Minneapolis, Minnesota


Email Mike Bryant Mike Bryant on LinkedIn Mike Bryant on Twitter Mike Bryant on Facebook Mike Bryant on Avvo
Mike Bryant
Mike Bryant
Attorney • (800) 770-7008

What Has Given Michael Jackson a Pass?


It has been another week of big Michael Jackson stories.  He was a hologram at the Billboard Music Awards.   Then we have his song with Justin Timberlake  that could be the hit of the summer.   I really don’t get it.

It really seems that every story with him should examine whether he really was a pedophile.  Clearly there were payments made which suggest that children and their families were silenced.    He really should be a symbol of what happens when such claims are proven to be true.   Every pedestal should be knocked over.

I wonder about what the survivors think about his continues reverence.  Also it clearly sends a message of what can happen when big names are questioned or accused.   Is there a way to buy your way out  or are there those who are so powerful that they can’t be reached? It is actually that power that gives them the opportunity to abuse.

Now I think Timberlake  is one of the most talented people in the world, so I am troubled by my own response when I listen.  Some could even say , that the Jackson’s situation is a bit different from your average, run of the mill pedophilia case where it’s pretty black and white. There was no doubt that inappropriate activity was going on, but his motivations can just as easily be tied to other things than wanting to have sexual contact with children

If nothing else, the discussion needs to be fully fleshed out.



Have an opinion about this post? Please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

  1. Albert says:
    up arrow

    He was proven innocent by a court of law, the case was proven a lie. Most of the claims by the first family have been proven false as well. He was innocent, done, over out. The end.

  2. Diane Anders says:
    up arrow

    This topic has been hashed to death. The horse couldn’t be any deader. It’s your own obsession with it that keeps it burning in your brain, My suggestion? Give it up.

  3. Antoinette Sullivan says:
    up arrow

    Give it up my friend… Michael jackson is KING… An innocent man crucified by greedy jealous people who could not accept his success!!!! Michael Jackson, beneath Jesus Christ only, is the most influential and respected man in history and not you or your ridiculous articles can ever change that… We worship the man he was…. Long live King Michael….

  4. Heather says:
    up arrow

    If you would bother to read the trial information you would see that the people that filed these charges were just money hungry. As seems you. You are just writing a bunch of garbage to try to get your name out there. You will never be the man he was.

  5. mike says:
    up arrow

    As a survivor of child sexual abuse, I believe 6th accusers of MJ and have a Facebook page in support of them. JOIN THE FIGHT, facebook.com/waderobsonsupporters

  6. Ara Krejci says:
    up arrow

    The jury in the 2005 Michael Jackson trial:

    Four men. Eight women. Two fathers. Six mothers. Eight of them parents.

    Eight of them white. Three of them Hispanic. One Asian.

    Not a single African American.

    Jury verdict after weighing the evidence: Not guilty on all fourteen counts.

    “We the jury feel the weight of the world’s eyes. We thoroughly studied the testimony, evidence, rules and procedures. We confidently came to our verdict.” (Official statement the jury had the judge Rodney Melville read out in court)

    What has given Michael jackson a pass? Verdict: “Not Guilty”

  7. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    What a interesting group of responses. I appreciate everyone that read and commented. Since I wrote about it, I clearly don’t agree with a number of you and see something else with the “evidence”.
    Since each of the questions involved children I don’t see stars. I also added the last two paragraphs taking into consideration those that only see that or won;t accept everything that happened.
    Oh and Heather I would have no interest in that life at all.

  8. Ara Krejci says:
    up arrow

    To those who keep arguing that a ruling of “not guilty” does not mean a person is innocent: there are only two options a jury or judge has in ruling on a criminal defendant in the U.S. legal system, as Mike Bryant, an attorney, must know:

    1. Guilty
    2. Not Guilty

    All rulings of “not guilty” in the U.S. judicial system are determined on the basis of “reasonable doubt.” There is no such ruling or legal declaration in the U.S. judicial system or any state therein of:

    “not guilty without a doubt”
    “acquitted without a doubt”
    “innocent without a doubt”
    “proved innocent without a doubt”

    or even simply “proved innocent”

    So keep that in mind when casting aspersions on Michael Jackson (or any person) found “not guilty” of charges with which they are accused of.

    No criminal defendant found “not guilty” in a U.S. court of law, is, in legal language, declared “innocent.” Not guilty means “acknowledgement by the court of the innocence of the defendant.

    Not guilty is as good as it gets.

