Poor boys now men. I believe them and think their parents were naive.

I only watched part of the second episode and Oprah's interview. I've never been an Oprah fan, but I think her style of engaging the 2 men, the audience, and the few specific people from the audience really added to the explanation of how all of this could have occurred especially from the mindset of young victims.

I just can't get over the mothers' rationalization that allowing their sons to sleep with an adult man was acceptable. I never understood it back when it first came out, and I don't understand it now. I understand the grooming of young boys, but not their parents. And especially after the initial accusations. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

I dvr the show last night. I haven't watched it yet. I missed the original show. So sad this has to happen.

I'm not going to claim having a premonition or suspicion about him because I had neither. But Michael Jackson always seemed creepy to me. When the numerous incidents and rumors came out years ago about "other than normal" goings-on that may have involved children, I wasn't shocked. Maybe I was shocked about how he seemed to get a pass from the press and the general public. All this coming out now is very sad. While nothing remedies such inexcusable experiences that they had to face, I hope victims can be compensated from his estate.

Many in show business are very troubled people who are not normal in various ways. It's one of the reasons why I find it so baffling that so many in the general public have such voyeuristic interest to follow reporting of the private lives and adventures of celebrities so closely. And why so many think what they do is okay and of interest. It makes me want to scream - Hey guys, these people are really screwed up. Do you really, really need to know or care what they're doing?

I just finished watching "Abducted... in Plain Sight" on Netflix. I think it's part of a true crimes series. Same theme. Master manipulator actually engaged both parents in sexual encounters so they'd be reluctant to report him to authorities. Have to say, I couldn't believe what they "allowed/accepted" as normal behavior with their young daughter.

Surviving R Kelly ( Lifetime documentary) as well as Believed, the Larry Nasser podcast have similar stories. While these stories are upsetting to hear, it does show us how manipulation and grooming captures people. I haven't seen the Michael Jackson yet, but will watch it soon.

I think this is all part and parcel of the casting couch type behavior. Parents wanted the power and wealth that was Michael Jackson. There are many people who give anything for the promise of getting!! Other people are so totally naive they don't see the red flags and danger.

It's like Oprah said, she was gonna catch He$$ for doing the interview, but exposing sexual abuse is worth talking about. I also remember hearing Michael had young boys sleeping in his bed....and thought....who doesn't know.

I guess if we missed

Leaving Neverland we can't see it now, can we?

I've got my curiosity up now. The last that I heard was that Michael was very immature and was kind of at the maturity of a little boy so it was more like he was just having a sleep over with his buddies as if he was also a child. I suppose that could be possible but I was always suspicious of what was REALLY going on.

He was one huge wack job and that show documents it from what I am hearing. A wedding ceremony was held with a young boy and Michael!?!?!

If you read this Gayle King interview, you pretty much know what was said in Leaving Neverland, GK Interview

What I can't believe is the apparently intelligent people of all races who continue to deny that MJ was a pedophile and are certain that all accusers are lying.

From the reports, he was much more than a pedophile. He was a child molester and a sex offender. Had he not had the ability to buy silence of some of his victims with his svengali powers over them and their parents, he would have spent a good part of his life behind bars. Actually, probably not too many years in prison because jailhouse justice usually happens quickly for child molesters.

It's no wonder he couldn't sleep.

I watched part 1 last night on HBO demand.

I almost wish I hadn't. The events those men shared, it was tough to hear, I can't even begin to imagine how horrible it was for them to actually live it.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he was a child molester/pedophile.

https://www.gardenweb.com/discussions/2708929/michael-jackson-died#n=91

Well.

My 6:00 local news covered it a little bit the other night. They said they couldn't continue because of the nature of the story but further info is available on their website.

It just so happens my 9 year old grandson is attending radKids this week. I'm reading the Family Safety Manual so I can reinforce what he's learning.

At the time of his death, his history of abusing young boys was pretty much established (by those with open eyes) but he continued to get away with it for years and years and countless victims. Some of the comments in the thread Lucille linked to, from the day of and those following his death, included so many people turning a blind eye to what was much more than allegations. And castigating those who spoke up with more sensible comments about his past. The only difference between his heinous acts and those of, say, Jeffrey Daumer, is that Daumer's acts included murder as well as sexual attacks and received more publicity. He was sentenced to jail, as Jackson should have been. No one mourned or defended Daumer, who himself was treated to jailhouse justice, having been beaten to death by a fellow inmate. It should have been the same with Jackson.

My favorite two comments from that old thread are one person who said "It's hurtful to read ugly remarks about Michael." and another who suggested it's tasteless to speak ill of the dead. The kind of stuff that can take your breath away.

