Michael Jackson interviewer Martin Bashir - BUSTED! (1 Viewer)

[Benson R]

Actually the witness never recanted. The witness stopped cooperating which prevented the state from going forward. I think if he was lying 20 million dollars could have brought an agreement that would have had the witness recant in turn for not being sued for slander.

 

[Kevin Alexander]

I think with the lawyers he had the police didn't make him do anything. He did it voluntarily to prove his innocents.

Excellent point Marque. You jogged my memory. I recall MJ mentioning how he voluntarily submitted to the picturing while pleading w/ the public to reserve judgement until all the evidence came out.

Everything about MJ's demeanor, and his constantly maintaining his innocence was the reaction of someone who was wrongly accused - he didn't act as if he was busted, or caught in the act, nor did he try to hide from the media and go into seclusion as the guilty often do, but he confronted the public and pleaded against a rush to judgement as the media and American public like to do often. **Can you say Richard Jewell?** MJ did just what an innocent man does - he weathered the storm, endured the criticism, maintain his innocence, and attempt to get on w/ his life.

 

[Benson R]

Actually in Michael's public plea of innocence he clearly states that police served him a warrant that allowed them to photograph any part of his body including his penis. I vividly remember this plus with the nonstop discussion of this on tv I have seen this many times recently.

Plus if you believe the prosecutor of this case (which I do) the examination of Michael's body fit the description the boy gave them. I think we all need to start realizing that someone got away with one of the worst things someone can do.

 

[Kevin Alexander]

Just as quickly as people are willing to pin a child molester tag on MJ, I'm shocked that some people aren't even willing to explore the possibility that maybe, just maybe, this boy's parents were looking for, and got the pay off of a lifetime. We can see it so clearly in other cases, but w/ MJ some want to permanently and forever brand him as a molester. This is sad.

 

[Benson R]

For years the public was willing to let it go because there was no way to know for sure. But now the prosecutor has come forward to say that the witness was credible and further evidence was found. Add to that that Michael acts like a child molestor by saying things about how he needs to love children and that the rest of the world does not understand that loving children is not wrong.

You can believe Michael. I will believe the prosecutor.

 

[Kevin Alexander]

I respect your position Benson. All this makes for fun discussion. I feel like a defense lawyer....if only I was paid.

 

[Benson R]

I'm guessing that you are probably a MJ fan. I can sympathise with wanting to defend an artist whose work you enjoy. I am a huge fan of GNR and Axl Rose. Whenever there is discussion about some concert he didn't show up to I am always there defending him. Hell I was at the concert in Philly where he was a no show and I still defend him.

 

[Nigel McN]

Things aren't as black and white as many people try to make it out to be, have many people seen the old GQ article on the matter?

http://www.lsulaw.com/thelegaltattler/michael.htm

np The Smashing Pumpkins - 2000-09-21 @ Ballsporthalle, Frankfurt, DE - 1979

 

[Benson R]

I'll say it again. I believe the prosecutor in the case. According to them they wanted to move forward but the key witness ended his cooperation. He also indicated there was enough evidence that they might have been able to move forward without his cooperation but they didn't because of the high profile nature of the accused. What seals the case for me is that the boy was able to give an accurate description of MJ's penis which was shown to be accurate after they photographed MJ.

 

[phil-w]

He could have seen him changing to go swimming or something. I think that article that Nigel points to raises more than serious credibility issues about the witnesses.

 

[Benson R]

I think if the boy was being coached the police would have recognized that and not seen him as a credible witness.

And lets for a second say that Michael was swimming in front of a young boy naked. Would he then be able to pick out distinquishing characteristics of his penis. Remember the police said the boy was able to give description of Michael's genitalia which matched the photos they took.

 

[Jonathan_D]

Is MJ a weirdo? Yes. But I also know alot of other celebrity weirdos...and guess what?...So do you. But we like to pick on MJ because he's an easy target, and he makes us feel better about the other weirdos that we know and love, but really shouldn't.

Anyone who hangs a child over the rail of a balcony seven (or whatever it was) flights up is more than a weirdo, he is unbalanced, irrational and has no business having small children in his care!

 

[Morgan Jolley]

Anyone who hangs a child over the rail of a balcony seven (or whatever it was) flights up is more than a weirdo

I remember in the original interview when Jackson defended this with the comment about how he was holding one of his other kids before the baby and that the cameras only saw the one.

 

[Kevin Alexander]

After reading this... http://www.lsulaw.com/thelegaltattler/michael.htm It's more than obvious that MJ was the victim of an elaborate extortion plot. And for those who put so much into the prosecutors and police, the last paragraph in the article sums up everything. Thanks for the link Nigel!

 

[Kevin Alexander]

Anyone who hangs a child over the rail of a balcony seven (or whatever it was) flights up is more than a weirdo, he is unbalanced, irrational and has no business having small children in his care!

Living here in Atlanta as we do Jonathan, I'm sure I don't have to tell you that there are much worse cases of unbalance and irrationality in our own backyard. When you really put things in perspective, MJ doesn't even come close to being a danger to his children. Children die at the hands of their parents almost everyday, sad to say. Who are we to question a man's love for his children. While MJ definately had a lapse in judgement in holding his child over a railing, everyone knows, whether they want to admit it or not, that MJ meant no harm to his child.

 

[RobertW]

no, i believe the authorities believed the description was worth pursuing, but once jackson bought off their main witness, they didn't have enough evidence outside him to build a reliable case to prosecute jackson without the kid's testimony.

 

[Benson R]

On the dateline interview the prosecutor said he wanted to go forward anyway but was told from above not to not because of lack of evidence but because of how famous the accused was. All the GQ article really does is show how the media was willing to listen to anything anybody close to Jackson and most of them were full of shit. That doesn't mean that the boy wasn't right. When there is this much money of course there is going to be a feeding frenzy.

I would be willing to except this as we'll never know but the description of MJ's body to me proves the boy wasn't being coached. If a 12 year old boy was able to describe the details of my penis I would say I would be screwed in a court of law.

 

[Dan Rudolph]

The "details" were just that it was spotted. Michael Jackson has said in a interview with Oprah before that his skin was spotted and he used make-up to even it out. This could just be a good guess on the kid's (or his parents')part.

 

[Benson R]

The "details" were just that it was spotted. Michael Jackson has said in a interview with Oprah before that his skin was spotted and he used make-up to even it out. This could just be a good guess on the kid's (or his parents')part.

Well so says Michael. But what kind of credibility does someone have who says he only had 2 cosmetic procedures to a nationwide audience with a straight face have.

I agree that there is still no way to know for sure if the charges are true. However he acts like a child molester, he says things a child molester would say and there is evidence he is a child molester.

Since this can't be proven I agree he is free to live his life without interference. However he is not immune from public scrutiny. And most importantly no person should willingly let him even near any children including child welfare workers in regard to his own children. Even if you don't believe the allegations his recent interview shows him to be emotionally disturbed to a spectacular degree.

 

[Chris Lockwood]

Just what was said in the rebuttal special to make you say the first one was unfair?

I only saw the first show, but Michael said enough weird & creepy things that I don't see how it could be considered a frame job, unless somebody overdubbed the words he said.

Has he reached the point where he thinks any publicity he can get is good?