunkable-racist-vanity-fair-article-93d461833978
View on Reddit #85630030

SatisfactionEast9815@reddit

Wow, got it. Is Vanity Fair usually trustworthy?
View on Reddit #85684038

resixresi@reddit

I've never really read them but given they published an article like that I wouldn't trust them or any of the media. With that long list of credibility issues posted earlier almost none of it was reported by the media. Even broadsheets like The Telegraph & Times were rallying behind the accusers whilst completely side stepping the many acts of perjury. This article looks at how awful the propaganda was during the 2005 trial and why the media can never be trusted with this case: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258
View on Reddit #85688000

SatisfactionEast9815@reddit

Wow, got it.
View on Reddit #85689545

Electronic_Worry_927@reddit

False God hey
View on Reddit #85653848

Bubblegumbitch_13@reddit

The question is the same, WHY would a 30 year old man insist on having sleepovers with CHILDREN? You can track all the dates, “facts” etc. but he was a grown man sleeping with children. If it was anyone else, this would have raise suspicions when it started and he would be JUSTIFIABLY JUDGED by society.
View on Reddit #85191350

SatisfactionEast9815@reddit

I trust you, but do you think you could give us some sources just to be sure?
View on Reddit #84976966

fanlal@reddit

2005 transcript
View on Reddit #85029657

SatisfactionEast9815@reddit

Got it. Why do you suppose so many people still think he was guilty?
View on Reddit #85066861

fanlal@reddit

People who do thorough research tend to see things very differently. Relying only on fan blogs and YouTube videos isn’t serious research, it gives a one-sided picture.
View on Reddit #85069489

SatisfactionEast9815@reddit

Yeah, I can imagine.
View on Reddit #85109297

resixresi@reddit

https://themichaeljacksonallegationsblog.wordpress.com/ The analysis of the court documents, depositions, investigations etc can be found here which show what I've summarised
View on Reddit #85033387

SatisfactionEast9815@reddit

Thanks.
View on Reddit #85066878

fanlal@reddit

Gish gallop!
View on Reddit #85029485

SerCoreyTrevor@reddit

Why did he have NAMBLA books with naked pictures of children at his house?
View on Reddit #84924077

the_merkin@reddit

Your copium addiction is off the charts!
View on Reddit #84555798

resixresi@reddit

As I said - inexcusable and clearly you've given no counter point to the many credibility issues that debunk the allegations
View on Reddit #84556156

Scotchdude1979@reddit

I think of Michael Jackson no differently to Epstein now. No Jackson defender will ever be able to come up with a satisfactory explanation for why Jordan Chandler was able to accurately describe the markings on the underside of Jackson’s penis. Jackson defenders just come up with the nonsense that the police were lying. https://www.theguardian.com/music/ng-interactive/2026/apr/18/michael-jackson-biopic-jaafar-jackson It’s also impossible to explain why Jackson paid Chandler approximately $22 million other than that the allegations of sexual abuse were credible. Forensic experts found Jackson’s fingerprints and those of some boys who slept in his room on erotic photos that the singer kept. I’m sorry but there’s no plausible innocent explanation for that. The only defence Jackson’s fans can offer is that the police were lying, or seeking to discredit the victims on the basis they were after money. No one questions the right of the much older Epstein victims to seeks compensation after what they suffered, but the pattern of Jackson’s defenders is just to attack the much younger victims and question their motives. I defy any neutral to watch Leaving Neverland and not be utterly convinced by the testimony of those men.
View on Reddit #84700517

electricbowl08@reddit

Chandler did not accurately describe Michael Jackson’s penis. He said Jackson was circumcised. He wasn’t. That’s a glaring, binary error. The 2005 prosecution omitted this and instead cherry-picked a supposed match (a “mark”). But Jackson had vitiligo (widespread irregular pigmentation), meaning his skin was covered in marks. In that context, pointing to a generic “mark” isn’t exactly compelling evidence.
View on Reddit #84912768

fanlal@reddit

Jordan never said that. If you want to prove your point, bring the evidence.
View on Reddit #85029440

electricbowl08@reddit

The problem is that neither the description nor the photos have ever been released publicly. Everything people cite, on both sides, comes from secondary reporting. So you can push back on my claim, but you’re relying on the same kind of sources.
View on Reddit #85034836

fanlal@reddit

That’s not accurate. Statements from Dworin and Weis aren’t secondary accounts, they were directly involved in the Chandler investigation and have both confirmed that the description matched. That comes from law enforcement, not media interpretation. The circumcision claim, on the other hand, traces back to a Smoking Gun article that doesn’t provide a primary source. That’s exactly the difference: one comes from people who worked on the case, the other from an unsourced media claim.
View on Reddit #85035488

electricbowl08@reddit

Dworin and Weis being directly involved does mean they’re first-hand investigators, not media commentators. But that doesn’t make their later statements the same as verifiable primary evidence we can actually examine. The key issue isn’t who they are, it’s that the underlying reports/photographs they’re referring to still aren’t in the public record.
View on Reddit #85035892

fanlal@reddit

You’re shifting the standard. Statements from investigators directly involved in the case are considered primary source testimony, even if every piece of evidence isn’t publicly released. That’s how legal and investigative work functions. And more importantly, you’re applying that standard selectively. The circumcision claim relies on an unsourced media article, not on any verifiable primary document. Those two things are not equivalent.
View on Reddit #85036392

electricbowl08@reddit

I’m not shifting the standard. “Primary evidence” refers to the original materials themselves such as reports, photos, transcripts, physical evidence, or sworn court testimony. Statements made years later to the media, outside any publicly available formal record, are not primary evidence and are subject to issues like memory, selection, and hindsight bias. And I’m not being selective either. We’re on opposing sides of this argument, both making claims that rely on non-primary evidence - accounts of the evidence rather than the evidence itself. We’re not going to resolve this unless the primary material becomes publicly available, so we may as well leave it there.
View on Reddit #85038119

fanlal@reddit

You’re creating a false equivalence. Statements from investigators directly involved in the case don’t carry the same weight as an unsourced media claim. Not everything is equal just because not all material is public.
View on Reddit #85038196

electricbowl08@reddit

You’re quick to use labels that sound impressive but aren’t actually being substantiated. First “shifting the standard”, then “selective”, now “false equivalence”. Why is it a false equivalence? I’m not saying the sources are identical in authority. I’m saying both claims rely on underlying material that isn’t publicly available or independently testable. In that sense, both are second-hand accounts of unseen evidence. What exactly do you mean by “false equivalence” here? Are you saying there is publicly available primary material that makes one claim independently verifiable and the other not? If so, what is it?
View on Reddit #85038909

fanlal@reddit

It’s a false equivalence because not all non-public sources are equal. Investigators directly involved in the case had direct access to the evidence, while the circumcision claim comes from an unsourced media article. Those are not comparable.
View on Reddit #85067075

electricbowl08@reddit

Calling The Smoking Gun an “unsourced claim” is a mischaracterisation. It’s a document-based outlet, not vague hearsay. Besides, even if one source is “better”, it doesn’t resolve anything. Both rely on material we can’t independently test, so neither is conclusive. On that basis, this doesn’t come close to supporting a definitive “match” claim. At most, the public record shows conflicting accounts, not a settled fact.
View on Reddit #85071095

fanlal@reddit

The issue isn’t whether an outlet calls itself “document-based,” it’s whether it provides a verifiable primary source. The circumcision claim still traces back to an article that doesn’t cite any primary document you can actually examine. In contrast, statements from investigators directly involved in the case are based on direct access to the evidence. That’s not the same category. Saying “both aren’t conclusive” ignores that not all sources carry the same weight. Conflicting claims don’t automatically cancel each other out, you still have to look at where they come from.
View on Reddit #85071787

