Brother of Jackson Accuser Admits Lying; Suprised?

Brother of Jackson Accuser Admits Lying

Full story here:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20050308/ap_on_en_mu/michael_jackson_32

Since the beginning of all the accusations I've since then supported all the victims but now it seems like all these victims are making lies of ridiculous proportions all for sympathy and money. The news on the accusers testimony yesterday was the following:

"He told the jury that on one occasion when the brothers were visiting the singer's Neverland ranch, Jackson had entered his bedroom, where the boys were sitting on the bed. Naked and in a state of arousal, the singer told the boys: "It's natural," according to the younger brother. The singer then left the bedroom.

On another date, Jackson asked the younger brother whether he masturbated. "He said everyone did it," the boy told the court. "You should try it, it's OK."

The boy was offered alcohol by the singer, he said, which Jackson described as "Jesus juice". He said that on several occasions he had seen his brother share alcohol disguised in a soft drink can with Jackson. His brother, who had cancer, only has one kidney."

I find it their stories very absurd and kind of hard to believe. But yeah, I know, Dahmers' story would've never been believable if it wasn't for all the evidence and confessions so I know theres alot of wierd and sick folks out there but I dont know. I feel like some of these so called victims are making up more crap and being puppets for money hungry parents and lawyers. If your going to lie atleast make it a believable lie not some kind of elaborate lie where it'll look and sound suspicious. Some of these stories from the victims sound like straight BS.

AM I the only one who feels this way?

P.S. I think Michael Jackson is way wierd though so dont get me wrong but I would feel bad for him if all these victims are making crap up and making it 3458719 times worse for Jackson with all these absurd and disturbing stories.

 

I think his biggest lie was when he said "it looked about 8" long to me."

 

Well they sound like money grubbers but their is one thing I am sure of an that is that Michael Jackson fits the profile of a child molestor to the tee. He was also abused as a child no doubt. He's stuck in his child like world. Even his voice is stuck. This is typical of molested people. They get stuck in their childlike state. The act like children and often want to be with them. The molestors do everything they can to lure children in such as make their houses very kid friendly and often befriend the parents to get closer to the children. He's guilty, maybe not from this kid but he's guilty.

 

I am very glad that i was born an adult but now i am a child playing in ferrari's oh well you cant all be perfect like me

 

i think jackson is innocent of what they are charging him with. i dont really care one way or the other, and he is certainly one of the worlds strangest people, but i think he is asexual. i saw the bashir interview, and i saw the jackson rebuttal movie, and he is just a strange unit who can only really relate to kids because his mental age is about the same as theirs.

but here is the clincher for me. he did not have sex with the mother of his second child in order to conceive. she is the same woman he had the relationship with that begot the first child, so she was obviously ready and willing. but he passed. nobody who is sexually active or even a sexual deviant, is going to pass up on the real thing, no matter what.

i think all these kids are lying at the behest of their parents. sure they saw and did some strange stuff at jacksons house, but i dont think it was molestation, and the parents knew all about it - so who is the really guilty party in that instance?

 

i dont understand why the parents have not been charge with child abuse, whether or not he is guilty (none of us have all the facts so im staying neutral) they let their children stay unsupervised at a mans house who has been accused (guilty or not) of child abuse in the past and clearly has some major issues. Surely they have failed in their duty of care?

Despite what I said above on the limited info I have I don’t think he is guilty however if I was a parent I would not allow my children to hangout with him as he is clearly not a positive influence

 

here is a quote from the trial:

'The teen testified that on his very first visit to Neverland Ranch, it was Jackson who suggested that he and his younger brother sleep in Jackson's bedroom in the main residence, rather than in a guesthouse where their parents and sister were staying.

"[He] said we should sleep in his room, and we wanted to, too," he said. They did, after their parents agreed, he said.'

there you go. now how can the parents be trusted to be wanting the best for their kids in this instance? quite frankly, i would not allow this even if it was at the home of a family member. as a parent you keep things on the best possible footing at all times for your kids, and this is clearly out of bounds.

 

Who will ever know the truth? The stakes are too big on both sides for the truth to get told. Even when the jury rules, that only means they bought one side of the story and that could be the result of many factors. I think justice is an accident in cases like this.

 

If you guys dont think he is a molester you should go and read up on what traits child molesters posses because he fits one to the tee.

Ps did anyone here that he did not show up for court this morning and they gave him an hour before they revoked his 3 mill in bail and put a warrant out for his arrest.

PS he showed up in his pajamas an hour late.

 

I watched the news clip showing him arriving in his pajama bottoms and I have one question. WTF is with the umbrella? Why does he walk with an open umbrella when the skies are perfectly clear?
Watching him walk it did look like he was experiencing back problems.

 

The umbrella has to do with his skin being white. I also think he moved too easily to have a severe back problem. He didn't want to sit and listen to the accuser.

 

The family that have brought the suit may or may not have been digging for gold.

That is beside the point in light of the fact that the victim did a pretty good job of describing the winkus of the accused.

Now, there are circumstances wherein a person may be exposed to adult nudity, but when a child can describe the winkus of the accused in great detail, then we have to stop and rethink the term accidental causes.

Combine that with fingerprint proof of prints on porn and on liquor bottles, and the case looks bleak for the accused.

All other spin is just that. Look at the base facts with no spin and no lie, and the truth becomes apparent.