Posted on 07/15/2009 5:06:27 PM PDT by Kimberly GG
"When Montreal-born author Ian Halperin first set out to write the definitive Michael Jackson biography, his intention was to nail the pop icon to the wall.
It was 2005 and Jackson had just been acquitted of a second charge of child molestation.
By the time Halperin, 44, finished the book, and long before Jackson died two weeks ago, his opinion of the troubled artist had undergone a 180-degree shift."....
OJ is gonna find that killer someday too!
And Danes don’t publish muzzie cartoons anymore, either.
Just goin’ with the flow...
Weren’t those innocent sleepovers at Mikie’s house?
the second boy to accuse Jackson of sexual touching was drugged when he made his statementWas MJ drugged when he taunted the press and bragged about his "sleep-overs"?
Well, yes... probably.
But so what?
What I wouldn’t do to have been molested by Michael Jackson and cashed in on $20 mil. I’ll be honest I would’ve been happy with 100k.
Blame it on the “happy juice”!
The guy was so eccentric I could picture him being innocent or gulty. God knows who is guilty.
Of course not.
If someone authorizes a writer to do their biography, everyone knows that the subject of the biography would admit to such a thing right up front!
The biography was UNauthorized.
Apparently, since the accusations were never proven.
Then he wouldn’t be privy to those details.
My point was that biographers are not necessarily the most informed, authorized or unauthorized. The biographer knows as much of the truth behind the issue as any of the rest of us. He was accused, tried, found not guilty. What really happened neither we nor the biographer knows for sure.
That said, any parent who would let their child within 10 feet of the guy must have been crazy.
Well, you wouldn’t have collected a dime from MJ.
While most people choose to believe the media accounts, it was, in fact, his insurance company who paid off Jordy Chandler, AGAINST MJ’s wishes. Their doing so is what destroyed MJ’s relationship with SONY and devastated MJ who wanted to fight the charges.
No, he just loved being portrayed as one (on TV)
Oh in that case I wouldn't take the $20 mil. ???
“The guy was so eccentric I could picture him being innocent or gulty. God knows who is guilty.”
Correct. But I wish some people could take a step back for just a moment and imagine for a moment him being innocent, yet, no matter how much good he did, the lifetime of torment he endured...first from his father, then his illnesses, the false allegations, threat of imprisonment and the media-created predatory monster he couldn’t live down, even when vindicated and even in death. I’m just amazed he live to 50.
Why did he have child pornograpy mags at Neverland?
However, the "leaked" grand jury testimony in the second trial included finding two (not a trunkload, just two) books of photos of nude pubescent boys in MJ's massive bedroom complex. After the leak, MJ's camp said they were send to him as a gift from a fan.
Some of the boys set to testify in the second trial had (according to the allegedly leaked grand jury testimony) claimed that MJ showed them the nude photos.
Also, as for SONY forcing the settlement, that may have been the case. Let's not forget, however, that Jordy Chandler wasn't MJ's first settlement for molestation. We don't know IF or HOW MANY were confidential -- the police believe there were several. However, it is known that MJ paid slightly more than $2.5 million to a maid in settlement after she claimed she walked in on MJ with his hands down her son's pants, fondling him. Don't know if MJ did it, don't know if SONY demanded that settlement, but that settlement preceded Jordy Chandler and was public.
Exactly. Yes they found porn stash and that was Playboy and Hustler. OMG! Michael is a man lol. If he had child porn, he would have gone to jail - no ifs nor buts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.