I find it very sad that parents will literally "pimp" their children to those who have something they want. I think this happened to a great degree with the Olympic gymnasts. How could anyone think anything about that "doctor" was normal? But if one wishes to remain part of the "favored few" in a sports program, a blind eye is often turned.

I cannot imagine any parent with an IQ above 50 who would think it was in any way appropriate for a grown man to have children to his house for "sleepovers". In what parallel universe are they living? I bet they would have thought it "creepy" if it had been the poor guy down the street who lived on cat food and his SS check. It's simply appalling.

Yes, it was somehow OK because he was a super rich celebrity. *insert sarcastic voice* It's crazy! Anyone with any sense could see it was wrong even if it wasn't some bum but rather an average Joe that had a nice home and good paying job. Why celebrities are somehow put on this pedestal is crazy!

Support for Jail House Justice means you support anarchy in prisons. Who in a first world country turns justice over to criminals? Think it through Elmer. They get to decide what justice is-criminals.

Support for Jail House Justice means you support anarchy in prisons

No.

I worked in a jail as a nurse for several years and there is a jailhouse justice system and it is not a system of anarchy. There is a jail culture and specific, unwritten rules. Lots of rules, and there was respect for those rules of justice, it was not merely the will of the stronger. I worked in the psychiatric area and one rule I appreciated is that those incarcerated unless they absolutely were not dealing with reality (which did happen sometimes) did not take out their frustrations on the nursing staff; I treated my patients with courtesy and unless they were not in touch, they treated me with courtesy and I was very rarely fearful when I worked there. So those rules worked to my advantage.

There absolutely was very little tolerance for those who had been accused of child abuse but intolerance for various crimes was very specific. Those accused of such crimes were often in isolation for their own protection.

patricia, you've misunderstood my comments if you think I was condoning prison justice. It's just a fact. It's what happens, it's unpreventable under the "rules" of what you might call the jail culture as lucille mentions or prison mores.

Just as there are prison gangs, most prisons have a pecking order too. Child molesters are at the bottom and aren't tolerated as violators of the honor code as these guys see it. Usually, in time, they are attacked. Often murdered. I know this from decades of reading of these attacks, not for any other reason.

Initially, I "liked" Elmer's comment, but upon reflecting on Patricia's comments, I realize that my revenge gene had just kicked in, relishing in the idea that people who have harmed children (or others) would get what's coming to them. But I support our system of justice, imperfect as it is, with improvements always welcome (and required) to fix the flaws.

What struck me about the response that there is a system of "rules" in prison, enforced by convicted criminals, and that's just how it is. I think, as a civilized society, we really need to make the changes required to ensure the safety of people who are incarcerated. We are failing to do that and we could ensure against jailhouse justice, if we were committed to it. It takes more money, more staff, different systems to do that, but if one of our loved ones was in prison, regardless of their crimes - we should be able to trust that they are paying their debt by being incarcerated and they shouldn't be brutalized by a system lacking humanity. I feel like if I couldn't personally cause the harm to prisoners, I cannot allow others to act in an inhumane way, in my name.

olychick, I understand what you're saying but I think your view is more idealistic than practical.

Humans in shared circumstances form subcultures. Subcultures to a greater or lesser extent develop different objectives, different values, different rules, different approaches, than the general population. Musicians are a subculture. College students, homeless people, people in the military, gang members, government workers, academicians, journalists, people who travel in RVs, etc., And yes, people in jail. All are different. It's human nature.

Can people in jail be better protected? Well, solitary confinement is safe but expensive and impractical and perhaps for many cruel and unusual punishment.

There are no easy answers. But in a general jail population, there is a social order and rules, and many categories of inmates are at risk. It's not new and it's probably not something that will soon change.

Maybe there are people here who work in law enforcement or the correctional field who can add more real info than the little I know.

It is not easy to change established jail culture. One time I reported an inmate's allegation that he had been beaten by a deputy,(the report is required but most people look the other way and don't write it) and all of a sudden I was no longer on the per diem work schedule.

There was an excellent series of articles by the NYT a few years back about how efforts are being made at some prisons to bring positive change, but the latest articles were about the increasingly privatized system and how that is increasing risk to inmates because of cut corners due to profit maximizing.

It's all about money and what we are willing to spend. Because prisoners are perceived as undeserving and are generally from the most disadvantaged groups in our society, we've decided to not put that money toward ensuring their safety.

It's a democracy. I doubt if you'd find much public support to increase prison spending in your area. It's probably the opposite. As a result, it is what it is. I think it's unlikely more money would do much to change this particular aspect of prison life anyway.

Well, a democracy gave tax cuts to billionaires and the majority does not support that. We could change our culture's biases so we stand against inhumane prison conditions, if we were committed to doing so and also require the gov't (us) to provide the $$.