electricbowl08@reddit

The Smoking Gun does cite primary legal material, including the Linden affidavit, which isn’t publicly available in full. By “document-based outlet” I mean it reports on and reproduces legal filings and investigative documents, often with access to underlying material that isn’t otherwise public. Meanwhile, retrospective media comments from investigators are still non-independent secondary accounts of evidence we can’t independently examine, so I don’t see them as particularly strong evidence in themselves. You’re criticising me for “false equivalence”, but I’d counter that you’re selectively overstating the difference in evidential weight between the two sources. But none of that changes the core point. Source hierarchy doesn’t resolve anything when both sides ultimately rely on non-public, non-verifiable evidence. We can’t independently check it, so it doesn’t support a definitive conclusion.
View on Reddit #85072706

fanlal@reddit

That’s not accurate. The Linden affidavit has never been made public, so it cannot be independently verified. And The Smoking Gun likely used the drawing found in Victor Gutierrez’s book in its article. That’s not the same as citing a verifiable primary document. So no, this is not comparable to investigators who actually had direct access to the evidence.
View on Reddit #85093739

electricbowl08@reddit

There’s no evidence The Smoking Gun relied on Gutierrez. That’s purely your speculation. If we’re just making things up, I could just as easily claim your sources are biased or selectively recalling events, but without evidence that’s just as baseless.
View on Reddit #85094354

fanlal@reddit

Exactly, so what did The Smoking Gun actually rely on, if the underlying document isn’t publicly available? That’s the point: without access to a verifiable primary document, you’re being asked to trust a media interpretation, not independently checkable evidence.
View on Reddit #85094709

electricbowl08@reddit

That’s a false dichotomy. It assumes the only options are Gutierrez or full public access, which isn’t how legal-document reporting works. Outlets like The Smoking Gun routinely reference affidavits, filings, and evidential material obtained through legal or court-connected sources that aren’t always publicly posted in full. You’d need evidence that they specifically relied on Gutierrez - otherwise, you’re just substituting one assumption for another.
View on Reddit #85095123

fanlal@reddit

No, you’re the one relying on a media article that doesn’t contain any actual documents. I used statements from Weis and Dworin, who were directly involved in the Chandler case. If you can’t tell the difference between a primary source and a media source, that explains why you think MJ is innocent.
View on Reddit #85095467

fanlal@reddit

No, you’re the one relying on a media article that doesn’t contain any actual documents. I used statements from Weis and Dworin, who were directly involved in the Chandler case. If you can’t tell the difference between a primary source and a media source, that explains why you think MJ is innocent.
View on Reddit #85095436

Temporary-Prune-9237@reddit

Are the markings accurate? I keep hearing that they weren’t
View on Reddit #84702469

Scotchdude1979@reddit

Yes, police stated that Chandler’s drawing matched the photos of Jackson. Read the article. It also addresses this.
View on Reddit #84703002

Ok_Toe_2694@reddit

There is **NO publicly verified evidence** that any drawing “matched” photos, and even if such a claim was made, sketch comparisons are subjective and too unreliable to prove anything. The alleged photos and drawing have never been released for independent review. There was no court case where this specific type of evidence was formally tested and verified in a way that produced a conviction or definitive legal conclusion. Different parties also made conflicting claims about whether anything “matched" For once, can you all try to come with evidence that is ACTUALLY confirmed beyond dispute, and not just alleged claims? In the case of Jeffrey Epstein, there were documented investigations and widely reported evidence, including photographic material and convictions related to his crimes. In contrast, there was never a criminal conviction proving Michael Jackson guilty of the charges made against him, and he was acquitted in court. Keep in mind that at the time of the allegations, he was one of the most famous people in the world, and the lack of a legal finding of guilt should tell you something. You all LACK critical thinking
View on Reddit #84740202

Temporary-Prune-9237@reddit

You realise certain things he did drew the line for some people? For some people just hearing a 40 year old wank saying he’s slept in a bed with “”all of em” draws the line and they don’t care what anyone says it’s over. For some it is the porn books or the documentary regardless of what was debunked or not that’s where some draw the line. For some it’s the fact that 11 pre pubescent white kids have come out, this may draw the line regardless of who’s father did what, people care about the fact that hear were kids, and the overall pattern. For some people La Toya draws the line. Some people believe he’s innocent fair enough many believe he is guilty that’s fine it’s down to your own research.
View on Reddit #84760575

Temporary-Prune-9237@reddit

Thanks 👍👍
View on Reddit #84703920

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

The greatest entertainer in the world and the King of Pop with the best selling album in the world who was a kid by heart and acted like a kid with other kids. That means sleepover parties. The only people who make something sexual about a sleepover party are the people who are s\*ck in their mind and the ones the society needs to be protected from. If there's any other person in your bedroom than your partner, we know what time it is...
View on Reddit #84984051

Thegreatbeedle@reddit

A kid by heart who had a massive collection of pornography all over his house and books, magazines and polaroids of naked kids in a locked file cabinet in his bedroom. The Peter Pan shit is hogwash.
View on Reddit #85022407

sneaksby@reddit

> they don't treat him now for what he clearly was. Guys dead m8, the time for treatment has passed.
View on Reddit #84593719

mrhippoj@reddit

There's no smoke without fire and in the case of Michael Jackson the smoke is thick enough to block out the Sun
View on Reddit #84552976

Barkasia@reddit

While this is very likely true in MJ's case, 'no smoke without fire' is a deeply illogical phrase that has been used countless times to indiscriminately persecute anyone who is deemed 'other'.
View on Reddit #84570472

mrhippoj@reddit

I'm just saying I think he's guilty
View on Reddit #84575849

poptimist185@reddit

I think his relationship with minors was, at very best, suspect. The people who defend him citing the court acquittals would never he so forgiving of a random person accused of the same thing who hadn’t also entertained them with smash hit songs.
View on Reddit #84539621

StunningPizza3747@reddit (OP)

I find it odd how he started as being known for being overly innocent and kind, soft spoken etc. then it was like something switched in his brain and he started acting so abnormal. Watching interviews of him after the 90s he had a really creepy aura about him. 
View on Reddit #84540924

dweeb93@reddit

Fwi, his soft spoken voice is fake, he actually had a very deep voice but I believe he put that voice on to give a non-threatening image. He groomed the whole world.
View on Reddit #84543362

NoQuit8614@reddit

It's recommended for singers to speak in a higher registry if they want their voice to preserve better when needing to pull of high notes.
View on Reddit #84624493

Ok_Toe_2694@reddit

Why are you being downvoted when it is literally true???? lol All of these artists I know speak with a higher register if they want their voice to preserve better when needing to pull off high notes: Ariana Grande The Weeknd Sade Norah Jones Sampha Cat Power Sufjan Stevens Corinne Bailey Rae Tracy Chapman Frank Ocean Esha Tewari Khamari Elias Rønnenfelt And all of Michael Jackson’s brothers do it too. Saying “he put that voice on to give a non-threatening image. He groomed the whole world.” is beyond weird. Maybe you dweeb93 and your seven upvotes are the ones who need help. You all lack a crazy amount of critical thinking to a point where it just becomes sad. Did you believe Justin Biebers accuser when they made sexual assault allegations on Twitter, for example? People love to attack and accuse famous people for money, and that trend has just increased over the years. And by the way, the Cascio siblings, notice how the moment their settlement of 5 years was over, 17 years later after his death, they suddenly pop out of nowhere with new “details” saying they were abused. I mean clearly shows that they are all snaky opportunists. But hey! Some people just can’t open their eyes. And the downvotes shows all of the people that stand with the ones against Michael Jackson are all **Willfully Ignorant.**
View on Reddit #84740794

