Jacko: When Does Smoke Equal Fire?
Published September 05, 2004
At what point - or perhaps the question is, IS there a point at which all this smoke indicates the presence of an underlying fire which must be actually extinguished rather than simply contained? Can all of this really be the result of parasites, gold diggers, and misunderstandings?
I find it very disturbing that Jackson has been functioning in essentially the same manner since at least 1990, and his money, fame, and paid army of apologizers, functionaries and sycophants have done all they can to shield the source of all this smoke, smoke that somehow keeps wafting into the nose of the public despite their best efforts.
Just in the last week, the judge in his molestation and conspiracy case has denied a reduction in bail because he finds credible the detailed evidence that Jackson tried to force his accuser and his family out of the country against their will, and an investigative panel has found Jackson's accusations of mistreatment at the hands of his arresters to be utterly without foundation: ie, he is, once again, a liar.
The latest in this seemingly endless, tawdry, sickening saga is this:
- The singer said that "years ago" he had paid "certain people" who "wanted to exploit my concern for children".
He made the statement hours before a US report was due to claim Mr Jackson paid $2m (£1.1m) to an employee's son to avoid a child molestation accusation.
Mr Jackson said he wanted to respond to "untruths and sensationalism".
"Years ago, I settled with certain individuals because I was concerned about my family and the media scrutiny that would have ensued if I fought the matter in court," he said.
"These people wanted to exploit my concern for children by threatening to destroy what I believe in and what I do.
"I have been a vulnerable target for those who want money."
The 46-year-old singer added: "I would never harm a child."
The Dateline NBC report claimed that Jackson paid $2m (£1.1m) to the son of an employee at his Neverland Ranch in 1990 to avoid an accusation of child molestation.
Former Santa Barbara county sheriff Jim Thomas said police learned of the 1990 case while investigating a separate 1993 case, the details of which were recently made public.
In the 1993 case Jackson agreed to pay a boy he was accused of molesting up to $20m (£11m). [BBC]
- Jacko: When Does Smoke Equal Fire?
- Published: September 05, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Culture
- Filed Under: Politics: Law and Rights, Music: News
- Writer: Eric Olsen
- Eric Olsen's BC Writer page
- Eric Olsen's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
When does smoke equal fire? When this book comes out.
It's a book by Raymond Chandler. Amazon doesn't have much in the way of description, but Chandler's does.
The only legally valid answer to whether a crime has been committed will occur at trial. [flushed, and not by Justene]
do not expect to ever be given the benefit of the doubt again
Though Jacko is a wacko, I can't say I'm ready to agree that there's fire her [except on his head: "Tito! Tito!"]. He gives me the creeps, and I wouldn't let my children near him, nevermind sleep at his house.
BUT, the accusations -- even the sheer number of them -- don't necessarily add up to guilt. If Michael were just an average guy, monetarily speaking, then there'd be no common alternative motivation among all these accusations. But since the money is there and nothing has ever made it to public trial, I can't make the leap. I have to wonder about the bandwagon filled with money.
Personally, I suspect the first accusation was true, but I don't know anything for sure. This latest one has some serious holes in it, though, purely from the believability of what's been made public. It could just be a false accusation/extortion attempt.
If it's not, I'm with jack e: the kid's mother has some responsibility for what happened.
I have serious doubts about why Michael Jackson is being attacked. I haven't seen such furor addressed to white criminal defendants even when:
*The allegations are much worse, such as murder.
*The person has been convicted, not merely accused.
Not long ago, I posted an entry about convicted child molester Mary Kay Letourneau. No one expressed such enmity toward her. And, let's be clear. She has been convicted of what Jackson has only been accused of. Furthermore, she has expressed no remorse.
Nor have I seen such hatred addressed to white celebrities in trouble with the law, such as Martha Stewart or Robert Blake. The latter is accused of murdering his infant child's mother. Yet, the blogosphere is not blanketed with entries trying to convict him before he goes to trial. Sure looks like a double standard to me.
I don't know if Jackson is guilty of the specific charges brought against him. The central issue is that Jackson has doing WHATEVER he has been doing for at least 14 years and has gotten away with it until now. And, Jackson still has an army of supporters for whom no amount of evidence against him is sufficient. Therefore, as the evidence of the current case seeps out, and new evidence comes up regading past allegations, this is worth reporting and trying to put into some perspective, which I have done.
And, there are few human beings on earth for whom race could be less of a factor. Would ANY aspect of his saga be ANY different if Jackson had been born white? Other than he wouldn't have the option of playing the race card when things got really desperate, that is.
I think if it was Donny Osmond, to call up a Jackson contemporary, people would be equally as wigged out by the strange behavior and fixation on children. It's just not normal, no matter how you spin it.
exactly, thank you bhw
Regardless of race, the public hates what it fears or what it envies, even out of proportion with the nature of the "crime". Notoriety often comes with accusation - Mary Kay Letourno *is* now reviled by many for her abuse of position, Martha Stewart hated for her -what, abuse of opportunity?, perceived greed or just her success?. Then there is Joey Buttafucco. He is now a hated celebrity and he didn't pull the trigger. Robert Blake, probably guilty but unconvicted, spent a jail in prison and is under some sort of house arrest. Hmm, a has-been white actor. Did OJ spend any jail time?
All of this is a far cry from the fame, wealth, reach and influence of Michael Jackson. Does he have any peer, of any race, with a reputation for child molestation? Maybe if the church scandals reach papal proportions?
people are tyring to make a hero out of this mary kay chick. she is just as much a pervy as any other child molester. this is CLEARLY a double standard. she will end up doing playboy, and a movie of the week and a book deal.
what really gets my goat on this issue is that thousands of innocent children in iraq have been killed or mangled. many whose life has been destroyed. for no other reason than george w. bush has a little cock and is the biggest pussy man in the world.
we can't even get him out of office much less convict him........i ask you (as the black eye peas say) where is the love?
jack e. jett
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/19476)
i think i have now come around to believe that where there is smoke there is fire with this jackson guys. it is hard for me to believe that anyone can be involved in such a horrenduous act. i feel that some adults in the past have been railroaded. i do think some children lie about such things. then there is a huge part of me that just does not want to believe that people would do such a thing. it just really freaks me out.
if he is convicted, does his mom hold some responsibility? what are the laws on that.
jack