KhooshMaprit said:
pikashoe said:
I don't see an issue with people wanting money from the man that raped there children. We know for a 100% fact that he spent a lot of time with all of his accusers. That he slept in the same bed as his accusers. That he spent time alone with the accusers without adults present. We know that he had nude photos of minors in his home. We know that a child was able to accurately describe his penis. We know that in the late 70s he showed an interest in cultures that allow marriage between a 10 year old and 30 year old. We have a letter that he wrote to a child where he says how in love he is with her. We have witnesses that worked for him say they saw him do it. There are real photos of him with his arms around half naked children. Semen stains in his room not belonging to Michael. Pornographic material with accusers fingerprints on them. Corey Feldman said he showed him porn when he was a child. Etc. The man showed so many signs of being a pedophile, I just cannot understand how anyone could say he was definitely not guilty. I can understand not being sure. I'm genuinely shocked so many are voting no here. I assumed I don't know would have been the most popular answer. |
This is not true and has been debunked numerous times. Famously, Jordan Chandler said that Michael Jackson was circumcised despite Michael Jackson not being circumcised. That's a pretty big mistake for someone to make when describing a penis they've allegedly seen and been abused by repeatedly. Most of the rest of what you said is pure conjecture that wouldn't stand up for three seconds in a court of law. |
Nope it has actually been proven true numerous times. The circumcision part is pretty easily explained, since the visual difference between erect circumcised and uncircumcised is much less obvious. The more important part is that he was able to describe distinct markings that he had no other way of knowing.
It stood up for months in a court of law. So wrong again. Frankly if you can read everything I said and say he is innocent without a doubt you must be delusional. If he wasn't a pedophile he was doing a very convincing impression of one.