  9. Valdene Pringle says:
    up arrow

    I was taught the it is wrong to bear false witness against your neighbor. That is exactly what you are doing. YOU ARE PERPETUATING A BIG FAT LIE that is hurtful to the people who truly knew that . i studied the court manuscripts. I imagined myself sitting in the front row of the jury box, and I listened to everything that was said so I feel totally comfortable with the jury’s NOT GUILTY verdict. Because, based on the evidence that was presented, I know for sure MICHAEL JACKSON WAS PROVEN INNOCENT. There is not a doubt in my mind Michael Jackson is innocent of all charges…… Now when you can comeback after you have read the transcript and say that he was a pedophile I’d like to hear your reasoning….. Until then, you should shut your trap because you don’t know what you are talking about. You owe Michael Jackson an apology and you have a lot of crow to eat.

  10. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    I think you are way over reading and adding what isn’t there. But again , thanks for stopping by and giving your opinion.

  11. celebrity worship destorys brain cells says:
    up arrow

    “There was no doubt that inappropriate activity was going on, but his motivations can just as easily be tied to other things than wanting to have sexual contact with children”

    what other things can be tied to such inappropriate activity?

    if your neighbour down the street behave in the exact same manner there would be no doubt in anyone’s mind to keep all children away from that neighbour.

    but no not mj. what because he sang ‘thriller’ and danced the moonwalk?! oh please!

  12. Kewlzter says:
    up arrow

    I DON’T GET IT! I’m a confident man, but I’m not arrogant enough to think I know more than a well educated Judge, or a jury of my peers.
    Who are you? That you hold such insight? Did you study at Hogwarts?

  13. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    CW not really the whole point with the quote. But, i am sure there will be other far more interested in defending the activities. Thanks for reading and the comment.

  14. Mack A. Johnson says:
    up arrow

    Um, you claim to be an attorney? Does the law mean anything to you? How about evidence? Ever heard of malicious prosecution? Does it concern you at all? Ever thought of considering the actual facts of the case, as opposed to tabloid gossip, before declaring an innocent man guilty? What makes you so sure there are “survivors” to be considered? (For starters, you might want to read Randall Sullivan’s “Untouchable” for a dummy’s guide to the 2005 trial. It’s a horrible book, but at least he got the facts of the 2005 trial correct. From there, you could graduate to reading the actual trial transcripts.)

  15. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Mack I didn’t write specifically about the trial nor specifically about the civil claims. I have been troubled from his very first (and only real open interview ) and will always be troubled by what he said. As I wrote, it seems to me that there is and will always be an issue here. I also added that others look at it differently.
    I do remember the criminal trial itself and had mixed emotions about the whole thing. I will always side with survivors. Those that took the money and settled, were never part of the criminal trial that is only a piece of the whole picture.

  16. Mack A. Johnson says:
    up arrow

    Sorry Mike, but you are absolutely wrong. The 2005 trial explores the civil claims in depth (1108 evidence). The child in the first civil case refused to testify against Jackson, though CA law allowed him to do so without risking his settlement. He was legally emancipated from his parents, and had he testified, his friends were willing to testify that he told them nothing ever happened and he would never speak to his parents again for what they made him say (see Meserau’s speech at Harvard Law School). The boy’s mother testified in court it had been many years since she had seen or spoke to her son. The second child was the one who went down as the witness the jury laughed at, the story was utterly ridiculous (claimed to have been improperly tickled while fully clothed in broad daylight while his mom was working in the home) and he was caught in a myriad of lies. The reasons for those two settlements are complex, but obvious, if you know the cases. There are no other settlements than the two.

    Before automatically siding with the “survivors” (aka extortionists), you might want to have a look at the psychology literature and review the damage of false allegations to the children involved. It is devastating to these kids and everyone involved. These false allegations destroyed Jackson.

    The one thing the total of three cases against Jackson all have in common? Adults going to civil lawyers for monetary claims (not counselors, clergy, police, social workers, or teachers) are the source of the complaints against Jackson, not the children, who only confirm the ventriloquilized stories much later in the game.

    Do your homework before declaring an innocent man guilty.

    Jackson was not the “run of the mill” target for extortion. He was the biggest target for extortion that ever lived.

  17. Matt says:
    up arrow

    I Love how Pedophile Jacko fans create lies and conspiracies against the victims of Jackson, then try to present it as real evidence!

    For anybody that wants to call the first accusers liars, explain how Jordy described Jackson’s genitalia?
    Jordy nor anyone he knew EVER claimed he lied!

    And this was EXACT moment Jacko retreated, and paid 20+ MILLION TO SILENCE him. The evidence against him in second case was not as severe, but still compelling enough to warrant payment of 3.5 Million. Nobody pays Millions that is innocent! They’d fight to prove their innocence, because ‘They dont just hand out cash to anyone who makes a claim, it has to proved.’

    NOBODY has to pay Millions for tickling, and nobody would!

    Also, the bedroom sex alarm?Parents forbidden entry to bedroom? Jackson spending WEEKS alone in bed with individual boys? Jacko couldn’t just been up to ‘childlike’ activities, and even he was smart enough to know it.