MulberryBeneficial84@reddit

Alot of kpop idols too
View on Reddit #87096312

Specialist_Box_8482@reddit

Why is this getting downvoted? I was always told that this was the exact reason he chose to speak in a higher tone of voice because he thought it would help preserve his voice.
View on Reddit #84739543

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

You are really a m\*ron. Lmao.
View on Reddit #84984076

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

You are delusional. There is literally ZERO evidence that he did any of those accusations. There are a lot of evidence the people who made the accusations lied about a lot of things. There is ZERO evidence Michael ever lied about something. He even admitted he had fun and innocent sleepovers. Which person who has ever molested a child would admit on any sleepover? You people have a sick brain or are bad people themselves.
View on Reddit #84984177

Thegreatbeedle@reddit

"he had fun and innocent sleepovers" Dude, you wouldn't believe a random middle-aged man sharing his bed with a series of children to be something "innocent". Police found a collection of books, magazines and polaroids of naked kids in a locked file cabinet in his bedroom, as well as porn all over his fucking house. Also, zero evidence Michael lied about something... Eeeeh dude he regularly lied about his obvious numerous cosmetic surgeries and the conception of his children. Every victim describes the same pattern of grooming. Showering the parents and the child with gifts, giving them money, houses, cars, making phone calls to the children that lasted hours on end, showing them pornography, introducing them to masturbation, then oral copulation, then anal and so on. He made some great music, but he was a monster.
View on Reddit #85021755

Djinjja-Ninja@reddit

I'll bet that those same people call Andrew a paedo.
View on Reddit #84542546

NoFalcon4850@reddit

He was innocent, just look at the evidence!
View on Reddit #86416133

Dry-Cheesecake-6515@reddit

No I don't.
View on Reddit #85938029

HugsandHate@reddit

This cropped up here recently. There was somehing to do with a hidden room. Dude owned CP. And the kids could all correctly identify a mark he had on his dick. And... The dude was abused and insane. So, I'm gonna go with, yeah.
View on Reddit #84541445

iwillgetwhatiwant@reddit

the FBI said they didn't find any CP? where did you hear that?
View on Reddit #84797597

fanlal@reddit

2005 court transcript, Not CP, a book containing around a hundred images of nude children hidden in a locked filing cabinet.
View on Reddit #85030060

Few-Location540@reddit

u need to find a life
View on Reddit #85901604

fanlal@reddit

LOL, I could say the same about you, 9 karma!
View on Reddit #85901800

HugsandHate@reddit

I haven't got a clue. Somewhere, eons ago. Doesn't really matter to me if it isn't true. Dude's dead. Sorry for the lazy (but honest) reply. But I just don't have anything for you.
View on Reddit #84805384

iwillgetwhatiwant@reddit

wth u shouldn’t just say things that aren’t true…
View on Reddit #84805472

HugsandHate@reddit

Because up until this moment, it was my understanding that it was. That's why. And now I just don't know.
View on Reddit #84806669

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

So, you base your opinion on something that isn't even true. And you stick with that opinion based on lies. Yeah, that's how it works. It's a good thing we have judges and a jury who check for actual evidence and not some; "i thought that, I thought this, I read this somewhere". You actually that st\*pid?
View on Reddit #84984961

HugsandHate@reddit

You are aware of the concept of being wrong, surely? And when I stated "And now I just don't know" Is the opposite of 'sticking to my opinion'. And you have the gall to ask if *I'm* stupid?
View on Reddit #84989224

Careless_Soup_109@reddit

Unfortunately, we have no publicly released pictures of Jackson's penis - those pics definitely do, or did exist, but it's not evidence we can access.
View on Reddit #84554580

HugsandHate@reddit

They just asked the kids, and they all had the same account.
View on Reddit #84574268

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Are you reall? ; "And the kids could all correctly identify a mark he had on his dick.". This has been debunked so many times it's laughable people still believe this.
View on Reddit #84985020

HugsandHate@reddit

I'm unaware of this.
View on Reddit #84989258

zecrichardson@reddit

Won't play his music in our house. Not sure why he seems to have gotten away with his crimes
View on Reddit #84540277

Personal-Pea-5964@reddit

Why don't you just seperate the art from the artist?
View on Reddit #84821088

BlueMeerkat12@reddit

Because listening to it means buying his music which means giving more money to the Jackson estate. Same thing goes for the movie that just came out If you believe that what happened to those kids is true, them you don't want to give money to a family that protected that dude for years.
View on Reddit #84823089

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

He has been proven innocent by a 12-heading jury on all aspects. People rather believe a jury who has looked at all the evidence (which there wasn't beside the made up accusations and lies which have been debunked) than believing Bluemeerkat12 on Reddit. It's a good thing we have judges and a jury cause otherwise people would be verdicted without doing anything wrong.
View on Reddit #84985114

BlueMeerkat12@reddit

I mean, the justice system being what it is, I've heard countless cases of rape/sexual violence where the perpetrator was "found not guilty" not because they didn't do it, but because of a lack of evidence. Some victims never come forward for that exact reason, they don't wanna spend thousands just to be confronted by defense attorneys trying to question everything they remember. It's a hard thing to confront when you're the victim. It is really difficult to win a case like that, where big money is being moved around and everybody's motives and truths are questionable. I choose to believe the victims, because I've seen people being acquitted for shit they had done, but not enough evidence, so there you go. But eh, I don't care what other people listen to, I also don't care that you don't agree. Peace and love to all of you out there lol
View on Reddit #85772330

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

He has been proven innocent by a 12-heading jury on all aspects. People rather believe a jury who has looked at all the evidence (which there wasn't beside the made up accusations and lies which have been debunked) than believing Zerichardson on Reddit. It's a good thing we have judges and a jury cause otherwise people would be verdicted without doing anything wrong.
View on Reddit #84985126

zecrichardson@reddit

I commented, it wasn't my post and this is my own opinion to which I am entitled.
View on Reddit #85017020

Djinjja-Ninja@reddit

Of course he was, no one pays multi millions to their accuser to make the allegations go away if they're innocent. A good friend of mine is a massive fan and she won't have a word said against him, thinks he was just an innocent soul who was utterly misunderstood and did no wrong.
View on Reddit #84539648

West-Calligrapher3@reddit

Ffs educate yourself. He wanted to go to court maybe before spouting piss know first the real story of why it didn’t.this is what’s wrong with this world - folk like you who have absolutely no idea what yr speaking about and won’t educate yourself as you prefer your version of untruths 
View on Reddit #85746522

Ok_Toe_2694@reddit

ACTUALLY, innocent people and their insurance companies pay all the time to stop a media circus. Michael’s insurance company PUSHED for the 1994 settlement because it was cheaper and faster than a years long trial. Michael even signed a paper saying he was not guilty. He later proved he was innocent in a 2005 trial where he was found not guilty on every single count. Despite ten years of FBI work and many raids on his home, the police never found any illegal evidence. Evan Chandler, the father of the first boy, was caught on tape saying, "If I go through with this, I win big time. There is no way I lose. I will get everything I want and they will be destroyed forever". He also said Michael would "never sell another record". Shortly after these tapes, Evan and his lawyer asked for 20 million dollars to not go to the police lol. The 2005 jury looked at everything for fourteen weeks. Here is what they said after: One juror said they had a lot of stuff to look at, but none of it proved he was a criminal. The jury did not believe the boys mother. They thought she was a scam artist who just wanted money The jury leader said they tried to ignore his fame and just look at the facts. When they did that, they saw that he was NOT guilty So the first claims started as a threat for money from an opportunist. The 2005 jury confirmed that even with all that evidence, there was nothing to prove he was a criminal lol
View on Reddit #84742386

imatornadoofshit@reddit

The FBI never carried out a full blown federal investigation on MJ's allegations. MJ was investigated by the California law agency two times between 2004-2005 and 1993-1994 so basically a total of two years. Since it was a high profile case, the FBI offered technical and investigative assistance, but that was it. You can find all of this in the official FBI website regarding MJ.
View on Reddit #85233582

fanlal@reddit

No insurance company paid anything. Insurance does not cover criminal acts.
View on Reddit #85030192

