Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Jacko not so Whacko?

Nov 26, 2003 8:13PM PST

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Unfortunately, it looks like
Nov 26, 2003 8:30PM PST

these people aren't seeking Jacko's money, but rather will settle for film and book rights, magazine and TV interviews if they win the case.

Surely the police investigated the family's background BEFORE laying the charges.

Ian

- Collapse -
NT:in a 'perfect' world, yes
Nov 26, 2003 8:36PM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:Unfortunately, it looks like
Nov 26, 2003 10:34PM PST

Hi, Ian.

The County Prosecutr really does have it in for Jackson because he bought off a previous accuser, leaving the prosecutor with egg on his face. So a new complainant was greeted like manna from heaven, despite the DA's protestations that this is :just another case."
-- Dave K.

- Collapse -
Did you consider, Dave...
Nov 26, 2003 10:52PM PST

Dave, did the idea of a 12-year old kid signing an affidavit strike you as unusual? What would be the legal standing of a document signed at that age? Also, I picture a kid that young facing a private detective and a tape recorder (or so they claim) in a private setting and the word "duress" comes to mind as icing on that cake.

- Collapse -
Something does not make sense....
Nov 26, 2003 9:58PM PST

If Jackson had never done anything, and no suits were filed, why did Jackson send a private detective after the boy back then? Does he do that with all of the kids that "visit" with him? I smell the old "trash the victim" ploy. I couldn't notice that the kid is suddenly being refered to as the "accuser".

- Collapse -
Nothing strange there J....
Nov 26, 2003 11:08PM PST

if was shortly after the story aired and the boy was pictured in the story.

This happened AFTER the expensive '93 incident and like any celebrity he has been sued many times and little things like this are done as a matter of course to CYA.

Although the affidavit of a 12 year old would'nt have much standing on its own, the tape and mother's statement at the same time would and supports the youngster's statement.

What it really is looking like is that MJ provided aid and comfort to both parent and child (as a cancer patient) and as he recovered provided less and the mother sees an opportunity provided by an over eager prosecutor.