  18. Janet says:
    up arrow

    Lol,Quoting Messereau, the high paid pedo defender lawyer is laughable. This is the same crooked lawyer that fought against allowing Jordy’s description of Jacko’s genitalia with the photos into evidence in 2005 trial (for some reason). And authorities confirmed description matched! Messereau is also the same laywer that created the big lie about an ‘insurance company’ paying for Jackson! Later he had to ADMIT there was NO INSURANCE COMPANY, Jacko paid it willingly himself, to shut Jordy up, because he knew Jordy had smoking gun! All these lies prove Messereau understands he’s defending a flaming PEDOPHILE! The Biggest pedophile ever to walk the planet!

    Had Pedo Jacko been man of lesser means, he had rotted to death in prison long ago!

    Messereau has defended other pedo’s too, he must have weakness for them, lol.

    And the child porn Jacko collected, documented in court evidence?

    That whole Lie about Jordy saying he lied was created by MJ nazi fans in pro Mj forums, to further victimize children! And has no authenticity! To many LIES! And MJ camp/fans have the nerve to call other people Liars!!

    And how about showing CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE victims some compassion for a change!
    Disgusting Child haters!

  19. @Matt says:
    up arrow

    1. He was known to have a skin disease by that time, with effects that are known to everyone. You honestly think the father hadn’t primed him for that as well? 2. It is my understanding that he described him as being circumcised. His autopsy showed this was not the case. 3. The whole “silence money” point is the worse excuse yet. If you believed any person… man, woman, young or old had violated your child behind your back, would you just take money for it? No one would.

  20. @Janet says:
    up arrow

    @Janet You people seriously give the rabid fans a run for their money. The language you all use and the ways in which you speak are CLEAR indicators that even you don’t believe in the things you say. Child abuse of any kind is nothing light-hearted and no one would speak about it in those ways if they actually thought it to be real. My main point to you is: there was no “child porn.” The only porn collected was of adult females, sorry. Why can’t you people take solace in the fact that the man is dead and “can’t hurt anyone” anymore instead of twisting information to suit your bitter interests?

  21. @Celebrity Worship Destroys Brain Cells says:
    up arrow

    THIS is what irritates me. Yes there are biased people in the world that will overlook anything for their favorite celeb, but why do people like you always assume it’s about celebrity? How about looking at REAL information instead of speculation and rumor? Unfortunately for you all there is more information to suggest false accusations than anything else.

    I will even admit there was a point when I DESPISED this man, but still had the sense to see it was all about cash. Anyone thinking logically can see that.

    Those wanting to believe the worst will spin it their way as well, so does prior hatred and disdain destroy brain cells as well? The fact that the media give him “a pass” shows that most people don’t believe it… not because of some songs and dances. It’s the other way around, if they believed it, no one would care about that aspect at all.

    I recommend the 2005 Rolling Stone article “Jacko on Trial: Inside the strangest show on Earth”



    …but instead of wishing and praying no children had ever been hurt, you’ll overlook those pieces and continue reveling in the possibility as long as it destroys this man’s image.

  22. @Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    As for the author, you always side with “survivors?” What if no one ‘survived” a thing? What if those survivors are actually liars? They automatically “get a pass” for claiming they were victimized? If I accuse my neighbor of rape, am I a “survivor” by default just because I stated so?

    I’d also like to point out that there were witnesses ready to testify in 2005 to state that Chandler told them nothing happened. But, of course, that’s all pretend and imaginary according to you all.

  23. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    It is interesting all of the facts that are being thrown around without much understanding of what the point seems to be. Thanks each of you for reading and adding to the discussion.

    I do distinguish where children are involved and will always be troubled by his interview,

  24. Shelley says:
    up arrow

    That just goes to show how stupid some Pedo Jacko fans are!! We are the ones that have given proof and evidence he was pedophile.

    They have spoken nothing but the TRUTH, all in official evidence. Everything you Pedo acko fans said got shot down! All you have are lies, and are quick to suggest tabloids when they favor Pedo!

    As mentioned before by Matt, EVERYBODY knows the lie that Jordy mentioned circumcision was conspiracy instigated By obsolete MJ fans! You people know he’s pedophile, and make up lies as you go! MJ fans are repulsive to society at large, and the more you show your disgusting true colors, the worst you look!

    How dare you defend a pedophile!
    If you truly respected the severity of child sexual abuse, you’d condemn it, even from your freak molester hero Jacko.

    But instead you calloused Mj fans cast lies and slander on the victims!!!

  25. Shelley says:
    up arrow

    Jordy couldn’t just say he had spots, he had to describe the spots accurately, which he did!

