I don't buy it. First...why do you say the kid would be torn to peices? Then so would Jackson right? Also, again...selfish to take money and run...without wanting to stop him from others....EVEN IF IT MEANT LOSING MONEY. SO you are saying the money is more important than stopping him and proving your accusations. Was there ever a lie detector test?
Jackson is a grown man who can reap what he sows. He is not, despite his best efforts, 12, and he wasn't then either. (That's kind of the point.)
A child is another matter. The option of settlement with a guaranteed outcome and no obligation to subject the child to a trial and all that entails, would have to be seriously weighed by any parent who gave a damn about his offspring.
Protecting other's interests at the expense of your own child's best interests is what you would do, no matter what?
You can't be a parent.
Like I said, it would be very easy to rationalize that Jackson had been publicly exposed, the settlement speaks for itself, and that the world has been warned. Your child is guaranteed that Jackson pays for his abuse. Your child will have security, and will not have to be subjected to a high-publicity ordeal, or have to face his abuser or his lawyers in open court. It was reasonable for the Dad to agree Jackson would settle a great deal of money on the boy, and that would be the end of the civil matter. The criminal case is not closed, BTW.