Janet Jackson: Michael Jackson's Worst Nightmare

[Joe]

http://drudgereport.com/flash3jja.htm



MEET THE NEW 'JANET JACKSON'; ACCUSER'S MOM REVEALED
Mon Jan 31 205 21:00:34 ET

This is the face of Michael Jackson's biggest nightmare: Janet Arvizo, the mother of the boy who alleges he was abused.

The media may be shielding her face from public view for now, but if the case holds together through trial, she will become the center of blistering international media attention.

Janet Arvizo married Army Reserves Major Jay Jackson in Las Vegas. She is now: Janet Jackson!

MORE

She has been moved into protective custody with her husband, and with alleged victim Gavin Arvizo, age 15, his little brother, Star Arvizo, 14, and older sister, Davellin Arvizo, 18.

Lawyers for Michael Jackson claimed on Monday the Arvizo boys have recently been spotted shopping in Beverly Hills -- with the district attorney!

MORE

The family's accusations are at the heart of criminal charges brought against Jackson by Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon: All will take the stand in open court.

But mother Janet Arvizo's conflicting and documented accounts of what transpired at the Neverland compound are seen to be a major hurdle for Sneddon.

Shortly after the famed GRANADA/ABC Martin Bashir documentary aired, Janet offered words of support for her son's "hero."

She said: "At no time has Gavin ever been treated with anything other than love, respect and the deepest kindness by Michael. Michael has been so important in Gavin being able to recover from cancer. His constant support, both practical and emotional, helped give my beautiful little boy the strength to fight his cancer."

Janet now claims she did not know of the abuse at the time.

She also claims she was pressure into making a show of support for Jackson.

But the Arvizo family was also caught on film strongly denying any Jackson wrongdoing.

"There were tears, they were holding hands, they were talking about Jesus and God and Michael as the ultimate father figure," claimed videographer Christian Robinson on ABC last year.

Robinson says he spent two years recording Michael Jackson and those who made it into the pop star's inner circle.

Robinson claims the alleged victim, his brother, his sister and his mother all said Jackson did nothing wrong.

"Yeah. I asked. And they answered, and they were very up front and they, of course, said absolutely not," said Robinson. "All of them, every single one," he said.

"And just to clarify that even a little bit more, during this interview I told them to speak truthfully probably more than 30 times. I kept on reminding them, I'm like I want you guys to tell the truth," Robinson explained.

It's going to be a 'Janet Jackson' vs Michael Jackson showdown this spring in a California courtroom!

[Justforfun000]

Funny enough, I was talking about this tonight with people. I refuse to cast a judgement on Michael Jackson without clear evidence one way or the other.

I mean, to be realistic, the man is at the very least weird. But this in itself is not an offense.

IF he is guilty then I hope it's discovered and he is no longer able to perpetuate such behaviour. Conversely, if he is NOT, I hope that there is a true public apology bourne out in a way that justifies the man.

In my own opinion I will say that I lean towards the idea that he is innocent.

I base this on a very general understanding of this whole issue regarding him. The first case was a situation that I recall he was not charged criminally, but civily, and he actually consented to pictures taken of him nude in order to compare to the kids allegation. They did not match. This is one point in his favour.

He ultimately paid them off, and the statement was that he wanted the whole thing over. This is understandable. Ideally many people not involved in such a thing automatically posture and say "NO, if he was innocent, he should have fought it all the way!!!". Well that's nice as a pie in the sky ideal, but realistically, anyone dealing with the courts and the daily stress of such a thing would understand that sometimes you would much rather take the easier way out instead of taking 10 years off your life with the daily pressure. So personally I don't blame him for this "cop-out".

It has been approximately 5 years or so from what I understand since this NEW allegation has popped up. He hasn't changed his behaviour as to being around children, and this in itself strikes me as being more true to his love for kids and ignoring the "alleged" pedophile charge. Yes, I know you could argue that he got through it and felt like he was invincible and therefore continued on with even more confidence that he was untouchable, but unless this man is really fucked up, I would find this to be a stretch. Normally people who are guilty of things tend to cover their tracks and do their best to appear guiltless. Again, in my opinion, I would say his continuing activities with children show a disdain for these allegations. Maybe I'm wrong, but my gut suggests I'm right on this. We'll see.