Aethelu@reddit

I can't maintain more than an acquaintance level with people who defend him. I turn the radio off. It would be part of the litmus test of who I would trust with my kids. My exes mum defended Michael Jackson heavily and for me, having supported multiple adult survivors of child sexual abuse who were cross examined in court, I realised if I ever had kids with my ex her judgement was coming nowhere near my kids.
View on Reddit #84910434

mdmdmdmdmdmdmdmdmdm@reddit

I think he was weird. Maybe a pedo. But I think theres weird parts to both sides of the story. People love to say what youve said. You wouldnt pay millions to for false allegations. But its always forgotten just how bad it was for these pre internet celebrities even without bad publicity. The dude was all sorts of fucked up. I think misunderstood is a great way to put it, probably not in the same way your friend put it though. There are a bunch of people who know all sorts of shit about Michael jackson, but are still confused about the white skin, or the plastic surgery. There are rumours about him having a deep voice. There are anecdotes about him being like this or that. Theres so much cover of Michael jackson and people are still full of misinformation. I think the neverland documentary coming out after his death is a bit odd. I was molested. Idk if my parents would have settled on anything if my molester was michael jackson. Its a lot of money, but also I was their kid and I had been molested. The second case was acquitted by a jury on all 10 counts. There was that huge media uproar about something that didnt have any substantial evidence, despite a huge media campaign about all the evidence the prosecution had. The kids from the neverland documentary had previously said multiple times nothing had happened. Then he died and suddenly they had been molested for years and years. Like ok maybe they were coerced by jacksoj at some point. But at no other point in their lives did anyone ever question them or explain to them what was going on? They said it was only when they had children themselves that they had an epiphany on the fact that it was bad. One of them had applied to work for a Michael jackson production and was denied, then like a year later he realises how bad it was and sues for 100s of millions. I also feel like, the dude could just buy some kids and fuck em. I dunno. Probably a pedo. Definitely misunderstood. The media definitely made loads of money spinning stories about him.
View on Reddit #84553185

marzilibeach@reddit

It's a commont think to pay even for false allegations. Just that the story disappear. Because even false story can hurt an artist.
View on Reddit #84761824

MagentaChair2@reddit

"no one pays multi millions to their accuser to make the allegations go away if they're innocent" That's what I feel. Michael Jackson didn't want the world to know about whatever he did/had with/about children.
View on Reddit #84541536

Big_Escape_8487@reddit

Although I don’t know what the truth is, in all fairness it wasn’t actually MJ who wanted to settle the allegations with pay outs, Michael actually wanted to fight it in court but his management, business advisors and Sony pushed him to do otherwise as they hoped this way it would stay in the dark and nothing was made public as they said this could’ve ruined his career and there was too much money at stake. It wasn’t actually a criminal court case it was a civil one which to me points out that the intention at the beginning was all about gaining money rather than justice. If my kid had been molested I’d want that person behind bars.
View on Reddit #84570278

Vivid_Sun_5636@reddit

> no one pays multi millions to their accuser to make the allegations go away if they're innocent. Insurance companies do, if they assess the risk to them is potentially greater. The big settlement in his lifetime was made by Jackson’s insurers, not Jackson, and likely saved them money on the legal costs of a trial alone. This other major settlement made was by Jackson personally, and although huge by normal standards, $2 million, this is significantly cheaper than just the legal costs even if he was found innocent. Although what you say is true for normal people in UK, the US system of plea deals and settlements and crazy legal costs is very different to the UK legal landscape; plenty of of Americans accept a guilty plea to lessor charges or make settlements even if they are completely innocent. It’s messed up. Not defending him. I have no strong feeling on him either way. But this isn’t really good evidence in itself.
View on Reddit #84564420

WinnerExpensive189@reddit

The only reason it was settled because if Michael went to court the costs being payed were going to be astronomical so that why they settled/resolved it and keep in mind. Michael asked about this with his lawyers.
View on Reddit #84550831

fringe_eater@reddit

People pay all the time. Having an allegation disappear, even when innocent, to protect lost revenue / time / stress makes sense to some people.
View on Reddit #84543247

nikhkin@reddit

>no one pays multi millions to their accuser to make the allegations go away if they're innocent. Not that I'm suggesting he's innocent, but if you're stupidly rich, a payment like that to make an allegation go away could still be cheaper than if your reputation is destroyed.
View on Reddit #84540045

HansJordi@reddit

Exactly. If you’re richer than god, you’re better off paying than risking even a slim chance of being found guilty.  That said, he was definitely a diddler. 
View on Reddit #84540973

Djinjja-Ninja@reddit

Tell that to the Prince formally known as Andrew...
View on Reddit #84540430

nikhkin@reddit

Fortunately, for some people it is more important to get the truth out than to make some money. Otherwise, we might not know what he's really like.
View on Reddit #84540867

Zealousideal-Low3388@reddit

Notice that nobody ever says “I hate his music, but think the way he acted around kids was normal” Because it wasn’t, and only the most deluded fans can pretend otherwise
View on Reddit #84542007

West-Calligrapher3@reddit

I’m looking for the laughing emoji what a total muppet seriously 
View on Reddit #85746158

Pixelater3000@reddit

Yes
View on Reddit #85130545

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Ugh, you never have seen him with kids you m\*ron, have you? You never actually have seen him together with Macaulay Culkin, have you? You're so delusional.
View on Reddit #84984350

Careless_Soup_109@reddit

I really got into this topic a few years ago. Yes.  Two things stand out far and wide, and they are confirmed, not disputed fact: Jackson's most famous accusers during his lifetime are Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo. (Arvizo was the one famously seen holding Jackson's hand in the famous Martin Bashir doc so many people have seen). Today, both Chandler and Arvizo are still alive, but have essentially gone very quiet and avoided the limelight. Now, here is where the facts becoming convincing: * Johnnie Cochran, later OJ Simpson's lawyer, representing Jackson, brings about a settlement with Chandler and his family. The settlement is reportedly about $20 million, or, as much as Jackson paid to buy Neverland Ranch. Now, if you were innocent, would you pay the equivalent of your house to make the case go away?  * Fast forward to a few years ago. Jackson is dead. Gavin Arvizo gets married - and invites anti-MJ journalist Diane Dimond, and prosecutor Ron Zonen to his wedding. Apart from that, we don't really hear of him.  Now think about this: if Arvizo was indeed lying about Jackson's molestation of him, why two decades later invite the prosecutor, Zonen, who did everything he could to have Jackson locked up - but failed - to his own wedding? That seems very, very unlikely. This fact alone swung it for me.  Lastly, Jackson was friends with Sean Lennon, John Lennon's son, as a kid. Watch Sean's music video 'Bubbles Burst' on YouTube and draw your own conclusions at to what Sean thinks of Jackson.
View on Reddit #84554300

