Quote from: hesouttamylife on March 26, 2013, 12:13:15 PMThanks for these articles as I was about to ask what other important news was ongoing during 1993 when Michael was again at the epitome' of his career everywhere but in America. :confused: This was during the Dangerous era aboad, no, and Michael was off the charts. He was touring, did the big super bowl halftime show and...that interview with Oprah (where she asked about the crotch grabbing & his skin color) :icon_rolleyes: which seems coincidental that the 2 biggest interviews he ever gave, first with Oprah and then with Bashir resulted in his being accused of terrible crimes against children. If I remember correctly during this period is also when Oprah really started lambasting the Catholic church for molesting young boys. And in 2005 she formulated her infamous child predator watch list.
The following statement was taken from Oprah.com:
"Oprah's long-standing commitment to children led her to initiate the National Child Protection Act in 1991, when she testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee to establish a national database of convicted child abusers. On December 20, 1993, the "Oprah Bill" was signed into law. In 2005, Oprah launched Oprah's Child Predator Watch List and her pledge to provide a $100,000 reward per case to those individuals whom the FBI or local law enforcement officials say provided critical information leading to the capture and arrest of fugitives featured on The Oprah Winfrey Show or Oprah.com. Since its launch, nine of the featured fugitives have been captured."
Who knows who else was on it and who's assistance was relegated (Bashir).
Here's some interesting thoughts to ponder from the New York Post: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/pulling_back_the_curtain_on_oprah_o8pmz6I4T3lZ8san4GHvlN/1
...and then this article from 1992
Airing Sexual Exploitation Of Children While Claiming To Expose It Incites The Impressionable To Make Up Things That Never Happened
By NICHOLAS VON HOFFMAN
POSTED: September 09, 1992
If Jerry Lewis uses muscular dystrophy to perpetuate his career, Oprah Winfrey is using child abuse to further hers.
Of late it has been nearly impossible to turn on a television set without being treated to Ms. Oprah's sobersided delectations over adults touching children in their no-no zones. Mr. Lewis is tasteless while Ms. Winfrey is tasty in her disguising the essential prurience of her program content under the guise of addressing a social problem.
That the sexual abuse of children is an important social problem remains to be convincingly proven. That it occurs, even outside the confines of the Roman Catholic Church, there is no doubt, but that it is a serious problem when stacked up against all the other difficulties facing the nation and its children seems improbable.
In trying to ascertain what the facts of the matter are it is a mistake to
put much reliance on the suspect "studies" turned out by people from the psychology industry which has a palpable, material interest in nailing down the proposition that millions of child molesters are to be found in home and school. Statistics on this topic may be taken only with a grain of salt.
Counting child abuse cases is like counting a bucket of wriggling eels. No common definition of what constitutes child abuse exists and none can say when it may have occurred and therefore should be counted - not in an era of sexual McCarthyism. Television to the contrary, the United States probably has not become a nation of vile adults taking lustful advantage of its children.
Oprah Winfrey, and the television networks that have aired her child-abuse special, Scared Silent, cash in on her game. They are spreading hysteria and encouraging the juridical lynching of people falsely accused of having sexual congress with children.
The last years have seen enough Salem show trials of people ruined by the accusations of deranged adults speaking through children whom they have coached and controlled.
Thanks to the Oprah Winfrey Watch and Ward Vigilante Association other lives will be destroyed as new people are dragged to the bar of injustice.
Having show business personalities on prime time glamorizing the subject of sexual exploitation of children while claiming to fight it is an incitement of the impressionable to make up things that never happened. Winfrey and the networks who put this nonsense on the air are facilitating hysterical contagion and building an atmosphere that makes growing up a little harder, a little more lonely, than it otherwise might have been.
Thanks to Oprah and her confederates an increasing number of adults, especially men, are steering clear of any contact with children. Outside of formal situations where contact is sanctioned, men are keeping their distance
from children of all ages. Increasingly, they don't touch them, they don't talk to them, they don't help them in distress, they don't even smile at them.
