NO! His reputation as a pedophile is based on the FACT that he paid a family of a child not to tell the world what perverse acts he did to said child.
His reputation as a paedophile is based on speculation. Interesting to see how many on FR have climbed into bed with this Peter Pan wannabe and seen all the action with their own eyes. Unless one wishes to present himself as a witness to MJ's sexual proclivities in a court of law I believe it is wiser to give the benefit of the doubt and keep the mouth shut.
Self-annointed know-it-alls would be happy to run your life, too.
NO! His reputation as a pedophile is based on the FACT that he paid a family of a child not to tell the world what perverse acts he did to said child.
Wrong.
And leaving aside the fact that he sleeps with little boys in his bed and was shown holding hands with one of them--and it did not look like the normal interaction of parent with child, or caretaker with child, his treatment of his children is bizarre. The scene of him attempting to give a bottle to the one baby was sickening and frightening to behold.
You may care less about the welfare of the children left in his care, but anybody besides Michael Jackson would have been investigated and had his access to children prohibited long ago.