Guilty or Innocent?
First off I’d ask the question as to whether it’s now trial by documentary and virtue signalling. Are you not innocent until proved guilty anymore? Michael was acquitted of these crimes in an LA court a number of times but I guess dead man don't sue and so there are opportunists who will make money from making claims. The mother of one of the men in the documentary has already called her son a pathological liar because he was never with Michael alone. But it seems these days the facts don't matter. There are a lot of unresolved issues with the complaints of these two accusers and their families. Not only the hush money that was paid by Jackson, but considering these relationships lasted years, other possible motives need clearing up.
In many ways it’s scary how he was found not guilty. But the men who started this and featured in the documentary actually testified in court that he did nothing wrong, but now they say he did! So when did they lie? Then or now? This is the question that both these guys and their parents need to be asked. In this age of #MeToo these two guys who have made the accusations but said the opposite under oath in courts of law, are now being believed without question or evidence.
You have to question the parent’s judgement and motives too. There’s nothing wrong taking young fans and parents to spend a day with a pop star, but sleepovers are completely another level. Let’s say back in the day Madonna had begged my parents for me to stay over for a full night, I know for sure they’d have said ‘No’. It’s a long way from normal for adults to have sleepovers with kids no matter if they famous or not. So what kind of parent in their right mind would seriously let their child go to a sleepover with a single adult male? Plus, you’d have thought that If anything did go on, there must have been changes in the child's behaviour when they got home, especially when they were asked to go back for another night.
Other Musical Paedo’s
There is a certain hypocrisy over the media banning Jackson’s music. Yes, the likes of Gary Glitter have been rightly ostracised and punished for his heinous crimes against children and his work is no longer heard on the media, but it probably wouldn’t be heard anyway because it’s of its time, you don't hear much else of that glam genre now. What it does beg is the question of why Michael Jackson has been zeroed in for removal from the airwaves? Is it just he’s an easy target? What about all the other singers and showmen that targeted young girls and boys especially during the rock n roll era? Why are their legacies not being destroyed too?
Why is Bill Wyman still hiding in plain sight? Mandy Smith has admitted numerous times she was underage when they first had sex. Are the media going to stop playing Rolling Stones records? Even Wyman himself has said she was 13 when he started a sexual relationship with her so I've never understood why he’s never had his collar felt by the police.
R Kelly seems to be a different kettle of fish. He’s in court for kiddy-fiddling yet his music is still being played by the media. But will they ban his records when he’s found guilty? Watch this space!
Climate of Abuse and Litigation
In the whole climate of sexual abuse today, even just suspicion is enough to ruin someone. It's doesn't matter about guilt or not, especially in show business. I don't know if Michael Jackson did it or not, it's only suspicion and you can’t put a dead man on trial. As I’ve already said, paying hush money was not the cleverest thing to do, but I’d guess his legal advisors would have suggested it. That being said it still doesn’t prove anything. He was investigated, trialled and nothing was found, now he’s dead his accusers are changing what they testified in court, for what reason? Justice, or a payout?
It does seem very easy these days for people to come out of the woodwork and say this happened or that happened yet there is no proof. And how expensive is it for these peoples to go to court to clear their name? How much did it cost Cliff Richard? Michael Jackson went to court on a number of occasions, each time he was found innocent, it cost him a fortune, did the people who accused him have to pay back the money? No, that was his loss, so why go to court unless you have to? These people say they lied on oath but now they have changed their minds. How do we know they aren't lying now?
Genius or Weirdo?
Michael Jackson was a musical genius and that should not be denied. I’d say music is music, I listen to the songs not judge who is singing or who wrote it. I can separate art from the artist and if the mood takes me I'll still listen to Michael Jackson. Let's face it he was a weird but very talented person and his music is still fantastic.
Even if he was guilty, he's dead. He personally sees no benefit when his music gets played today. Meanwhile, all the other people who receive his royalties lose out. Not to mention Michael's children, yes, I know Paris has a knack for rubbing people up the wrong way, but the boys seem to legitimately be decent kids. Prince commented in an interview last year that he can't sing or dance, but would really like to do good in this world so why hurt them because of what their father may or may not have done?
Music is about our own memories. I have no idea if Jackson did any or some of the stuff he's accused of and nor do the media. It's just another witch hunt, Michael Jackson is not here to defend himself.
He was a brilliant musician, a seriously screwed up individual and in all honesty, I’m pretty sure he's guilty but there’s no proof and probably never will be. So move on folks. Enjoy his music for what it was and turn it off if you find him, his music or his legacy offensive.
No comments:
Post a Comment