I never thought either of the two accusations made against him were credible, and there were countless people who vouched that he never did anything inappropriate. One man who knew him said he was such a good father, it made him ashamed. Everyone close to him seemed to echo this sentiment. He is probably one of the most tragic, mysterious and misunderstood figures in pop culture history.

I remember watching the news every day during the that trial. They almost went to any lengths imaginable to bring this man down. They even created an awful exception just for him, which allowed "prior bad acts" to be admitted as evidence in court for an unrelated case, regardless of if you were ever actually charged with anything (which he wasn't). So the DA brought all these disgruntled ex-employees and whatnot to come give their flimsy hearsay testimonies, and showed absolutely no interest in corroborating the accounts with people who were actually accused of being molested. For instance, the DA found one guy who suddenly remembered witnessing Macauly Culkin being molested by Michael Jackson, so immediately put him on the stand to testify. Shockingly, he didn't even bother to attempt to contact Culkin himself, who had to actually come to court to defend himself and Jackson by stating, no, actually I was NOT molested. Jordy Chandler, who was the boy involved in the 93 accusation (made primarily by his parents btw, who he has now been estranged from for many years, probably because they used him for money), had the opportunity to come testify against Michael Jackson in 2005. He chose not to. I would think if someone who had been molested by Jackson finally had a chance to put him behind bars, and prevent anyone else from experiencing the same, they would.

The entire ordeal was surreal and unprofessional to an amazing degree, but regardless of all the crazy allegations and paper-thin evidence they could dredge up, from every available source they could find after numerous raids of his property, he still came back with unanimous NOT GUILTY on all counts by all jury members. Remember, much of the previous accusations WERE finally aired in court in 2005. All the cards were put on the table, and to those who were actually required to examine the evidence, no convincing case could be made. If anything, taking a closer look at the evidence makes one realize how victimized Jackson has been in the entire ordeal.

I understand why most people think he's guilty. It seems almost a no-brainer. Obvious. Freaky weird guy obsessed with childhood and childish things, loves kids, gets accused, etc. So I get it. But most people don't really bother to actually look closely into the accusations, because it DOES seem so obvious. And thats why Michael Jackson was accused in the first place IMO. He was the perfect target. No one would question an accusation against him. Extremely rich, extremely weird, obsessed with childish things. And yet countless children enjoyed his company, even remaining friends into adulthood, and always vouched that he was like just another kid to them hanging out. Trying to be normal in some way. Out of those many people he befriended, two ended up involved in accusations against him, both heavily driven by their parents, and both quite incredible upon closer examination.

Good article on the 93 case: http://www.usnewslink.com/framedjackson.htm

And this book is supposed to be a great account of the trial and circumstances surrounding it (although I have not read it yet), written by a journalist who was convinced of his guilt until she investigated and completely changed her mind: http://www.amazon.com/Michael-Jackson-Conspiracy-Aphrodite-Jones/dp/0979549809/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246284065&sr=8-1

There IS a reason 12 white jurors from a conservative area unanimously found Jackson not guilty on all counts. When you actually examine the evidence, it becomes clear that not only are the accusations not credible, but they are clearly motivated by a desire for money.

The Arvisos were laughably unbelievable in court. I remember they came out with an entire timeline of claims, and when it was shown to be impossible due to other circumstances, they simply changed it. They changed their story every day. The events, the timeline, everything. They added things as time went on. They were, by the end, more of a joke than Jackson seemed to be at the beginning.

I'm actually glad in a way that it all went to trial in 2005, and that they put all their cards on the table. To me, it was closest Jackson ever came to being completely vindicated.

Jackson did have an obsession with regaining his childhood, hence his obsession with the Peter Pan story and 'Neverland' theme park. But that is not evidence that he's a child molester. We all know he was insane and a 'freak.' That does not make him guilty. When you examine the cases, the evidence is not there, aside from the circumstantial "oh he's weird and likes kids" stuff.

Has anyone here ever been accused of something they were innocent of, but everyone assumed they were guilty because of other circumstances and no one cared to look at the actual evidence? Its a truly awful feeling.

Posted by Wes | June 29, 2009 4:00 PM
___________________

I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why so many people are besides themselves over the death of a drug addict who was a known pedophile. Michael Jackson is certainly someone none of us should be extolling as a role model or icon for the masses. People simply have to be stupid to think of him as someone who should be remembered and respected.

Posted by Dr. Tim Martin | June 27, 2009 11:12 PM
___________________

Hey, have you seen this news article?
New details about Michael Jackson's Death Emerge
I was wondering if you were going to blog about this...

Posted by Michael | June 26, 2009 12:16 AM
___________________