    And NOBODY pays 25MILLION dollars that isn’t guilty, because if he wasn’t guilty, he could’ve easily PROVED it!!

    After seeing what he was up against, Pedo Jacko made a complete about -face, and sought to silence Jordy and Francia anyway he could! That PROVES guilt!
    No INNOCENT man would’ve done that! And his rep was on the line, child sexual abuse is very serious allegation.
    Any innocent person would bring everything to a halt, and fight to prove their innocence no matter how long, or what the cost!

    Jacko paid Jordy 25 MILLION, no one does that for some thing false!!!

    And a grown man alone in bed with a boy for weeks!! This is verified. Nothing justifies that! ONLY a pedo would do this.

    And have you looked at the court transcripts, or do just get everything from tabloids?

    Much child PORN was collected into police evidence, yes, porn, and child erotica!
    There was lots more than some thought.

    No innocent man would have such.
    And there were more details in official reports that expose Jacko.

    And you add up everything, Pedo Jacko was the Biggest Pedophile ever on the planet!

  26. Mack A. Johnson says:
    up arrow

    @Mike Bryant: Totally understand why you believe “facts being thrown around” misses the point of your article. It’s very clear you are ambulance chasing “victims” of child sex abuse in order to profit from them – no evidence or proof necessary – just show up with a accusation (who cares if it is true or false?) and get a pay day. You’ve made yourself quite clear. I can see you are looking to drum up some business in this area and those who would like to make false accusations rather than work for a living should find an ally in you. You seem to know Larry Feldman’s play book pretty well.

    However, if by chance you or any or your future clients particularly care about how damaging the game of false allegations is for the children and families involved, the Jackson case is an excellent place to learn. The once successful family was completely torn apart; the child was emancipated from his parents; he got a restraining order against his father for beating him with a bar bell; the father died of a self-inflicted bullet to the head.

    And not that facts mean anything to Jackson bullyers – but not one, but TWO grand juries refused to indict Jackson in ’93. Why? There was not a shred of evidence Jackson committed a crime. The grand jury looked at photographs of Jackson’s body next to the child’s drawing of it – IT WAS NOT A MATCH. The child refused to testify in criminal court where his story could be cross examined. It should be abundantly clear why.

    Any lawyer knows that the premise “nobody pays money who is innocent” is an out and out lie and lawyers profit handsomely from this. Innocent victims settle all the time and there are VERY compelling reasons why Jackson fought for months against these extortionists, but took his lawyer’s advice to settle. The cost of fighting the case in both dollars and emotional/psychological torture was far greater than the settlement amount.

    Sorry we live in a world where this sick game has to be addressed, making it more and more difficult for REAL victims to be heard and believed. But it’s time to deal with the truth, rather than the old fashioned folk-devil myth that Jackson was a dangerous predator.

    (would be happy to post actual MJ interviews to counter the myth of the “first,” “only real open interview,” if the truth means anything to you.)

  27. HowardSTP says:
    up arrow

    Another dumb statement from MJ fan imbecile. What do you mean nobody cared MJ was molester? As I recall, MJ was the most ridiculed, infamous specie on the planet before he died! Thats one reason he died broke and in debt. Nobody wanted anything to do with him for DECADES before his death, and everyone knew he was pedo.People scorned and despised this Great Pedophile, who’d been lying and manipulating children all those years. Then he dies and suddenly becomes saint? At least to his outcast,child sex abuse endorcing freak fans.

    And what innocent man that isn’t pedophile, obsesses over naked boys in suggestive poses? What non-pedophile obsesses over naked boys at all?

    Why would an innocent man keep supposed art books of naked books locked away in his file cabinet. Those books had been edited by previous child sex offenders, and inscribed by Jackson. Those books have also been confiscated numerous times off pedophiles, those books are also used by NAMBLA.

    And there was adult material with children found as well.

    What innocent man wants boys in his bed?
    HUNDREDS of non-related boys?

    And the bed wasn’t accident, but priority for Pedo Jackson with his special friends. His favorite ‘special friends’ were demanded to get into bed with him!Even to the point of bribing their parents, and making them get lost?

    Nobody needs to bribe for harmless, innocent friendship.Only someone who wants to get rid of parents because they are doing something WRONG, and know it.

    Pedo Jackson even had to have a certain ‘look’ to these ‘special’ boy friends. They were all boys considered above average, good looking, with specific facial features. So why is that, if nothing was SEXUAL? Its clear he had a preference to these special friends. Not just any boy got chosen.
    These are all facts everybody knows!

    And the 27+ Million paid to at least 3 different boys? Nobody does that who’s innocent!

    Its clear, everything points to Jacko being pedophile. Its undeniable. Its very dangerous and unethical to support such openly flaming child sex abuser!

