deltadarlin wrote on Jun 26th, 2009 at 11:39am:On June 13, 2005, the jury found Jackson not guilty on all charges. This was the second case.
With the first case, even though he was charged, the family was rather eager to sue and get a monetary settlement (22 million). Not only that, Jordan Chandler's admission that he was molested by Jackson was given while he was under the influence of sodium pentathol. If what he had done was so egregious, why didn't the boy's father have him charged initially? Instead, he tried to get a monetary settlement. After the case was settled, the boy and his father refused to initiate criminal charges.
Now, I don't know about you, but if it were my child, criminal charges would have been first and then I would have sued for damages after Michael was convicted (remember, it's much harder to prove a criminal case than is is a civil case).
So, before we become judge and jury (don't need an executioner now). maybe we ought to consider that he didn't do it?
THANK YOU!!!!
I personally think that Michael was becoming more child-like as he grew older, since he was ROBBED of his childhood. He'd get tutored, work in the studio all day until bedtime, and occasionally got to look out and watch other kids play. He never had that.
Like I said before, he put himself in a very vulnerable position with his generosity - and we ALL know there are people who are just looking for deep pockets they can dig in, and who better than the king of pop?
The man did great things: "We Are The World" for African famine relief, making dying children's wishes come true (including one kid who was 'dying' but that turned out to BS! ) and giving money to helpful causes. I find it hard to believe that someone witha heart like that would hurt anyone, ESPECIALLY a child!
How would anyone here feel if they were wrongfully accused, but 'evidence' had been fabricated? THAT drove him into seclusion. THAT caused a deeper pain that no painkiller could take away.
Was he guilty? Everyone has their minds made up one way or another what they will believe.
I choose to focus on how he revolutionized pop music, R&B, and broke the color barrier on MTV - and was a phenomenal performer; that is what I will carry with me in my life.
NOW - one thing that we SHOULD be discussing is how he died. It has been said that if Anna NicoleSmith was enabled with her addictions, it pales in comparision to the enabling of Michael's painkiller & prescription drug addiction. There are many on this board who deal with pain issues outside of CH and rely on opiods, whether vicodin, percocet or morphine on a daily basis.
In fact, I am sad to say, I am one of them.

Due to back problems, leg and hip problems, I am on morphine and percocet daily. I miss a dose, and my body & bones HURT! I am in physical therapy and have been since march, and chose months ago to be weaned off of them. I'm facing a hard road, as the taper-down has begun. But just with what I have learned in the past 24 hours, I am scared to take my meds, but I also cannot handle the jolts that shoot down my back and leg. I've justified it for a long time that I am not an abuser, but reliant on the meds, since I DO take them as prescribed. That doesn't change the fact that being reliant also means being an addict.
If anything, we should celebrate Michael's talents and the great music he left us, and we should learn of the dangers of painkiller addiction.
This just makes me more determined to get off of them altogether. I would like to see 50.
No one needs to 'fess up here on the board if they realize they are reliant / dependent / addicted to pain meds... but you DO need to take a hard look at yourself, and most of all, be HONEST with yourself.
This is probably the hardest post I have ever made on this site. I almost held back. But this is a real dilemma with many people who suffer various pain conditions, and if it will help anyone else...

Peace, Love & Hope,
Carl D