To top this off the family involved in this are supposedly guilty of some con scams in the past. So i've heard. With all of this put together, including the fact that it's been at least 5 years since ANY other kids, or their parents, have brought up a charge against him, I have to give the benefit of the doubt. The first charge got money. LOTS of money. Great precedent. Why have there been no other allegations during all this time?

I don't envy the man one way or the other. He either has the very reprehensible pedophilia desire in him that will be a curse to him the rest of his life, or he's an innocent victim that is being martyred because of his love of kids and the unfortunate vulnerability that goes hand in hand with being so personally involved with them.


Only time may tell.

[SPOOFE]

Conversely, if he is NOT, I hope that there is a true public apology bourne out in a way that justifies the man.

He's already been tried and convicted in the Court of Public Opinion, unfortunately. The up side is that Public Opinion is fickle, and has a really, really bad memory. If he's found innocent, people will be up in arms for, oh, a month, and then they'll forget. Maybe Bush will do something to distract them. Or maybe another huge NBA star will be accused of sexual assault. Or maybe Jacko will have another child molestation charge brought against him and then it'll be the whole game a-a-a-a-all over again.

I just plain don't care. Don't like the man's music, think he's nuts and a freak... but hey, who am I to condemn someone else's nuttiness and freakishness?

[Shroom Man 777]

Actually, his nuttiness and freakyness makes him a pretty nifty guy, in my book. I concur, there's no evidence, so we must say that he's innocent, unless something does indeed turn out.

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

SHOWDOWN WOOOOOOAaaaHHHH!!!!

*shakes*

Anyway, this is an interesting case. I think that he's entirely innocent, but *shrugs* that's just me.

[Tommy J]

Funny enough, I was talking about this tonight with people. I refuse to cast a judgment on Michael Jackson without clear evidence one way or the other.

Like you I'm not passing judgment with regard to Michael's guilt or innocence.

I do pass judgment with regard to him. He must be on the stupidest MUTHAfucka's on the planet


How could any sane and someone even with an IQ of 80 not get this. Follow the sequence of events.

1. Settles a lawsuit with a child and his family paying allegedly Tens of Millions of $$$ to hush up allegations of wrong doing.

2. Marries a women and allegedly has her child. They don't live together and it's obvious to everyone it's not Michael's child based on the child's skin color.

3. Persistently denies publically that he's had cosmetic surgery despite the fact that it's obvious to the contrary.

4. Goes to Germany and dangles and infant over a balcony -- Plays the victim of 'poor me' why do they keep attacking me.

5. Regardless of suspicions of wrong doing by the general public continues to invite children to his home for 'sleep overs'

6. Conducts an in depth interview with a British journalist. Journalist asks direct questions like:

a. Have you ever had cosmetic surgery -- he denies it again

b. Have you had your skin lightened -- he denies it but blames his lighter skin on a disease 'Vital-ago' for which 99% of the people who get it, are senior citizens.

c. Admits that he has children sleep over at his house and sees no problem with sleeping in the room AND IN THE SAME BED with adolescent boys.

7. Through the course of the interview talks about his special 'friend' who sleeps in his room and his bed for which he's named 'CARPET' -- he finds the entire relationship innocent.

8. Through the course of the interview, they visit Las Vegas in his Howard Hugh's like Hotel room where he goes on spending sprees.


When ABC first aired this interview his prior personal FRIEND Barbara Walters said to the audience before airing it, that she was saddened and frightened by the content of the interview as well as his COMPLETE utter inability to be in touch with reality.

I'LL SAY IT AGAIN; MICHAEL JACKSON WHILE NOT YET GUILTY OF PEDOPHILIA IS GUILTY OF BEING

THE STUPIDEST PERSON ON THE PLANET!

[Marksist]

Admits that he has children sleep over at his house and sees no problem with sleeping in the room AND IN THE SAME BED with adolescent boys.

[South Park Michael Jackson]Nooooo.. that's ignorance.[/SP MJ]