Once upon a time the rearing of children was regarded as something of a communal responsibility. Older people bothered with youngsters who weren't their own. You're asking for a lawsuit, if not an arrest, today if you look crosswise at a child. Their care and rearing is left to their parents, their teachers and those Rasputins of modern life, the psychologists.
The child abuse scam is backed by the psychology industry. A sharp line is drawn here between the psychology business and psychiatry, a licensed profession practiced by people trained in medical art and science.
Psychology is another matter. Counseling the innocent, mugging pedestrians and pushing drugs may be the last areas of unfettered free enterprise.
Anybody can hang up a shingle, call him or herself an expert and make a living off the child abuse scare. Given the growing reputation of therapists for taking sexual advantage of their patients, there is a certain irony in calling on their services in these matters.
There's a lot of money to be made because everybody becomes a potential paying patient. The candidates for "help," "treatment" and/or "therapy" include: a) the putative victim, b) the victim's family, classmates and chums and c) the alleged perpetrator. All aboard, everybody goes to group therapy!
For the "treatment providers," this deal is better than buying an annuity. The need for their services never ends, because the new shibboleth of this racket is that no one is ever cured. The patients or clients or marks are taught to think, say and believe that they are always "recovering," never recovered. Therapy ad nauseam, payments ad perpetuum.
To help keep the money rolling in, judges have been persuaded to sentence persons convicted of sex offenses to treatment. But sentencing people to therapy raises new questions.
If a person is suffering from a disease that deprives him of the power to control his acts, why was he convicted? Don't send him to a law court, send him to a doctor. Conversely, if a person has committed a crime, why is he being treated for an illness? He's a criminal, punish him. Heads I win, tails you lose, but always pay the shrinkologist.
If I didn't know better I would suspect George Bush and the Republicans of putting Oprah and the networks up to unleashing this storm on the nation two months before election day. Those Oprah introduced offered titillating, first person accounts of what Daddy did to me and how it felt. These couldn't be better calculated to distract attention from what our children need.
When is Ms. Oprah going to devote a weekend of network television to parents making enough money so that one of them has the time to stay home and rear their children? And while she's at it, let's not have a weekend but a month consecrated to schools and schooling.
Yes, some children are injured by sex molesters, but more of them are victims of celebrity abuse and media molestation. Now that, Ms. Oprah, is a problem you are in a position to do something about. You can even do it quietly, off camera."
Some things just make me wonder :icon_e_confused: :Crash: :ghsdf:
It's also an interesting timing for Oprah's first real efforts towards a show about molestation being 2/21/03 - Confessions of Molestation right around the time of Michael's accusation although he was officially indicted in December 2003.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/12/18/jackson.case/index.html?_s=PM:LAW
Michael Jackson formally charged in molestation case
Thursday, December 18, 2003 Posted: 10:35 PM EST (0335 GMT)
District Attorney Tom Sneddon announces charges against Michael Jackson.
SANTA BARBARA, California (CNN) -- Setting the stage for a contentious legal battle played out in the world's media spotlight, California prosecutors on Thursday formally filed molestation charges against pop star Michael Jackson in a case involving a cancer-stricken boy invited to the singer's Neverland Ranch.
Jackson was charged with nine counts -- seven of child molestation and two of administering an intoxicating agent for the purpose of a committing a felony. The charges involve incidents alleged to have occurred in February and March of this year, District Attorney Tom Sneddon said.
In addition, the complaint includes special allegations that could make Jackson ineligible for probation in the case, Sneddon said.
In a prepared statement released Thursday, Sneddon said the alleged victim would take the stand at a trial. "The family is committed to this process," the district attorney said.
Later Thursday, Jackson attorney Mark Geragos again asserted Jackson's innocence and told reporters that the entertainer's legal team would "take no quarter" in their defense of the accused singer.
The charges against the 45-year-old singer were filed nearly a month after local authorities raided his Neverland Ranch home. He was booked November 20 on suspicion of multiple counts of child molestation and has been free on $3 million bond.
The singer and his lawyers maintain he is innocent, and contend that the boy in the current case and his family have brought the allegations for financial gain.
