I tend to fall on the motto that where there's smoke, there's fire. For years I believed he was guilty because of the settlement. I always said an innocent man wouldn't settle when having this heinous accusation leveled at them. Being older and more "worldly" [[ha!) I do understand that wealthy people pay off accusers of one thing or another all the time when they have the money to cut the check and quickly move on and hopefully get people talking about something else. I get it now just like I understand how people who confess to crimes are not always guilty. So I don't use MJ's payoff[[s?) as a determinate in my opinion regarding his guilt anymore. Dude was a weirdo in so many ways. Why would molesting children be out of the question? I think it may even be likely that he's guilty. But would I bet my life on it? Nope. No one has been able to produce nothing more than hearsay and retroactive memories. I need evidence in order to be placed over the edge. I believe the latest accusers have questionable characters which really makes their words pretty hollow for me. And yeah, I have to question "why now"? They had the opportunity to speak up in 2005 and didn't. Now they do it when the man is dead and can't say "yay" or "nay". There's a grieving family, including MJ's children, who have to deal with the fallout, and for what? No one can hurt Michael now. He's dead. His reputation can't hurt him, his finances can't hurt him, so what's the point? If he is guilty, these two dudes won't be the ones to convince me.

On the flip, touching on a point Midnight was making, if MJ were still some rando from Gary, would the thought by his staunch defenders be any different? My guess is that it would. Michael was human and subject to some of the same problems seen among "regular" folk. Even if the two latest accusers are lying, there's a lot of smoke before them. Something wasn't right.

So am I convinced he was a pedophile? No. Am I convinced that he wasn't? No. And I think it'll be harder to convince me one way or the other because he isn't here to chime in, barring the discovery of irrefutable evidence, like videos and photos. Can I still enjoy his music and artistry knowing that it may even be likely that one of my favs of all time [[up until about 1996...although I enjoyed the Invincible album and thought it a return to the Mike of old, I really viewed this MJ as someone completely different than the MJ of my childhood) was a pedophile? Yes I can because I can usually separate the artist and the art they create, particularly for music. Might this change if something more concrete were to surface? I think so, if at least changing somewhat.

This entire thing is a mess, no matter what side you're on.