>>79130176>>79130101Why bring up "ugly kids" as an argument in favour of guilt, if this response doesn't even acknowledge the other post's response to it?
The door wasn't locked or closed. The parents could check in on their kids whenever they wanted. Michael Jackson never denied that he has slept in the same bed with children - in fact, he openly admits to having footage of doing so, depending on how you might interpret some of his statements during his interview with Martin Bashir in the 2003 documentary Living with Michael Jackson. Michael even expresses surprise that Martin doesn't sleep with his kids or other kids.
He's open and flagrant about sleeping with kids to an extent that would be suicidal if he was an abuser. Celebrities like Jimmy Savile had hundreds of allegations pop up against him. Bill Cosby had over 60. Why aren't more appearing now that he, like Jimmy, is dead? Why didn't their parents come out to testify against him when the trials went public and the tides were largely against him? Why does Michael break the pattern?
In spite of having all that footage, California law enforcement was assisted by the FBI in making investigations on Michael between the mid-1990s all the way to the mid-2000s. The FBI has accumulated over 600 pages of data on Michael. He was on trial several times, and cases were thrown out because of a lack of evidence. Neverland was practically stripped naked during investigations. The FBI found no sign of violence or abuse inflicted by Michael.
Sleeping with others isn't necessarily sexual, but I understand that its innately icky the same way people might be disgusted at the idea that some parents bathe with their children (which is quite common in countries such as Japan, low-hanging jokes about birthrate aside).
