Quote:
Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan
I think the "pedophilia" angle is a really tough one in this case. The actions of the family look more like extortion than the actions of a family seeking justice against someone who abused their child, but that doesn't mean he didn't do it. However, it's worth keeping one thing in mind: until Martin Bashir's hatchet job on Michael and the boy in question, the family had no interest in going to court.
My instinct--based on nothing other than seeing interviews with him--is that he was not a child molester, but a deeply unhealthy, broken individual who believed that he was still a child. In the Bashir documentary he seemed perpetually confused, naive, and like a person who was being victimized by the people around him constantly.
With that said, I wouldn't want my kids "spending the night" with a person who so clearly believes himself to be a child. I think that sort of "Peter Pan" syndrome leads to profoundly unhealthy relationships with children, and do have the risk of being harmful even if they aren't abusive.
I don't know for a fact that he didn't abuse the boy in question. But nor does anyone else "know for a fact" that he did. But Jackson doesn't really fit the profile; pedophiles are adults who victimize children in a predatory way--they get off on power, control, hurting, etc. They are truly evil, scum of the earth people who deserve no sympathy. The thing is, the vibe I got from Jackson was different--it was more like he was in every important sense a child himself, vulnerable and sad as well as neurotic and mentally broken.
And he was clearly a musical genius. The Chaplin comparison is a good one; there's no escaping the fact that Chaplin liked very young girls--he was sort of famous for it. But that doesn't change the fact that he transformed the world of film. Michael Jackson was on the same order in terms of being a musical innovator.
|
This sums up my feelings as well. My buddy's sister said it best after watching the documentary you mentioned. Her main point was that while he no doubt acts in an inappropriate manner around children, when it comes to actually sexually molesting them, it doesn't seem like he'd even know what to do.
While a case could definitely be made for molestation, I think there's an equally strong case that he was totally extorted. That's why I'm not quick to jump on Rerun's bandwagon of hatred towards the guy, because I just can't be certain he did anything sexual (and in my opinion, neither can anybody else).
As for his music, no doubt he was one of the most influential artists of all time. Personally I feel about him as I do the beatles. He brought something new and fresh to the table and forced people to think about music in a new way, but on a personal level i find the music to be overrated.