  28. Mack A. Johnson says:
    up arrow

    @HowardSTP Do read my post if you have a chance (7/10 5:39pm). Sorry that you are not aware of the legal facts in this case. It’s not entirely your fault, you were cued to believe these myths.

  29. Pam @Mack says:
    up arrow

    More twisting of facts from Pedo loonies!Do you think people are fools? Two grand juries never refused indictment of Pedo Jacko. What brought the earliest cases to a stop were the monetary agreements. The complainants refused to cooperate after making settlement and getting payments.

    Again, you are LYING! Another well known Pedo Jacko camp conspiracy myth. The grand jury NEVER got to see the pics, or any evidence, because the settlements halted the trial,Chandlers never presented the evidence to jury!Without that, they could not possibly indict!

    And JORDY’S DESCRIPTION AND THE PICTURES DID MATCH!!This was confirmed by authorities!

    tThat’s been established. IF not moron, why would Jacko pay up Millions because of it, and Messereau try so hard to keep it from 2005 molestation case?

    If Jackson was truly INNOCENT, and the victims didn’t have anything of significance,he’ d not need to spend so much time in YEARS or resources fighting! If the pics weren’t correct, they’d been thrown out of court, and the case dismissed!!!!


    Fraudulent claims get thrown out of court!
    Jackson and his lawyers were apparently much smarter that the gullible fans!
    And Jackson was the one to initiate the decision to settle, he admitted this in televised interview, not his lawyers! You Jackson floons ignore ALL THE EVIDENCE!

    There’s plenty of proof against Michael Pedo Jackson, more than for most pedo’s, who end up doing time because they don’t have enough money to pay people off!

    You want to choose something crazy unrealistic as proof, like Micheal Jackson actually filming himself in act of molesting children!No pedophile does that, no criminal films themselves committing crime, not even Jackson!Going by those standards, no pedophile, murderer, etc would ever be convicted! You want to be unreasonable because you know all things about Pedo Jackson show him as pedophile! Other evidence, and there’s much, is more than sufficient to prove Jacko Jackson was pedophile!


    Nice try, the more lies and twisting of truth you disgusting fringe lunatics tell, and the more you victimize victims of child sexual abuse, the deeper you and King Pedo Jackson sink!

  30. Ara Krejci says:
    up arrow

    Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone magazine investigative reporter, who was no fan of Jackson, had this to say about the the 2005 trial:

    “Ostensibly a story about bringing a child molester to justice, the Michael Jackson trial would instead be a kind of homecoming parade of insipid American types grifters and
    no-talent schemers looking to cash in any way they can. The first month or so of the trial featured perhaps the most compromised collection of prosecution witnesses ever assembled in an American criminal case – almost to a man a group of convicted liars, paid gossip hawkers or worse. The early witnesses against Jackson included a bodyguard who missed court because he was in custody facing charges stemming from a series of armed robberies, including holding up a Jack in the Box at gunpoint; a former Neverland maid who’d stolen a sketch Jackson had made of Elvis Presley and sold it to the tabloids for thirty grand; another former employee who’d lost a wrongful-termination suit against Jackson and had to pay part of a $1.4 million settlement as a result.

    “And then there was the very key figure in the case, the accuser’s mother Janet Arvizo, who had to plead the Fifth Amendment on the first day of her testimony to avoid cross-examination on a welfare-fraud allegation – a witness so completely full of sh—t that Sneddon’s own assistants cringed openly throughout most of her five days of testimony.

    “In the next six weeks, virtually every piece of Sneddon’s case against Jackson imploded in open court, and the chief drama of the trial quickly turned into a race to see if the DA could manage to put all of his witnesses on the stand without getting any of them removed from the courthouse in manacles.

    “Sneddon’s hard-on for Jackson was a faith-based vengeance grab every bit as blind and desperate as George Bush’s “case” against Saddam Hussein. If Ahmad Chalabi had ever been to Neverland, Sneddon would have put him on the stand too.

    “His case against Jackson was bullsh—t. California vs. Jackson turned out to be basically a tale of a family of low-rent grifters trying to lay a criminal-molestation charge on a rich celebrity as a prelude to a civil suit.”

    Excerpt from “The Nation in the Mirror” Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone magazine. Issue 977/978

  31. Mack A. Johnson says:
    up arrow

    Hi Pam,

    Here are the lawyers for both sides explaining their positions in the Chandler case. The Chandler lawyer tells the press his client is not prohibited from testifying against Jackson (aka obstruction of justice) and there is video evidence here of people arriving for grand jury proceedings. http://youtu.be/Bx-PCsTQ4n8 If you find any evidence of any criminal proceeding against Jackson besides the 2005 trial, be sure to let us know. In the mean time, I’ll assure you there were no criminal charges in the Chandler/Francia cases.

    I really am sorry that there is so much misinformation that you passionately believe.

