View Single Post
Old 06-15-2005, 10:41 PM   #19
Mike
Member
 

Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 489
Mike is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to Mike
Quote:
Originally Posted by raublekick
Mike, I agree with your first post and disagree with the second.

In many cultures it is accaptable and encouraged to sleep with children, family members specifically. In his case these children probably were his family and he wanted to be close to them. I think it is very possible that he never molested them, in bed at least. However, when it comes to something this heinous it is best to err on the side of caution. If someone our age (back then) claimed to be molested it wouldn't be a huge deal, but children need protected. If there is even a sliver of solid evidence it should be a guilty charge. But like you said, the evidence in this case is not solid whatsoever.
Well, in our culture, the culture that Michael Jackson lives in, it is not encouraged or acceptable to sleep with children ... especially if it is not necessary (many of those cultures have those stigmas because of their living conditions). It is generally unnacceptable to sleep with children, even if you are not doing anything malicious to them ... it is not only a bad habit (many parental counselors instruct parents that the moment your young child gets into bed with you [say if they're afraid, or whatever], you have to pick them up and bring them back to their own bed), but it's also just plain weird. I had trouble wording my point from my second post ... I meant to point that ... everybody knows it's weird, and when MJ says "This is love," we all say that he's just saying that to avoid getting convicted ... but ... if there's one person who actually thinks sleeping with a child is love, it'd be Michael Jackson. That's what I meant to say, really.

And ... I disagree with the point that if there's one sliver of solid evidence a person should be convicted. There is rarely any perfect evidence, so you'd be judging "solid evidence" by something that isn't solid, and too many people would be convicted on circumstantial evidence and false eye whitness testimony. There has to be more than just evidence of guilty, there has to be proof of guilt.
Mike is offline   Reply With Quote