Michael Jackson  » People  »
5.0
1 votes
Are you familiar with this?
Feel free to rate it!
  • There are many people who appreciate that he was an amazing performing artist but who also think he is a paedophile
  • I will not be psychoanalyzing Jackson here and so I will not be going into the issue of WHY he should want to do this
  • The main problem with the Arvizo case for me personally was the unlikely allegation of sexual abuse the family had made against the security guards of a department store years before
  • I think his motive is not money but, horribly enough, titiliation, and I wish Sky News would stop interviewing that man and calling him Michael Jackson’s friend

    • by jeanne71
      TRUSTWORTHY

      all reviews
      This is not a review of Michael Jackson as an artist, but as a person. There are many people who appreciate that he was an amazing performing artist but who also think he is a paedophile. Such people believe that they are only being realistic considering the facts. In this simple review, I intend to show that if we look at the facts behind the facts, a different story emerges.

      It is undeniable that Jackson loved children. He donated millions of dollars to children’s charities and spent a fortune entertaining thousands of sick and disadvantaged children at his Neverland Ranch theme park and zoo. What is harder for people to understand is the fact that as well as his many close adult friends, Jackson was close friends with certain children too, playing with them and laughing as though he was their own age instead of a grown man. I will not be psychoanalyzing Jackson here and so I will not be going into the issue of WHY he should want to do this. It was really only when the accusations started flying, that the public started to suspect that his motives were sexual. Let’s look at the main accusations against him.

      His first accuser was Jordie Chandler back in 1993, one of Jackson’s aforementioned ‘close friends’. Jackson was never arrested for any crime to do with Jordie Chandler, but Jordie’s parents brought a civil case against him which is a very different thing. Jackson’s insurers paid an undisclosed sum to the Chandlers in an out of Court settlement. People will often say that because Jackson paid out of Court then he must be guilty. I have worked in law for 20 years and out of Court settlements are no admission of guilt but are often the cheaper alternative to fighting the case in Court. Any lawyer will tell you that.

      The main


      element that discredits Jordie’s allegations is his own father who was secretly taped talking about his case against Jackson, and amongst other things he says “If I go through with this, I will win big time”. I fail to see how anyone can hear that tape without being suspicious of the man’s motives. This is widely available on the internet if you are interested. I was not then surprised to find out that in 2006 Jordie Chandler accused his own father of trying to kill him. The agreement reached between the Chandlers and Jackson is conditional upon neither of the parties ever talking about it again, but I would like to see the day when Jordie speaks out.

      Next, there was the Bashir documentary in 2003. Martin Bashir was famous for his interview with Princess Diana and Jackson was thus lulled into the false impression that he would represent his love for children in an honest way and in context, as opposed to tabloid titiliation. But no, it was the most sinister documentary ever, showing Jackson holding hands with Gavin Arvizo whilst the child rests his head on his shoulder, Bashir’s ominous narration making it seem even more sinister.

      Gavin was a dark and handsome teenager. It did practically look as though we were witnessing a homosexual man and his young lover. We’ve seen Dirk Bogarde in ‘Death in Venice’ obsessing after that beautiful boy so we know that some men do like that sort of thing. But what we weren’t shown is the footage of Jackson holding hands with Gavin before his cancer had gone into remission and he was bald, pale and skinny, and far less appealling than that beautiful healthy boy he was in the documentary. Put in that context, the fact they are holding hands doesn’t look sexual at all.

      The main problem with the Arvizo case for me personally was the ...


      • unlikely allegation of sexual abuse the family had made against the security guards of a department store years before. This included a female security guard by the way. Janet Arvizo and her children, including Gavin, were caught on the car park of the department store with stolen goods. Janet claims she was sexually assaulted by the guards when they took her and the children back to the office. She brought a civil case against the store and won a healthy out of Court settlement. This incident must raise some suspicions about the moral integrity of the family, and when the Arvizo case against Jackson went to trial in 2005, the behaviour of Janet Arvizo on the witness stand confirmed those suspicions in the eyes of the jury.

        The other main allegation about Michael Jackson is a different kettle of fish altogether as it has never gone to Court at all, but it has received plenty of notoriety here in the UK tabloids nevertheless. This is the allegation of Terry George, a self-made millionaire who first met Jackson when he interviewed him before he started his solo career. George was only about 13 at the time and to this day he alleges that Jackson was clearly sexually aroused during one of their many long-distance telephone conversations.

        George has always seemed to be the most plausible of Jackson’s accusers because, for a start, he is already very rich and does not need the money, and for another thing he claims that he does not want to make a fuss about that phone call because it was no big deal and he never felt like he was being abused at the time. He comes across as genuine precisely because he apparently wants to play the incident down rather than play it up as you imagine a liar would. But, wait until you find out about Terry George.

        Look at

        his website and you will see that his attitude towards paedophilia is different to most people. He is actually quite leery about it and argues that it is OK as long as the boy is consenting. Wiki says that George “owns a gay directory inquiries service, a gay adult chatline industry, adult SMS text services”…. I would not dream of suggesting that all gay men have tendencies towards paedophilia, but George’s excuses for paedophilia on his seedy website do discredit him as far as I am concerned. I think his motive is not money but, horribly enough, titiliation, and I wish Sky News would stop interviewing that man and calling him Michael Jackson’s friend. If Jackson could see that website and what it says about him he would never call him a friend.

        I will wrap this up now. Obviously there is much more detail and this has all been gone over at Court. All I wanted to do here was raise a few of the issues that make people convinced that he was guilty of this crime that our society so despises. A lot of us can appreciate that one person can lie, but if two people lie then we start thinking that there is no smoke without fire. I think maybe I am writing this from a very personal motive. I have been lied about, although in my case the supposed crime I committed was not remotely so serious. That was bad enough, but years later, with a completely different motive a second person lied about me who built upon the first lie. A lot of people believe the both of them now! I am all too aware that there really does not have to be any fire where there is smoke and our willingness to believe the worst of someone may be a reflection of us rather than them.




    more about
    Michael Jackson
    • Don't Be Nice. Be Helpful.

    The review was published as it's written by reviewer in October, 2009. The reviewer certified that no compensation was received from the reviewed item producer, trademark owner or any other institution, related with the item reviewed. The site is not responsible for the mistakes made. 52310855790731/k2311a103/10.3.09
    Your use of this website constitutes acceptance of the Terms & Conditions
    Privacy Policy