If he didn’t molest the boy, then why the $30M payout to the family of the victim? What was he settling out of court, then?
Shut-up payouts are common from rich people and companies even when they did nothing. The hush money is less than the cost of negative publicity.
“If he didn’t molest the boy, then why the $30M payout to the family of the victim? What was he settling out of court, then?”
I’d like to know the answer to that question also. The child, Jordy Chandler, offered as proof of his claim that Jackson was circumcised. After a humiliating investigation, it was (easily) determined that Jackson was uncircumcised. So did the lawyers suggest Jackson settle just to hush the whole thing up, or did Jackson say, ‘Just make it go away’? All I know is that if a poor woman said a rich man had molested her, and offered as part of her ‘proof’ that she knew he was circumcised, and it turned out to be the opposite, there are many on FreeRepublic who would accuse her of being a gold digger. When it’s MJ being accused, being a weird crotch grabber automatically makes one a pedophile, I guess.
IF he had molested Jordy, why did the Chandlers settle for ANY amount of money?
It could be that Jackson would rather have had half the world suspecting that he was a pedophile, than all the world to KNOW that he was a eunuch, castrated, neutered, sans balls. Like a fixed male cat. It's a possibility, you know, and it makes sense.
I've often wondered over the years if Michael Jackson was "nipped," as in castrated, whether by knife or drugs and by whom, who knows ... as a youth in order to keep his high voice. It certainly was done in the Middle Ages.
If that were so, he would have no sexual drive for anything, not homosexual, not pedophilic, not heterosexual, not kinky, no "rise" physically or sexually. He wouldn't have molested himself, let alone kids ... no desire, nothing to molest.
And IF word were to get out that he was indeed a eunuch, it would have ruined his career and his soul more than accusations of pedophilia could ever have done. How could girls swoon over a man with no balls crooning love songs? Even though they did over the flaming queen Boy George, at least BG had testicles. If MJ didn't and he had to PROVE it in order to clear himself of child molestation charges ...
... I think extortion was behind the child molestation charges, and nothing more. Michael was damned weird, but I don't think he was evil.
Being in L.A. during the entire time Jackson was on trial, we know the mother of the child who accused Michael was a welfare cheat, a shop-lifter and had tried to extort money from other celebs including Chris Tucker, by saying the boy had cancer. That's why Jackson did so much for him and took him on tours with his nieces and nephews.
Apparently his advisers told Jackson it would be cheaper and less damaging to pay the Dad (this was the first boy), but it turned out to be more like 1.5M, though you'll hear 25.
So, if your child had been molested, damaged, traumatized, would you take money and walk away?
Despite his obvious body dismorphia and tortured soul, he was set-up, framed and smeared by the Mother, the lawyer and their group. That's what the all-white jury found.