Of These Four Men, The One Most Likely To Be Innocent......

Except to establish a pattern of prior bad acts. The cops who work in sex crimes will tell you 50 accusers is too much smoke for there to be no fire, and he had 65.

That's part of the problem, the arguments that have been circulating for 30 years to indicate guilt are only made up of half facts and a bunch of 'normal people don't do that, guilty!' Everybody believes Thomas Jefferson raped his black slave and got her pregnant, makes for a nice emotional story and a reason to hate a dead guy who can't defend himself. Problem is DNA proved that to be false, the father in question was a related male in the Jefferson bloodline but not old Tommy himself. People don't care, they still believe it, because that's the widely accepted version of events and truth can't budge past the first story everybody heard.

So what's the fact here? We've heard from countless people who were there that entire families stayed at Neverland, which they did both when Michael was there, and when he was gone. We've also heard how entire families would stay in his bedroom, his 2 story apartment sized bedroom, it stands to reason there's more than just a standard double bed for 4-10 people to pack into. Personally I never heard anyone give testimony their parents just packed them a bag, said 'have a good time', and catapulted them over the entrance gate. Especially nobody who wasn't looking for a multi-million dollar payday. Now hundreds of kids and their families visited Neverland every single month, so how is it possible only 4 of them ever dared speak out, and ALL of them wanted money for it? Also, ALL of their stories are 100% different from each other, and even contradict history? Pedophiles typically target kids who NOBODY will believe, nobody means including and especially their parents, they pick kids the parents will deny anything ever happened, not go on TV and say 'hello world, my son was raped by a man, feel sorry for us, we want money', or more commonly, try to castrate the bastard with their own bare hands. Out of all those kids who were there, if there actually were any victims, why wasn't there ever a single one who was willing to tell the world their story for free? And why can't anybody turn up any from before 1993? Oh people name a few names, people who never went public, who wouldn't show their face and tell the story, we officially get a third-hand account from someone who was never there, that's not very credible. And pedophiles don't just wake up one day at 35 and start abusing kids, they start as teens and in their 20s, nobody's ever come forward to say black Michael Jackson with an afro or jericurl molested them.

The accusations didn't start until a deadbeat dad wanted MJ to get him a $20M scriptwriting contract and didn't get it, and 2 years later magically got a $24M settlement on a civil suit for negligence. And people point to that as proof of guilt, a payoff. Not the case, CA law at the time wouldn't allow a criminal trial until there had first been a civil trial, so Chandler got that money, and his next step could've, would've and should've been to press criminal charges, that was his legal right. No, he got his money, they all cut and run. Why? That case was the ONLY one where there was actually a semi-shot in hell of a jury saying 'guilty', the 2004 trial was a huge farce, everybody knows it, but first accusation, why stop at the money? Why not go all the way to criminal court?

I never paid attention to the names but at least one of them WAS vocal about it for YEARS, I remember on the original IMDb boards people were talking about the first woman to accuse him and they were still talking about it in the early 00s, at the time nothing ever came of it because she was one woman and he was Mr. Jello/Sweater Dad, but apparently she was consistent through the years in saying he did it, people there discussed it, don't remember if people believed it but they DID talk about it. But in a pre-social media world, her word didn't get worldwide attention, and in a pre-social media world, these women had no way of finding one another or knowing how many of them there were.

And what physical evidence would be presented? When did rape kits actually become a thing? And then there's the pesky fact one can only conclude if injuries were sustained, bruising, tearing, etc., which defense lawyers then say 'the bitch liked it rough'. Or if you're a guy who was raped, they use that as proof that you're a homo.

Now maybe this doesn't have anything to do with it but what was the racial makeup of the 65 accusers? Do you remember?