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Your research is so god awful it's hard not to lol. Michael didn't want to settle but his insurance company told him to cause they where scared of a year long case which would drain them financially. And besides that he was on tour, to continue touring they told him he/the insurance company needed to settle. It was his mistake for believing them rather than going to court (which he wanted). He also signed not guilty. "Fast forward to a few years ago. Jackson is dead. Gavin Arvizo gets married - and invites anti-MJ journalist Diane Dimond, and prosecutor Ron Zonen to his wedding. Apart from that, we don't really hear of him.  Now think about this: if Arvizo was indeed lying about Jackson's molestation of him, why two decades later invite the prosecutor, Zonen, who did everything he could to have Jackson locked up - but failed - to his own wedding? That seems very, very unlikely. This fact alone swung it for me. " Do you even read what you said? You can't be that st\*pid can you? Is your IQ really lower than 75? Hahaha.
View on Reddit #84985815

Electronic_Worry_927@reddit

Intelligent people don't worship grown men they don't know so...
View on Reddit #85654652

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Who's worshipping? You don't know the difference between worshipping and hating injustice?
View on Reddit #85674388

Electronic_Worry_927@reddit

And what other causes do you support? Do Tell.
View on Reddit #85723845

fanlal@reddit

There was no insurance payout. Show proof if you claim otherwise.
View on Reddit #85029798

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Stop lying and do research yourself. Next I need to prove that the earth is a globe. What's after that?
View on Reddit #85032042

fanlal@reddit

No lies. Look up Mesereau and insurance and you’ll see that Michael Jackson’s own lawyer stated that no insurance company paid anything.
View on Reddit #85032128

purple_temperance@reddit

No, he is innocent. I researched into the Jordan Chandler case and that was just extortion, no molestation took place. I listened to the court transcripts on youtube and wow the inconsistencies in the Arvizo family’s testimony were shocking!! the lies that came to light of the alleged “false imprisonment” and “child molestation” really changed my perspective. I strongly encourage people to read the court transcripts themselves. If you don’t want to read them, they’ve also been uploaded as audio on YouTube. Here’s the playlist: https://youtu.be/zzui5gTTeuE?si=UV2QYzZMtaJcJpVu
View on Reddit #85666991

DiznerdUnfairBanned@reddit

Survivor here 🤚 so don’t give me that you have no idea BS. My answer, No. And if any accuser wanted to truly send a message, they’d sue for nominal damages instead of millions. Emmanuel Lewis would have said something. You can bet your ass Macaulay would have said something. No way he’d be able to keep his mouth shut about something like that. And no amount of hush money would work on someone like that. So then what about Kieran? And Emmanuel’s brother? And all his superstar associates kids? His nephews? His entire teams kids? Waaait for it… his own boys? You think MJ drew a magical line with famous kids and anyone in the family? If rampant abuse was the case, his own kids would have been victims as well. And where are all the little girl victims? He wasn’t gay. His team never should have paid people off. Sounds ridiculous but the rich kidnapper rule. You pay one napper off they’re gonna keep ransoming. MJs team couldn’t be bothered with the additional stress and finances would ensue with court. MJs mental health was already bombing. Was the guy cooky? Absolutely. Irrevocably damaged from a nasty father? Totally. Doped up and ruined by painkillers? Definitely. Raped little boys? Nuhuh.
View on Reddit #85237304

Electronic_Worry_927@reddit

He did it. Smh.
View on Reddit #85654929

Antique_Duck9178@reddit

this is the one.
View on Reddit #85531079

Long_Wait_3078@reddit

The arguments the MJ defenders have is that he was proven innocent in a court of law and also nearly every accuser has seemingly tried to get some financial gain out of the accusations. On top of that a lot of accusers defended when he was alive and now are accusing him. What convinced me recently was watching a doc on the trial in 2005 on Channel 4. They made a good point that people don’t take into account. It’s easy forget now how famous Jackson actually was. It’s hard to describe but there has never been a level of fame like it. He is easily the most famous person to ever be officially documented to of ever lived. With this comes an incredible amount of power. He and the team around him could easily spin narratives about his accusers and to make the accusations less credible, which is kind of what they did. Jackson was a master of dictating the narrative. In the case in 05 the day his accuser took the stand was the day he turned up to court in pyjamas, that’s all the media spoke about. If you listen to testimonies of the 05 case against him, there is A LOT that didn’t see the light of day in the wider media, after reading that for me it’s hard to say he is innocent.
View on Reddit #84586513

julialoveslush@reddit

Nobody is “proven innocent” in a court of law. Cleared is not the same is innocent.
View on Reddit #84897952

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

There's no evidence and he was found unguilty. So, how is someone not proven innocent if there is literally no evidence?? I think you forget this.
View on Reddit #84985888

Electronic_Worry_927@reddit

Unguilty? Making up words now are you
View on Reddit #85654777

NoPie1049@reddit

If there was no evidence it would not have went to court. You can't have a trial with no evidence at all.
View on Reddit #85269298

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Yes you can. Witness testimony is consired evidence. Do you know what they said about the witness testimonies? That they where b\*llocks and unfaithful.
View on Reddit #85340231

julialoveslush@reddit

MJ himself admitted he slept in bed with kids and at one point had “Macauley culkin one side and Kieran the other” just watch this [interview](https://youtu.be/MMrOZte3hvo?si=ASgi6YbrKQPl1JZA). He also happily said he’d let his kids sleep in beds with other adults who weren’t their parents. His out was to compare himself to Jack the Ripper by saying he wasn’t like him.
View on Reddit #85352406

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Yes, he admitted he slept with them, he never admitted he f\*cked them, cause that not happened.
View on Reddit #85389136

julialoveslush@reddit

I mean, is sleeping with children who aren’t your own like that appropriate? How do you know what happened? Were you there?
View on Reddit #85421673

NoPie1049@reddit

A kid was able to describe his d**k. He was a pedophile. Stop defending him. There is so much evidence of what he truly was. Yet his crazy fans choose not to see it. You can't take that he tricked you into believing his lies. He openly admitted to sleeping with children. How can you defend that.
View on Reddit #85347485

SteveBruceGod@reddit

Hard to say, you’ll get a lot of people saying I wouldn’t dare dream of having a sleep over with kids etc but Michael didn’t have a normal life growing up. I haven’t done a deep dive into the case so it’s just what I’ve seen online. Didn’t the fbi do a huge raid on his home and only find like naked cupids of what they deemed as child pornography ? I also find with any of these high profile pedos they don’t just do a few times but to literally every child they met. But with all evidence and his behaviour it’s hard to argue he didn’t do anything.
View on Reddit #84542192

imatornadoofshit@reddit

Nah, the FBI only provided technical and investigative assistance to the investigation of Michael Jackson. The bulk of the investigation was carried out by California law enforcement for a total of two years ( 1993-1994 ) and (2004 - 2005). You can find this on their official website. 'Didn’t the fbi do a huge raid on his home and only find like naked cupids of what they deemed as CP ? I also find with any of these high profile pedos they don’t just do a few times but to literally every child they met.' He has 11 accusers right now. The Californian police didn't find any CP, but they did find books filled with child nudity filed away in a locked closet in his master bedroom. One of those books 'Boys will be Boys!' was written by two convicted pedophiles Martin Swithinbank and Ronald Drew using pseudonyms. There was also a nude photo of a boy believed to be Jonathan Spence, a boy Michael was close to.
View on Reddit #85243010

DiznerdUnfairBanned@reddit

No. And if any accuser wanted to truly send a message, they’d sue for nominal damages instead of millions.
View on Reddit #85232318

Pixelater3000@reddit

No one dislikes his music and thinks he's innocent. His defenders are just delusional fans
View on Reddit #85130771