  32. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Oh Mack, I just read the blog again : I said I wanted a discussion, and guess what ? You have contributed to the request. Got what I wanted.

    I never asked for a case in the blog and didn’t write it even thinking about that. I often write posts just because I want to. I was watching the hologram and it hit me, more needs to be said about this.

    I do find it funny that you have so self righteously talked about reading, You then jump to such cliches. Are you are thinking ” I know who you are from this one blog” ?

  33. Pam @Mack says:
    up arrow

    What an idiot you are Mack! Did you listen to anything I said? I said there was NO criminal TRIAL with Jordy, due to the agreements!! Thats why Jacko PAID UP!
    Even the video states the without their cooperation, case could not go forward. The Chandlers stopped cooperating, including refusing to testify, and not presenting their evidence. So there was no criminal trial.
    The Chandler’s didn’t go forward, that was the purpose of settlements, of which , yes, the Chandlers were prevented from going forward with acceptance.

    And still, you are avoiding main point. If the Chandler’s didn’t have evidence, there case would’ve simply been thrown out of court, and Jacko wouldn’t pay a penny!

    Instead he pays MILLIONS!!!
    If Jackson was innocent, and the Chandlers had nothing,he could’ve easily proved it.

  34. Pam @Ara says:
    up arrow

    Ara, stop reading the tabloids. Showing bias. You shouldn’t give him any more credit to that than you do those that speak against Jackson.

    Try something more reputable, like statements from the jury,

    “Michael Jackson’s acquittal was a victory for a law that could have helped convict him in his child molestation trial.

    Some members of the jury, which acquitted “The King of Pop” of all 10 charges related to allegations that he molested a now-15-year-old boy, said they suspected the singer had molested other children but that prosecutors had not proven he had done anything illegal to the accuser in his trial.

    During deliberations, jury foreman Paul Rodriguez said, he and other jurors frequently discussed the testimony they had heard about past allegations that Jackson had molested or behaved inappropriately with five other boys, including two youngsters who reached multimillion-dollar settlements with the singer in the 1990s.

    But, Rodriguez said, the jurors knew they could not convict solely on the basis of past allegations.

    “We couldn’t weigh that with this case in particular,” he said. “We all felt that he was guilty of something. But we feel that if he didn’t learn from this experience, then it’s up to another jury to convict him.”

    Mind you, the foreman was dedicated Jacko fan.

  35. Pam @Ara says:
    up arrow

    Ara, stop reading the tabloids. Showing bias. You shouldn’t give him any more credit to that than you do those that speak against Jackson.

    Try something more reputable, like statements from the jury,

    “Michael Jackson’s acquittal was a victory for a law that could have helped convict him in his child molestation trial.

    Some members of the jury, which acquitted “The King of Pop” of all 10 charges related to allegations that he molested a now-15-year-old boy, said they suspected the singer had molested other children but that prosecutors had not proven he had done anything illegal to the accuser in his trial.

    During deliberations, jury foreman Paul Rodriguez said, he and other jurors frequently discussed the testimony they had heard about past allegations that Jackson had molested or behaved inappropriately with five other boys, including two youngsters who reached multimillion-dollar settlements with the singer in the 1990s.

    But, Rodriguez said, the jurors knew they could not convict solely on the basis of past allegations.

    “We couldn’t weigh that with this case in particular,” he said. “We all felt that he was guilty of something. But we feel that if he didn’t learn from this experience, then it’s up to another jury to convict him.”

    Mind you, the foreman was also dedicated Jacko fan.

  36. Pam @Ara says:
    up arrow

    And those damning jury statements were from 2005 trial, that Pedo MJ freaks boast so much about.

  37. Pam @Ara says:
    up arrow

    Mr. Bryant, they always attack everyone telling truth to make them shut up.Because Pedo Jackson is so guilty, all facts are against him,and they don’t want Pedo King exposed!

    Never let them make you shut up, or intimidate you. You have right to speak.The truth is on side of the MJ’s victims. The more we talk, the more truth comes out.

    There should be laws made against pedophile enablers too.Unethical pedophile lovers!

  38. Pam@ says:
    up arrow

    And for the record,Pedo Jackson’s collections of nude and lewd boys was ‘child porn’

    from court transcripts;

    “Q. What did you think of “The Boy,” Michael Jackson’s collection of child porn?

    A. Didn’t want to look at it, didn’t want it to influence my decision.

    So this evidence was just ignored!

  39. Mack A. Johnson says:
    up arrow

    Pam, hun, I see that you don’t understand the theories of the law. But simply ask yourself, why would a true “victim” refuse to testify against a “pedo” in criminal court? Not once but twice? Why would a true “victim” take the money and run – leaving an alleged perpetrator free to victimize other children? Why would two grand juries refuse to indict? The answer is simple.

