Can you?
But Michael Jackson did, according to this report from Court TV:
- Michael Jackson paid out approximately $25 million to settle a civil suit by a boy who accused him of molesting him in 1993, according to the confidential agreement which was exclusively obtained by Court TV's Diane Dimond.
The pop star, according to the agreement, maintained the settlement did not signify an admission of any wrongdoing against the boy or his parents.
....Jackson agreed to pay $15,331,250 to be held in a trust fund for the accuser, now 24, as well as $1.5 miillion to each of his parents. The accuser may have also received another seven-figure payment not specified in the agreement. Additionally, the plaintiff's lawyer was slated to receive $5 million.
In exchange, the accuser and his parents agreed to not pursue civil claims against Jackson.
The agreement could play a role in the current criminal charges Jackson faces stemming from allegations by another California boy who accused him of molestation.
....Evidence of the 1993 accusations could be admitted as evidence of prior criminal behavior against Jackson in his current case - but only if the now-adult accuser is willing to testify.
In December 1993, the boy outlined his accusations in a sworn declaration, recounting his year-long friendship with the King of Pop.
According to the account, he met Jackson in May 1992 at the rental car business where his stepfather worked and where Jackson was renting a car.
The introduction led to several trips to Jackson's Neverland ranch, where the boy claimed he played video games, rode golf carts - and slept in the same bed with Jackson.
He and his family also took trips with Jackson to Florida, New York, Las Vegas and Europe, according to the statement.
"During our relationship Michael Jackson had sexual contact with me on many occasions," the statement alleges.
He accused Jackson of open-mouth kissing, fondling and oral sex.
His contact with Jackson ended, he said, when he went to live with his father in July 1993.
Very very grim. I realize the payment is no admission of guilt - as it states explicitly - but surely all but the most besotted fan can see SOME kind of unsavory pattern here, and IF the now-24-year-old is willing to testify in the current case, how can it be anything but extremely damaging?
Article comments