Dragon_M4st3r@reddit

It’s bizarre that people still think there is a ‘debate’. It was settled long ago, the man did pretty much the worst thing human beings can do and people still idolise and worship him. He should be in the Saville ranks by now
View on Reddit #84543184

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

It was settled long ago?? Yes, by being proven innocent by a 12 head judge. On all counts. You do know there wasn't even any evidence except the witnesses stories. In the 2005 criminal trial, the jury largely found the stories of the prosecution's main witnesses—specifically the accuser's family—to be **inconsistent, non-credible, and untruthful**. But hey.... Dragon\_m4st3r knows more than the jury and knows more than anyone, you have evidence of the wrongdoing. Can you please share the evidence with us? Cause the accusers couldn't but yes, you can. It's laughable and you are the evidence what is wrong in this world.
View on Reddit #84985290

Pixelater3000@reddit

He's clearly guilty
View on Reddit #85130683

thadoctordisco@reddit

It was settled. He was acquited.
View on Reddit #84912556

No_Hurry7691@reddit

I’ve been unbiased about the entire situation. The only people who know what really happened are the people that were actually there, regardless of what “facts” have been presented. Sexual abuse is one of the if not the hardest things to prove. Only 25 in 1000 cases are proven. I’m not going to say his accusers are lying and I’m not going to say they aren’t. However, I will say that diehard fans need to calm the fuck down about it towards people who do believe he is guilty. He was acquitted, so why tf do you even care if someone believes he did it?
View on Reddit #85011329

NoQuit8614@reddit

Normally I would agree with your sentiment. But the media bias against Michael Jackson is jaw dropping. There are tons of facts that stack in his favor and definitely against his accusers' favor that have always been thrown out the window. If the media ever presented the story with a balanced attitude based on fact that would've been acceptable, but that never happened so of course us fans will go hard for him. And it's a big moment for his fan community, if we can't go hard now, when ? : ))
View on Reddit #85082907

MagentaChair2@reddit

Michael Jackson gave money to his accuser(s). Not an act of innocence, I think.
View on Reddit #84541327

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Stop thinking then. Michael Jackson NEVER gave money to his accuser(s). His insurance company did and they advised him to settle cause they where scared for a years long trial which would deplete them financially. On top of that Michael Jackson was touring and if he settled he could stay on the tour (which was already planned out). Michael himself never wanted to settle and he wanted to go to court. IF you think you know something maybe next time ACTUALLY know something and know fact's instead of making up lies and b\*llshit.
View on Reddit #84986083

fanlal@reddit

No insurance payout. Insurance does not cover criminal conduct.
View on Reddit #85030313

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

You really are in lalaland, aren't you? Come back to reality and get your facts straight.
View on Reddit #85032084

fanlal@reddit

No insurance company paid anything. Source Mesereau https://www.reddit.com/r/MJnotinnocent/s/yhcwh3oIv3
View on Reddit #85032446

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Great source. Hahahahaha
View on Reddit #85039975

fanlal@reddit

The source is MJ’s own lawyer. Lol
View on Reddit #85067002

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

In 1994, Michael Jackson settled a civil lawsuit with Jordan Chandler for a total reported amount of approximately **$23 million**. This settlement was paid by Jackson's insurance company, **Transamerica Insurance Group (TIG)**, rather than by Jackson personally. The insurer chose to settle to avoid the high costs and uncertainty of a trial, despite Jackson's desire to fight the allegations, according to reports. Do some research you lying brick.
View on Reddit #85032171

fanlal@reddit

Source? lol
View on Reddit #85032477

RecentTwo544@reddit

Also worth noting that in the UK he'd have probably been found guilty. The offences he was charged with were criminal not civil (obviously) so it would have been him vs the Crown, not him vs his victims as it was in the US. So he couldn't have paid them off and doing so would have landed him with extra criminal charges.
View on Reddit #84544118

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Also worth noting you are telling lies and b\*llshit it's hard to not lol. Have you completely missed 2005?
View on Reddit #84986020

Barkasia@reddit

He had a [criminal trial.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Michael_Jackson)
View on Reddit #84571011

WinnerExpensive189@reddit

Well keep in mind the family flies a civil lawsuit and not a criminal lawsuit there’s a difference between the two.
View on Reddit #84550941

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

Yes. He had alarm bells leading to his bedroom, why else would you need that?
View on Reddit #84540554

StunningPizza3747@reddit (OP)

First I’ve heard of this - omg.
View on Reddit #84540839

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

It was in Leaving Neverland, according to the documentary his own staff knew he had an alarm system that would ring a bell in his bedroom when someone was coming down the main corridor.
View on Reddit #84541091

Empty_Bell_1942@reddit

Yet all their lurid allegations were thrown out of court when they tried to sue his estate.
View on Reddit #84619240

fanlal@reddit

Incorrect, there will be a trial soon.
View on Reddit #85029866

Empty_Bell_1942@reddit

No, correct, they were dismissed, twice. You mean the new appeal.
View on Reddit #85035439

fanlal@reddit

They weren’t “rejected” on the merits. Those were procedural rulings, not findings that their allegations were false. Their cases have moved forward and are set to go to trial.
View on Reddit #85035616

Ok_Toe_2694@reddit

Being downvoted for literally telling the truth, lol. All of the people against Michael Jackson are so willfully ignorant, it is sad. They throw around rumors rather than actual confirmed evidenc
View on Reddit #84741772

Mysterious-Show-2333@reddit

A lot of famous people who fear getting robbed or killed?
View on Reddit #84726332

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

So you're fine with the man having alarms on the way to the bedroom that he had children staying in with him? I'm worried about intruders I alarm the doors and windows of my house to keep them out entirely not one that trips whenever anyone (including his own staff and visitors it wasn't turned off in the day) walks down the long hall to the bedroom.
View on Reddit #84749324

Mysterious-Show-2333@reddit

He didnt have one alarm that tripped whenever a person stepped into the corridor. First of all because it would be set up everytime anybody would walk there, which is inconvenient. Also because it would have to be installed by someone and that person would find it suspicious.
View on Reddit #84770349

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

Well that's what the documentary claims and if the people claiming it are correct it's as you say, very suspicious. About as suspicious as a grown mam having kids sleeping in his bedroom which MJ did.
View on Reddit #84783224

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Ohhh. The "About as suspicious as a grown man having kids sleeping in his bedroom which MJ did." That's not suspicious. What is suspicious is you thinking anything sexual about that. That makes you the pervert not Jackson. You are the one giving a sleepover a sexual meaning. Are you maybe touched by your cousin on a sleepover or something? That you don't know there isn't anything sexual about a sleepover. I think you either touched yourself or you lacked a lot of love in your life. I hope you will receive some love some day. And I also hope there will be a day you'll realize there isn't anything sexual about a sleepover.
View on Reddit #84984866

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

So a celebrity asks you to let your kids sleep at his house in his bed your answer is yes?
View on Reddit #84998345

Careless_Soup_109@reddit

I believe Jackson is guilty, however, I don't read too deeply into the alarmed bedroom.  1) Rich people commonly have lots of security. It's not unusual to want privacy. 2) if you believe Neverland staff, Jackson molested his child friends all around Neverland . So why would Jackson only alarm his bedroom?
View on Reddit #84554509

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

Just because having an alarmed bedroom is common doesn't make it any less unnerving. The world we live in today makes it clear that nonces are more prevalent than I'd ever suspected so why is an alarmed bedroom walkway less suspect?
View on Reddit #84554805

Careless_Soup_109@reddit

I'm saying it's not great evidence by itself.
View on Reddit #84555079

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

Believe the victims when it's anyone except lots of kids and a famous guy eh? Jimmy Saville says hi.
View on Reddit #84555967