    The 2005 jury spoke loud and clear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNfrgUu29Gs

  40. Ara Krejci says:
    up arrow


    You are a personal injury lawyer, are you not? And a criminal defense litigator at that–whose firm represents defendants accused of sex crimes. Part of the mission statement of your firm:

    “A sex crime conviction will change your life permanently. Don’t risk your reputation and future by not hiring the right criminal defense lawyer. (We have) been protecting clients accused of sex crimes for over 30 years. We will use our knowledge and experience to defend your sex crimes case and pursue the most favorable outcome possible. We strongly believe all our clients deserve a fair trial and are entitled to their rights. Our sex crimes lawyer will conduct a thorough investigation, challenge the evidence and create a strong defense to obtain a positive conclusion.”

    You (your firm) further state: “We understand the devastating impact …a criminal charge can have on you and your loved ones. Our job is to do everything we can to lessen the burdens imposed by these traumatic events.”

    Given the above, how can you, with a any ethics at all, encourage further public harassment of a man who was acquitted by a twelve person jury at the conclusion of a five month fair trial? You are entitled to your opinions about the interview you are troubled by, but you know better than to incite a trial by suspicion in a court of public opinion. Lest you claim you are not doing that: “It really seems that every story with him should examine whether he really was a pedophile.”

    You also full well know you are deliberately inciting prejudice by using the term “survivors.” Unless and until injury is proven they are “accusers.” As you know, accusations are neither truth nor evidence.

    I am a litigator also with a firm (also) in Minneapolis: Stinson Leonard Street (formerly Leonard Street and Deinard). Had you chosen to post this on a personal blog, I would take no issue.

    You chose instead to publish this in an online professional forum. Given that this is accessible to the public I find this irresponsible, unprofessional and disturbing.

    Ara Krejci (pseudonym)

  41. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    and won’t use your real name. That adds a lot of credibility to your very pointed statements.

    I will always be bothered by the interview and that just the way it is. I stand by everything on my website and fully represent the people that I do. I have no problem with what I wrote here or my thoughts.

    The survivor part hit hard and was meant to in response to the comment. I never used it in the post and I stand by it also.

    I will give what you said some though though, You clearly are much deeper committed to this whole issue then I will understand. If you are in Minnesota ask some of the lawyers there that know me, You are really slinging a lot of mud and doing so as if mine is a minority thought. I asked a number of others about this issue, after these posts and was amazed how strong the overall views are about there being very little doubt.


  42. Lynette says:
    up arrow

    Mike my first question to you is which interview are you disturbed about because I can’t quite make that out from your article?
    Then I would like to ask you from a lawyer’s point of view a couple of other questions that have also been on my mind. I am not an attorney but have always wondered what another lawyer might have done under similar circumstances. So if you had been Michael Jackson’s attorney what would your advice be in the following scenario?
    A 13 year old boy that you befriended accused you of molestation after his father demanded $ 20 million to keep that accusation quiet before the accusation was made. He was recorded on the phone a full month prior to any allegations stating that he had a plan and had certain people in certain places ready to move ahead with that plan. When he was denied that money he took his son to a forensic psychiatrist and had him tell his story. You had an attorney consult this same psychiatrist a month before hand by phone about the hypothetical case of a child sleeping with and adult. As an aside the father was a Dentist, also a mandated reporter, so if he made the report in GOOD FAITH he cannot be held liable. However if it is found to be fraudulent he can be sued. If he does not report it as a parent and a mandated reporter he can be fined and jailed.
    The psychiatrist is mandated by law to report all reports of child molestation to the common entry point. He did that and social services were called in. Someone wasn’t pleased with that deviation from the original plan and the police were called in. The boy gives the police and social services a report. He admits that his father asked for the money. The plan is to get this news out in the worst way possible (a quote from the taped conversation) A mysterious phone call is placed to a reporter when a search warrant is served on the ranch where the accused resides. The accused is away on a tour and scheduled to be away for several months on this tour under a contract that makes him liable for the costs of the tour if he does not complete it. Essentially he can’t come back at will to answer the charges.
    In the meantime a tabloid stringer that was part of that plan was leaking the boy’s statement to the tabloid media. Mainstream media had to pay for their copies from the court or from the tabloid outlet Splash News. It became a PR and a legal nightmare for the accused. His private investigator goes on TV and accuses the father of extortion but forgot to go to the police first. The boy’s father hires a high profile attorney that wants to get the accused into criminal court as soon as possible. She takes him into the DA’s office and he gives another statement this time including a description of the accused genitals. That is the only case in history where a child victim has ever either been asked or volunteered such a description of the accused.
    The family fires her and hires another attorney that is willing to move first with a civil trial suing the accused. He files the suit. The accused has lawyers that also file suit. The boy is sent to an outside psychiatrist that specializes in false accusations. IN that particular interview the boy claims that the accused not only masturbated in front of him but had the boy masturbate the accused.
    Then the two legal teams meet in court. The accused is asking to delay the civil case and allow the criminal case to go forward first. His attorney misspeaks and the judge grants the boy’s motion to move forward with discovery and sets a trial date for the civil trial. It has essentially become a legal hemorrhage at this point because this tabloid stringer that was part of the plan has been talking to the boys lawyers and bringing several ADULT employees to them to give depositions about what they saw going on at the ranch. He also was bringing them to the tabloids to sell sensational stories about the accused. All of them would later sue the accused and loose because their stories were proven false.
    Next the accused returns to the US after the tour. In one hearing the accused was asking for a gag order. The judge denied that and the DA’s in two counties asked for and were given access to the civil case discovery. Because of the description that was given to the police the police get a search warrant to photograph the accused genitals. The search warrant came with the warning that if he were to refuse it would be taken as an admission of guilt and he would be arrested. The photos were taken and the police left without arresting the accused. The accused then went public with a no questions statement prepared by his lawyers because of the possible criminal charges and the current civil case.
    In answer to this the boys attorney presents another motion to court for its consideration. He is asking for financial statements from the accused and he wanted the photos prohibited from the civil case. To bring attention to this he added partial depositions from those employee’s previously mentioned.
    Now if you were the attorney for the accused in this case and knew that the police and the DA’s would have access to the discovery of those sensationalized stories of those employees would you advise the accused to go into arbitration and settle money on the boy or would you allow the DA’s to see what your defense was?

