One of the most tragic side-effects of this case is the willingness of apologists to spread or endorse various myths about the sexual child abuse in a misguided attempt to justify their belief that Michael Jackson is entirely innocent of the crimes he is accused of.

I agree there is nothing at all wrong with their belief that Jackson is innocent and their dedication to that belief is in many ways praiseworthy. Equally valid up to a point is their assertion that the alleged victim is lying or is part of a plan to extort money from Mr Jackson. I say up to a point because, in their haste to shout down the "haters", these otherwise (I'm sure) decent, compassionate people are spreading inaccurate and irresponsible information usually associated with such morally reprehensible groups such as NAMBLA.

Hopefully after reading this section, many of these fans will cease using these "arguments", but if not at least others will have the wherewithal to counter them.

These "arguments" often appear in various permutations--I've distilled them down to four basic ones, plus two relevant aspects of the current court case. They will have seperate pages, just to keep the information in readable chunks. The myths addressed are:

The Myths

False allegations of Sexual Abuse are Common

The child is lying because he waited so long to come forward

The child originally denied any abuse had taken place. He must be lying now

Even if something did happen, the child was a willing participant so there is no crime.

And the two related issues are:

The DFCS memo
The expert witness
Hopefully both sides of the issue will find this information useful. It should be noted, in the strongest possible terms, that none of this information proves that the alleged victim was molested, or that Michael Jackson was the molester. They are not intended to because (everybody join in--I know you know the words) that is the jury's job.

What they do prove is that these particular arguments as put forward by apologists are not proof that no molestation took place, and do not exonerate Jackson by any stretch of the imagination.

Return to the INDEX