Geragos -- who acknowledged he was brought into the case soon after Jackson appeared with the cancer-stricken boy, the alleged victim, in a documentary in February -- said his client will "fight these charges with every fiber of his soul."
"Michael Jackson is unequivocally and absolutely innocent of these charges," he said.
"I'm telling you right now that there is absolutely no way that we will stand for this besmirching of this man with these horrible, horrible allegations, and I will tell you right now that there is no way that the prosecution will prevail in this case."
Geragos called the case "an intersection between a shakedown" -- the alleged victim's family looking for money -- and an investigator who's "got an ax to grind."
Jackson was accused of child molestation in 1993, but the case was settled, reportedly for millions of dollars, and no charges were filed. Sneddon was the district attorney who looked into that case. Later Jackson released a song widely considered to be an indictment of Sneddon for his efforts to prosecute Jackson in the 1993 case. Sneddon denies that the current case stems from a personal animus against Jackson.
Thursday evening, Katherine Jackson, the singer's mother, released a statement proclaiming Michael's innocence.
"On behalf of the Jackson family we know these vicious lies are totally untrue, malicious and motivated by pure greed and revenge," the statement said. "We proudly stand next to Michael who we know could never commit any of the acts he is accused of. We will fight with every ounce of our energy to reveal the truth behind these false allegations and the motivations behind those who have falsely accused Michael."
Dates may be crucial to case
A complaint filed with Santa Barbara County Superior Court accused Jackson of having "substantial sexual conduct" with a boy under the age of 14 in incidents alleged to have occurred in February and March of this year.
Five of the child molestation counts accuse Jackson of a "lewd act upon a child," a felony, "on or between February 7, 2003, and March 10, 2003, in the county of Santa Barbara." The other two molestation counts allegedly happened on or between February 20 and March 10, according to the complaint.
The two counts of administering an intoxicating agent allegedly happened on or between February 20 and March 10 of this year, according to the complaint.
A source close to the investigation told CNN the "intoxicating agent" was wine.
The specific dates could be significant for both prosecutors and defense attorneys. In mid-February, Los Angeles County child welfare officials found there was no evidence Jackson had had inappropriate contact with the boy. (Full story)
Additionally, Jackson's attorneys played for a CNN legal analyst an audiotape from mid-February in which the boy and mother said there had been no inappropriate contact.
Sneddon said prosecutors were aware of the agency's report before seeking a search and arrest warrant for Jackson, but he contended the welfare officials did not conducted interviews, or any investigation.
On the audiotape, sources told CNN that a Jackson representative was present when it was recorded by a private investigator hired by Jackson.
Jackson to travel to Britain
Jackson attorney Mark Geragos speaks to reporters Thursday.
Thursday's charges were filed in Santa Maria, a working-class town close to Jackson's Neverland Ranch.
The filing came after Sneddon had agreed to delay Jackson's arraignment a week to January 16, and return Jackson's passport to allow him to travel overseas. Sneddon said prosecutors agreed to return to Jackson his passport for a planned trip to Great Britain, because Jackson could face "significant economic problems" if he missed the trip.
Stuart Backerman, spokesman for the 45-year-old pop star, said Jackson planned "to relax and enjoy the surroundings of the Christmas season."
On Thursday, Sneddon denied suggestions that the state waited to file charges in hopes of finding evidence in the interim. "That was never, never, never the intent of our office," he said.
Given the intense interest in the case, he said, prosecutors wanted to wait until a Web site was in place, he said. "They're having technical difficulties. I told the court we're not going to wait any longer."
In another development, Geragos told CNN in a phone interview that reports of famed attorney Johnnie Cochran joining the Jackson defense team are false.
"I have known Johnnie Cochran for many years as an attorney and personal friend but he has already expressed publicly that he is not on this case," said Geragos.
The attorney also dismissed other reports that Jackson replaced his management staff with representatives of the Nation of Islam as "tabloid trash."
:animal0017: Too many coincidences to actually be coincidental for my taste
yep ! let's figure out how to isolate our kids to where there is no other input than ours in their way of looking at life.