Whole-Net-2138@reddit

First thing they said was “I believe Jackson is guilty”. Tf are you yapping about?
View on Reddit #84831282

Nice-Goose-7599@reddit

My mistake, read it too fast as "I don't believe"
View on Reddit #84833973

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

Yeah, just as you read to fast to get the actual facts straight you m\*ron. And your brain thinks to fast to actually think even for a second.
View on Reddit #84984758

NoQuit8614@reddit

This guy had a homeless man enter his home and live in secret for days in one of his closets. Why indeed would you need alarm sensors when you are Michael Jackson. People parachuted on his property.
View on Reddit #84624611

Jazzlike-Grape-1999@reddit

No, absolutamente no, me parece que MJ era una persona muy noble, le faltó la infancia que tuvimos la mayoría y por eso hizo el rancho Neverland donde invitaba niños para que pudieran ser niños, él tuvo una infancia muy dura y por eso eran sus comportamientos extraños e incluso infantiles, es cierto que dormía con niños en su habitación, pero nadie toma en cuenta cómo era su habitación, no dormían en la misma cama, como ya dije él era una persona increíblemente noble y por esa misma “ingenuidad”, se podría decir, dejo que mucha gente se aprovechara de él 
View on Reddit #85022329

Shot-Specialist-9841@reddit

If it was the same situation but a random guy on your street would it even be a question?
View on Reddit #84544861

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

There's no evidence even the accusers couldn't give any evidence, so yes. In the 2005 criminal trial, the jury largely found the stories of the prosecution's main witnesses—specifically the accuser's family—to be **inconsistent, non-credible, and untruthful**. Even a random guy on the streets would be found to be proven innocent.
View on Reddit #84985387

HarlequinKing1406@reddit

Even if he didn't do anything illegal that can be proven, at the bare minimum he outright admitted that he slept in the same bed as children and called it a beautiful thing. That should be at minimum seen as *extremely* inappropriate and would put anybody else on a registry if they did it.
View on Reddit #84540416

girlandhiscat@reddit

The man also said he never had any sort of work or plastic surgery. They guy changed everything about himself, to the point he used a fake voice and people think this man wasn't guilty.  Also, who tf wants to sleep in the same bed as a child that IS theirs, let alone isn't. It's fucking annoying. 
View on Reddit #84582918

CelebrationFit7615@reddit

He didn't use a fake voice you m\*ron, how can he have a fake voice if he speaks with it? That makes it his voice. You aren't the same person in a job interview or with your best friend, are you fake in the job interview then? "Also, who tf wants to sleep in the same bed as a child that IS theirs, let alone isn't. It's fucking annoying." We can see you never got any love when you where a child. I hope you'll ever find someone who gives you the love you deserve.
View on Reddit #84984273

MagentaChair2@reddit

"he slept in the same bed as children and called it a beautiful thing" Creepy AF!
View on Reddit #84541669

thadoctordisco@reddit

Of course not. If you look at the evidence and the testimonies of the accusers, it's pretty self explanatory.
View on Reddit #84912527

quite_acceptable_man@reddit

There was obviously something weird and inappropriate going on, probably related to the childhood he never had himself. One thing that really surprises me is the absence of his name in the Epstein Files.
View on Reddit #84599011

Subaruforever38@reddit

DUH. He was innocent. That's why. 
View on Reddit #84908605

julialoveslush@reddit

Yes. Watched an old interview with him recently and the way he justifies his actions by saying he’s not like Jack the Ripper is…a choice. I also noticed he said he slept in the same bed as the culkin brothers. Yet Macauley says this didn’t happen. Methinks he was paid off.
View on Reddit #84897900

SWFC_wawaw_fan@reddit

All I’m saying is, half of you who have energy for MJ on here wouldn’t have the same energy for all your favourite politicians going to see a certain billionaire on a certain island somewhere in the americas MJ wasn’t on no Epstein list or whatever. And trust me a man like Epstein would have loved to have courted MJ’s attention in the 90s - come on the man was as big as Jesus at that point
View on Reddit #84874737

Sea-Stranger-3822@reddit

Yes I'm believe it true,years ago he made friends with a boy in England well michael Jackson was trying to talk dirty to him,The boy all contact with him true story look it up
View on Reddit #84866449

weierstrab2pi@reddit

A few years back, I was on a train with Owen Jones and Paul Gambaccini, and they were talking very loudly, so that the whole carriage could hear them. Paul Gambaccini mentioned about how one time they ran a radio competition for a kid to have a phone-in with Michael Jackson. He said it was very obvious during the phonecall with the kid that Jackson was masturbating down the phoneline.
View on Reddit #84774466

Personal-Pea-5964@reddit

Don't think that's true
View on Reddit #84821635

weierstrab2pi@reddit

I only report what Paul Gambaccini told a carriage full of passangers on the train from Manchester to Euston many years ago (Iirc Owen Jones was trying to compose a joke about Liz Truss's government, and so it must have been about that time).
View on Reddit #84831752

Personal-Pea-5964@reddit

[ Removed by Reddit ]
View on Reddit #84845478

Personal-Pea-5964@reddit

Guilty or not just seperate the art from the artist and enjoy his music.
View on Reddit #84820653

On_The_Blindside@reddit

Almost certainly yes.
View on Reddit #84585436

aliensupastar@reddit

I often wonder is he had a personality disorder or something. In videos he says “Michael Jackson would never hurt a child” and that sounds ok… but what if he didn't see his self as Michael in those instances. He often referred to himself as forever young. I know a lot of people talk about having an inner child, but what if he took that seriously. Like he seriously saw his self as a child… I don't know, I definitely agree that his childhood ruined him, but I also don't think being the most famous person in the world helped.
View on Reddit #84805253

Totodile336@reddit

Yeah nobody should denounce what he allegedly(definitely) did but knowing his inner circle and how he was raised it makes some sense why he grew up to become a monster
View on Reddit #84700296

Upbeat_Psychology_71@reddit

I used to think he was a peado, and for a very long time nothing could of changed my mind.  I had a conversation with one of my teachers at school, who said to me "if a man sexually abused your children, you would want him to burn in hell and spend the rest of his days in prison, where they abuse child molesters"  Fast forward to being a parent and I couldn't agree with her more. Yes he most likely had a very unhealthy relationships with children, and he was definitely a strange dude, but after reading all the case notes, I gotta believe he wasn't  a peadophile.
View on Reddit #84793253

lisa-on-the-moon@reddit

After watching Leaving Neverland I don’t have any doubts. I just can’t believe those men lied about it…all those graphic details…I cannot not believe it
View on Reddit #84706459

Hampshire-UK@reddit

Yes but his brand is too valuable
View on Reddit #84660603

BusyBeeBridgette@reddit

I think he was a deeply troubled man who had many mental problems and I think he was stuck in a child's mindset. As Dave Chappelle once said "Why not Macaulay Culkin?". I guess he took one too many right hooks from dear ol' papa and it perma brain damaged him. I think he wanted to have sleep overs, sure. Probably had many. but I don't think he did anything sexual. Still creepy though.
View on Reddit #84640626

Temporary-Prune-9237@reddit

I’m glad brits can distinguish nonces unlike the shitload of American dumbfounded comments I’ve read about Jackson.
View on Reddit #84636945

Opening_Nose_2347@reddit

I'm not a fan but don't I think he was sexual with the kids. I think he had some mania to find he's inner child.
View on Reddit #84542333

jamesdownwell@reddit

So you think the men in Finding Neverland lied about being abused as children despite their highly specific and detailed accounts which often match each other’s?
View on Reddit #84544196