Oly, spending more money on prisons would most likely enrich the unions and corporate owners, with a few pennies left over for a safer environment.

S&P 400

In 2012, CCA sent a letter to prison officials in 48 states, offering to
buy prisons from these states in exchange for a 20-year management
contract with a guaranteed occupancy rate of 90%.[32]
Many community organizations have criticized the proposals, arguing
that the contractual obligations of states to fill the prisons to 90%
occupancy are poor public policy, creating an incentive to criminalize
behavior and lengthen sentences in order to keep the prisons filled.
They believe that these contractual clauses end up costing taxpayers
more than state-run prisons would and add to over-incarceration

Michael, I agree, but we can say no to corporate ownership of prisons! That's what spending more $ to create a humane system would start with, imo.

"Well, a democracy gave tax cuts to billionaires and the majority does not support that. "

The party in control had the votes to pass it. It can be changed when power shifts, as it always does.

"We could change our culture's biases so we stand against inhumane prison conditions, if we were committed to doing so and also require the gov't (us) to provide the $$."

A principled view but one that's unlikely to happen. If changing biases were an easy thing to do, I think we could each come up with a handful of biases to change with higher priority and of much greater importance and wider impact than what happens in prisons.

Lobbyists overpower our votes.

Politicians of both parties are influenced by lobbyists. There are few consistently independent thinkers in any of our legislatures, but there are some. If you don't like how your elected representative acts, work to get them replaced with someone you hope can do better.

'but if one of our loved ones was in prison, regardless of their crimes - we should be able to trust that they are paying their debt by being incarcerated and they shouldn't be brutalized by a system lacking humanity." ......and, if one

of your children, grandchildren, someone you loved and cared for, was the

victim who was abused over and over and scarred for life....what say you then?

I would say that I wouldn't want lower myself to the perpetrator's level by allowing them (in my name as a citizen) to be treated inhumanely. I may think they deserve it, but their mistreatment at our hands, whether actively or passively (jailhouse justice) is not going to erase or negate what they've done to my loved one, or yours.

I'm always moved by stories of families who forgive the person who murdered their loved one. I'm not sure I would or could, but that would definitely be my goal, because hate hurts no one but the hater.

You may not be surprised but I look upon the continuing local "news" coverage of victims' families and friends very cynically. It's almost theatrical farce.

"Okay, cue the grieving (wife, husband, girlfriend, best friend). We need a brighter light, the tears aren't visible. Cut, switch to courthouse with protesters chanting and holding signs. Back to spouse, who says "S/he was my best friend. I don't know what we can do but I know in my heart......". " And so on.

It seems to be an American tradition that these tragedies are pounced on by loved ones as a once in a lifetime moment of media attention. Maybe even fame! Reactions are almost as if scripted, they're so the same from one to another. A tragedy resulting from a criminal act is always horrific. If I were a surviving victim of something like this, I'd say "No comment" and keep my thoughts and feelings private. I think most thoughtful people do.

I'm in no way condoning Michael Jackson's behavior in any way, however, I do wonder what kind of abuse he may have been subject to as a child. I do happen to know of at least one individual way back when Michael was a kid (who turned out to be a child predator) who had a very heavy obsession with him at the time and claimed that there were many more like him, it was almost a cult-type scenario. This is what happens when people put their kids out there to be idolized and scrutinized by the public whether it be acting, music, beauty pageants, whatever.

Pudgeder--I was thinking the same thing!!

I'm SO opposed to this idea at sentencing of giving the victim's family an opportunity to vent to the jury and judge. For what reason? The guy has been convicted. He did something wrong as found by a jury of his peers. The law gives a jury/judge some leeway in sentencing, but just because the family of the victim cries and yells and swears, it should not affect the sentence. It should be based on the facts of the crime - level of violence etc.

Yes, I DO know someone whose son was killed for no good reason. A woman he knew called him as her boyfriend had called her to say he was coming over to her apt to kill her. Now, calling a friend would not be my first choice - I'd call the police. But she called two friends, and he did come and killed all 3 people. It was devastating for the woman I knew (a woman from my pulmonary rehab). He was her only son. He was hardly an angel - left 5 children (by 3 different "baby mamas", one a set of twins), all under the age of 5. But he should not have been killed.

All this wailing and cussing has turned courtrooms into "reality TV" shows.

I completely agree about the courtroom dramas and the victims and their families venting. I wouldn't give the criminal the satisfaction of me even knowing his/her name. Forget me wasting one second chastising someone like that. As far as I'm concerned anyone who would do me or my loved ones any harm don't deserve to even think that we think they even exist except to spend the rest of their lives in a 4 x 6 cell. Or a trip to hell - whichever one suits.