Please Lets not speak ill of the dead. Give me a break several of the children identified Jacksons private prts! Response to Alana Ronald

Submitted by Anne A. (United States), Jul 18, 2009 at 08:08

Jackson was forced to go under examination because the children that were abused were asked to describe identifying marks on his genitals, which they did. The fact that he coaxed little boys to his bed by stories and all kinds of gifts, and extended stays at Neverland Ranch is sick enough.

The Joker face that was given to him by plastic surgeons, the white bleached skin, the obsession with sharing a bed with young vulnerable little children, the drug addictions, say Michael Jackson needed serious help! He was abused by his father, and never had a childhood. There are many reasons why the pop star went down this road of addictions, and hopefully he is at peace, but I will never excuse what happened to these children, or the fact that he never got help for his addictions. Remember sexual addictions only fester and get worse, as in the cases of John Wayne Gacy and Theodore Robert Bundy. All bizarre, peculiar and sick minded people! As citizens we need to stand up and protect the innocent and not the offenders. Another addiction is lying as in so many cases of pedophilia., and abuse of children. Remember O.J. swore he was innocent of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson, and Ronald Goldman, and was a Heiseman trophy winner.

Nicole and Ron's blood was found in the Bronco OJ was driving, and his Bruno Mally shoe prints were found in the blood at the scene of the crime, and yet he said he was innocent. DNA is hard to dispute! The jury found this monster innocent too, because he was black and there was fear of a race riot. Please don't try to convince me that Jackson was not guilty. The facts are too overwhelming against him.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".