NoQuit8614@reddit

Yes.
View on Reddit #84624884

Opening_Nose_2347@reddit

Yeah.
View on Reddit #84545604

RecentTwo544@reddit

Which is the entire problem and doesn't excuse it. When I was 12 or 13 it wasn't that unusual to knock one out near or with your mates, and this isn't unusual for teenage lads. By most victims accounts this is the very least of the behaviour Jackson got up to with lads around that age, so the "trying to relive his youth" thing stacks up, but obviously isn't excusable when you're not another boy of that age, but rather a man in his 40s. it may explain it, but it certainly doesn't excuse it.
View on Reddit #84544492

Opening_Nose_2347@reddit

You obviously have more experience of things like that.
View on Reddit #84545797

RecentTwo544@reddit

It's not a conversation that comes up often obviously when you're in your 20s/30s/40s but when it has been mentioned it's way more normal than you'd realise. It wasn't "gay" either, more "look what we can do haha". Much like around the same age we weren't suicidal but would do stupid shit like jumping off a roof on your bike that you'd have to be suicidal to do in adulthood.
View on Reddit #84546700

Opening_Nose_2347@reddit

As Implied, I didn't do stuff like that, perhaps it's being of an older generation.
View on Reddit #84548776

followthewaypoint@reddit

Yes absolutely. Never had a real girlfriend, was sleeping in the same bed with them, the alarm system and hallway of doors and not to mention the whole Peter Pan persona. All hallmark signs of a peadofile.
View on Reddit #84616190

chiakoiv@reddit

I find It hard to say. I've been a fan of his since I was 8, when he died. Growing up I started to look up his personal life other than the music, up to this day, and I'm more inclined towards believing that his behaviour was inappropriate, but not sexual. People say that we wouldn't excuse the same behaviour on a random person, and it's true and I won't, but he definitely wasn't a normal person, both because of his life story and his fame that made him a target: since his childhood he went from living in a small space with all of his brothers, no personal boundaries or privacy, with an abusive father, to life in the showbusinnes where he was a kid surrounded by adults, constantly working, struggling to develop real relationships, no childhood and extreme loneliness besides his toxic family, this would deeply damage anyone. And then he distanced himself from the family too. There is weird stuff coming from both ways for sure, it's kinda insane that so many people had the chance to come forward when it mattered and things would have been in their favour, and they either didn't or they did it in such a questionable way.
View on Reddit #84615146

lidlberg@reddit

I'm getting the word...
View on Reddit #84539575

West_Yorkshire@reddit

Shamone!
View on Reddit #84593347

Clueingforbeggs@reddit

I’m disgusted by the fact that a film has been made about his life, to the point where if I open Reddit on my phone and see an ad for it, I report it as inappropriate. Take a guess how I feel about Michael Jackson.
View on Reddit #84586366

medlilove@reddit

Yeah I do now that I’m older and there’s so many consistent stories by different groups of people
View on Reddit #84555284

YumBukkake@reddit

I'm more towards yeah he fucked around, there's way too much weirdness to his life. I'd like to hope he was reliving a missed childhood or whatever but even that shouldn't have been happening really.
View on Reddit #84549151

Mediocre-Opinion@reddit

Yes https://preview.redd.it/iq8exdveblxg1.jpeg?width=640&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=32ecf069a2e5bb42e5f74a8b4a2ee70969a29409
View on Reddit #84546077

Low_Border_2231@reddit

He admitted to having sleepovers with little boys. That alone is grooming behaviour, you don't have to specifically prove any sexual contact took place. 
View on Reddit #84545891

290Richy@reddit

2 sides to every story. Not defending him but it's every time they're dead and not hear to defend himself. He was certainly weird at least. Meanwhile there's an orange ape with blonde hair who's listed quite clearly within certain files that's running a certain nation freely and nothing is being done about that... World is cooked.
View on Reddit #84542073

jamesdownwell@reddit

> 2 sides to every story. Not defending him but it's every time they're dead and not here to defend themselves. He was certainly weird at least. We talking about Savile or Jackson here?
View on Reddit #84544865

Ok_Cow_3431@reddit

Always believed it but with everything over the past 12-18months and the Mackaulay Culkin stuff Im actually willing to believe the "saving kids from Epstein" line
View on Reddit #84539747

RecentTwo544@reddit

This is right wing MAGA conspiracy bollocks.
View on Reddit #84544555

MountainMuffin1980@reddit

What do you mean?
View on Reddit #84539993

nikhkin@reddit

There are unfounded claims that Culkin stated Michael Jackson protected children from Epstein and "spied" on his island.
View on Reddit #84540180

RecentTwo544@reddit

John Niven (former A&R guy for London Records turned novelist) wrote this fantastic article which was, amazingly, publisher just days after Jackson died - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/michael-jackson-bad-and-very-dangerous-1731258.html Sums it up for me. Also see Niven's fantastic novel Kill Em All which features a villain clearly based on Jackson. Needs to be made into a film, unlikely though as the film adaptation of his first novel (Kil Your Friends, also fantastic) was utterly dreadful to the point the audio was mixed so badly you could barely hear the dialogue.
View on Reddit #84543982

CreativeAdeptness477@reddit

If he wasn't, he didn't do himself any favours with the way he behaved.
View on Reddit #84542713

reggieko13@reddit

Talking about it recently and it does seem there is a different opinion based purely on how good the music is
View on Reddit #84542401

idontlikemondays321@reddit

Probably for 20% of crimes he was accused of
View on Reddit #84541678

HamsterEagle@reddit

Because it’s bad, it’s bad, shamone (bad, bad, really, really bad) You know it’s bad, it’s bad (bad, bad) You know it (really, really bad) You know it’s bad, it’s bad (bad, bad) Shamone, you know (really, really bad) And the whole world has to answer right now Just to tell you once again It’s bad?
View on Reddit #84541300

Boring-Equivalent315@reddit

I’m always 100% a victim believer but I genuinely think he was just a damaged, mentally unbalanced man who regressed into childhood as much as he could. And had the money and status to indulge it.
View on Reddit #84540691

Mysterious-Sock39@reddit

Right fucking weirdo
View on Reddit #84540121

maxmarioxx_@reddit

I think Michael Jackson was weird in some aspects but l think he was innocent and the allegations were just people milking some money. How do l know this? There was no actual proof of anything and most of the kinds who were around him at the time - including McCaulay Culkin - defended him on multiple occasions. There were however new revelations of how the parents of some of the kids he had at Neverland were encouraged by their own parents to sleep with Michael and other weird stuff.
View on Reddit #84539925

AcceptableRedPanda@reddit

No smoke without fire
View on Reddit #84539499

Bibb5ter@reddit

Is that what 1,000 years of the English Judicial system comes to?
View on Reddit #84539810

So_Gawjus@reddit

Chance would be a fine thing.
View on Reddit #84539848

Plastic-Lie1492@reddit

A fine thing indeed
View on Reddit #84539898

AcceptableRedPanda@reddit

Yes
View on Reddit #84539858

MixingWeedWithWine@reddit

Yes I do
View on Reddit #84539681

Alarmed-Syllabub8054@reddit

I'm getting the word.... https://preview.redd.it/l6o84w2cukxg1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=17c199fc717a552013e2c8fd80f97ca4ff6d32d1
View on Reddit #84539674

Upstairs-Balance9846@reddit

obviously he but his hands all over them, but I think it was non-sexual.
View on Reddit #84539598

AutoModerator@reddit

**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - When replying to submission/post please **make genuine efforts to answer the question given**. Please no jokes, judgements, etc. If a post is marked 'Serious Answers Only' **you may receive a ban for violating this rule**. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
View on Reddit #84528760