Eric Renderking Fisk doesn't
just call Micheal Jackson nuts: he paints the parents of his elleged
victims with the same crazy brush...
June 14th, 2005
"Michael Jackson: GUILTY! (… of at least having very bad taste.)"
The Death Of An Artist and Performer…
The Michael Jackson I knew in the 1980’s died a long time ago. I just can’t tell you when his “death” occurred.
The first time I first really noticed Michael Jackson was back in 1983
on the ABC “Motown 25” special where he first publicly performed the
song “Billy Jean” and everyone saw his “Moonwalk” for the first time.
The morning after everyone was talking about him; most of my fellow 7th
graders wanted to dance like him.
When I was a teenager, almost everyone had a copy of his Album
“Thriller.” I can’t even think of any other album that dominated the
1980’s like “Thriller.” Not even “Born in the U.S.A.” by Bruce
Springsteen, “Appetite for Destruction” by Guns N' Roses, “No Jacket
Required” by Phil Collins, or even the "Purple Rain" Motion Picture
Soundtrack by Prince and The Revolution were able to impact western
culture the way Jackson’s album had.
And to an extent, the way he dressed was a throw-back to the Golden Era
with the suits and fedora’s he wore, the style of music had a serious
Jazz – Big Band Swing undercurrent; the only other album that embodied
more of the “Golden Era” element was Phil Collin’s “No Jacket
Required…”.
But the Michael Jackson of the 1980’s died. The man who was accused of
child molestation is not the music legend of my youth. They aren’t the
same person. Jackson didn’t die in the literal sense and “re-animated”
is some off-shoot Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein technique or resurrected
in some “Night Of The Living Dead” way… (Yet the Video of “Thriller”
did feature Zombies…) but the man - and the performer - that he was
then and what he’s become are not the same person in a figurative
sense.
20 years ago, who would have known that Michael Jackson would later
dominate the news by his personal behavior while his albums would sit
on the shelf at music stores virtually untouched?
Tasteless Victory
On the morning of June 14th while doing the daily update, I was sent a link by one of the readers of this web page.
Michael Jackson Source
If you take the time (and I’m not suggesting that you do…) you’ll see a
download of his “Victory” presentation. It’s a three-minute montage of
Great moments in recent history that includes the fall of the Berlin
Wall and the release of Nelson Mandela and finally Jackson’s acquittal…
The “Not Guilty” verdict is in no way a vindication of Michael Jackson,
it’s not any type of “Victory” for him, nor is it any way as
historically significant to the aforementioned events.
For example…
Nelson Mandela is
the Former President of South Africa and fought against racism and
segregation in his own country… he’s a man of peace and was unjustly
imprisoned.
Michael Jackson is now a narcissistic
self-absorbed lunatic who apparently uses his shtick of being an
eccentric yet once successful performer to lure real children into his
“Neverland” trap to perform lewd acts on them. But that’s just my
opinion and observation, but I doubt I’m wrong…
Jackson, or the people who maintain his web site, has now crossed the
line into true unadulterated bad taste. Yesterday’s “Verdict” is by no
means a victory for him… it’s a warning. Jackson has been charged TWICE
for child molestation, once a decade a go when he paid off the parents
of his alleged victim, and recently in a case in which he was just
acquitted.
The Ten Count charges against Michael Jackson didn’t appear out of
nowhere, and aren’t apart of any conspiracy on the part of the Record
Label or the State of California Prosecution team that tried this case.
These accusations owe their gneiss to Jackson’s own behavior and his
own past… No sane 45-year-old man would want to spend the night in bed
with children that aren’t his own.
Verdict Analysis.
There have been legal analysts on the news all
last night and this morning talking about how the prosecution botched
this case and how they made it difficult for the jury to get beyond the
shadow doubt.
Ten counts against Jackson says something. The evidence against him
must have been pretty dam’ning if the State Prosecution would go ahead
and stick their necks out. Stop and think about what must have
motivated the State to go against a popular “performer” with a legion
of fans. The Prosecutors aren’t evil people with an ax to grind;
they’re people with families, careers and reputations to think about.
There’s a reason why the State Prosecution went ahead with this trial,
and not because of any vindictive motive on their own part, but because
they believed Jackson was guilty of a crime and it was their duty to
pursue it.
The State Prosecution aren’t the only ones who believe Jackson was
guilty of Child Molestation – Taken from The Netscape News article: “Jurors Say They Were Bothered by Mother,” By Linda Deutsch.
"Juror No. 1,
Raymond Hultman, 62. He told The Associated Press in an interview at
his home that he believed Jackson may have molested at least two boys -
but not the accuser.
He said he voted to acquit Jackson in the current
case because he had doubts about the accuser's credibility. ``That's
not to say he's an innocent man,'' Hultman said. ``He's just not guilty
of the crimes he's been charged with.''
Juror No. 10, a 45-year-old woman with one adult
child and two teenage sons, discussed the panel's feelings about the
46-year-old pop star sharing his bed with boys.
``What mother in her right mind would allow that
to happen? Just freely volunteer your child to sleep with someone. Not
so much just Michael Jackson but any person for that matter. That's
something that mothers are naturally concerned with,'' the juror said.
Here’s another story that illustrates the jury’s frustration and concerns: “Jackson Jury Says They Believe He Molested Other Boys-Not Accuser…”
Criminal Negligence
Folks are going to keep a closer eye on Jackson. Whether if it’s fair
or not, people are going to think twice about letting their kids spend
any time over at the Neverland Ranch.
I’ll say again: This is a warning to Michael Jackson, and one that he
better heed or he’ll face similar accusations in the future… Where
there’s smoke, there’s fire or the potential for a blaze. Three times
could be the charm for the Prosecution the next time there are similar
allocations.
I’m not the only one who believes this is Jackson’s Final Warning.
Yet, some blame has to be leveled at the parents of those boys who were
his alleged victims, those parents who allowed their children to spend
the night alone with Jackson also need to be scrutinized. There’s no
way a sane parent would allow their children to spend the night with
someone who was once accused of being a child molester.
Whether it’s fair or not, it doesn’t matter. A parent’s first instinct
is to protect their children. “Innocent until proven guilty” only
applies to a court of law, not public or personal opinion. If Jackson
is “judged” unfairly by the “Court of Public Opinion,” he only has
himself to blame.
If there was an eccentric 45 year old man in your neighborhood who was
obsessed with childish things and had been charged for Child
Molestation 10 years earlier, then invites your child over to spend the
night (with out you being there…) I highly doubt you would go for it.
If you say you would allow your kid to spend the night with the type of
person I just described, you’re lying. That would be like letting your
children run with an operating chainsaw while playing in traffic. Or
worse, that would be like giving your child permission to “pet the
kitty” that lives in the tiger cage.
Nobody would allow their children to stay the night over at the home of
a man who was once charged with child molestation then paid off the
parents in an effort to keep them quiet and not testify. The next
“Trial of The Century” should be held to see if the parents of these
boys who spent the night with Jackson are negligent or inadequate
parents.
As a parent, I stay up all night worrying about the world my son’s will
inherit when they get older. What kind of world will they live in, what
will the culture be like? I worry about my oldest son getting too close
to the road we live on; I worry about what my youngest son is finding
on the floor and putting in his mouth.
… I can’t imagine what it would be like for a parent who let their sons
spend the night with someone with a reputation like Jackson’s.
Instinctively I’m over protective, the idea of sending my kids to
Jackson’s house with out me being there goes against everything I know
and feel as a dad.
Anyone who would submit or subject their chidden to a potentially
damaging situation would mean that they are just as crazy as Jackson.