  43. lemmy says:
    up arrow


  44. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    Lynette, I find it odd that you would write all of that and really ask what interview bothered me. I doubt you care about my answer, and don’t even see the two questions.

    I don’t ever do civil defense. It also looks like the criminal / civil line is being blurred there. Client is always the one that gets to decide if they want to settle or not.

  45. Lynette says:
    up arrow

    Yes, most definitely the civil and criminal lines were very blurred in this case weren’t they? But what would be your biggest concern at the time? Wouldn’t you as a criminal defense attorney be far more concerned with the criminal case where the outcome has so much more at risk?
    I’m sure that your clients look to you for advice during their legal trouble and I am sure that you give it. Being a criminal defense attorney I think I know what your advice would be.
    So now we are back to the first part where you say that every story that has to do with Michael Jackson should examine whether or not he was a pedophile even stories about music and posthumous releases? I think that the reason it isn’t that if it were written into these stories it might be construed as deliberately undermining the promotion of the materials that were being written about.

  46. Lynette says:
    up arrow

    I also forgot to mention that there is not a settlement until the plaintiff accepts it. So in this case I guess the reason it was settled is because of the guardian ad litem that was appointed to the boy determined it was in his best interest to accept.

  47. Lynette says:
    up arrow

    And lastly as a criminal defense attorney I would think that you know an accusation is not proof. The proof in this case is that many things working together settled a civil case and a few months later the accuser decided that he did not want to testify.

  48. Mike Bryant says:
    up arrow

    As I said, I don’t think you cared about the answers, it was all straw person questions to make an exaggerated point.

  49. Lynette says:
    up arrow

    Mike I do care about your answers that is why I asked the questions. That is why I gave you all the information that I did so you could make an informed decision with all the facts that are available.That is not a straw person argument. My question was genuine, what would you do if you were faced with a similar legal situation where those line between a civil and criminal matter were crossed? Was there a way to proceed safely in the criminal case when all those factors were present in the civil case?
    Ever thing needs to be considered doesn’t it? So was it a payoff or was it a step to prevent exposing exculpatory evidence in the criminal case to the prosecutors?

  50. Tim says:
    up arrow

    [QUOTE]That is why I gave you all the information that I did so you could make an informed decision with all the facts that are available.[/QUOTE]

    Michael Jackson fan site “facts”, not actual real facts. You obviously aren’t smart enough to see the distinction.

    Fact is that no matter which way you slice and dice it, Michael Jackson behaved inappropriately around children and that kind of behavior needs to be called out.

    If an ordinary man living in our community did as Michael Jackson did we would be quite vocal in letting everybody know about it, and rightly so.

    People in positions of influence should not be permitted to convince parents that it’s acceptable to split them and their child apart so that the man can spend lengthy alone time with their child with no supervision – especially if that man owns questionable books and magazines that, though legal, are full of naked and semi naked children.

    There are men out there using the Michael Jackson play book “It’s all innocent”, “Nothing happens”, “The kids want to hang around me”, “The kids are liars” etc etc to cover up their own abuse, so we need to shine a light on Michael Jackson’s behavior and excuses.