PaulB said:
I've posted this before but I suggest you read it and then tell me you are convinced Jackson was not a stoat the ball.
Stoat the ball? Never heard that used in this context before ;0)
Have you looked into the background and previous actions of some of the people who accused Jackson? I suggest you do. Did you know that the boy had previously accused 'both' of his parents of abusing him? The mother also accused a security guard who apprehended her for shoplifting of sexually abusing her and gained an out of court settlement from the store.
Social workers who attended the family home during the parent's divorce interview the children. All children said that the father sometimes shouted at them, but not often, and never hit them. When the mother found out that the children had said this she was furious and accompanied them to later interviews where the children changed their stories to say that the father beat them every day, broke their bones, threatened to kill them and held the mother's head under water.
The mother also, months later, accused the father of sexually abusing the daughter. The prosecution in the Jackson case for some strange reason did not want these things brought up in court, can't think why!
And do you remember that the boy was destitute and dying of cancer? Turned out he was neither! And the boy's mother said in court that the only reason she'd recorded a video extolling Jackson as a wonderful person was that his aides had held her family and threatened to kill them all if she didn't! You believe these people? You just take them at their word?
I'm not saying that Jackson was innocent. I'm saying that he might be and I would ask you to consider the results of persecuting an innocent man before being so keen to participate in the witch hunt.
It was because he was behaving like a pompous prima-donna.
Yes he was. Doesn't he have the right to? Can we beat up camp homosexuals? Can we destroy books we don't like?