Thursday, August 13, 2020

Jerry Sandusky, Michael Jackson denial of their evil deeds…

November 16, 2011 by  
Filed under Ent., News, Opinion, Weekly Columns

Like Love Haha Wow Sad Angry

( “Jerry Sandusky’s bizarre answer about young boys, reminded me of when @Toure asked R Kelly abt young girls,” Jemele Hill tweeted after Bob Costas’s disturbing interview with the accused pedophile.

In the R. Kelly interview, following the singer’s acquittal on child pornography charges, Toure asked the question “Do you like teenage girls?” To which, the self-proclaimed Pied Piper of R&B responded, “When you say teenage, how old are we talking?”

Similarly, on Monday night, when Costas asked Sandusky if he was sexually attracted to young boys he responded “Am I sexually attracted to underage boys? And then paused before stumbling “I…I enjoy young people. I love to be  around them. I…I…But no, I’m not sexually attracted to young boys.”

Even worse, Sandusky, who is accused of abusing at least eight young boys over a 15-year-period and reportedly under investigation for more, confirmed that, per former grad assistant Mike McQueary’s grand jury testimonial that he saw Sandusky sexually assaulting a child in the showers at Penn State in 2002, he was in the shower with a young boy.

“I have horsed around with kids. I have showered with workouts. I have hugged them and I have touched their legs without intent of sexual contact,” he told Costas, as he denied that he was a pedophile.

That response was eerily reminiscent of those given by Michael Jackson to British journalist Martin Bashir in 2003 for the special Living with Michael Jackson. In that interview, Jackson admitted that he often shared his bed with children in response to accusations that he had molested young boys. Jackson, like Sandusky, insisted that his actions were not sexual.

When he spoke with Ed Bradley about this on 60 Minutes that same year, Jackson did not back away from his statements. He told Bradley that he still felt that it was okay for him, a grown man over 40, to sleep in the same bed as a child.

Finish story over at; TheGrio – Jerry Sandusky, Michael Jackson Evil, etc.

Also follow TheGrio on Twitter;

and Facebook;



68 Responses to “Jerry Sandusky, Michael Jackson denial of their evil deeds…”
  1. Ben Abbott says:

    Michael Jackson was completely innocent. Get over the lies and let this man rest in peace.

  2. TheresaB says:

    It really isn’t about being a fan of Michael Jacksin but a fan of truth in journalism which there is precious little of. I, too, have researched the Jackson situation thoroughly and the evidence completely points to extortion and media irresponsibility in telling the truth. It’s all there for those who week to find it. And to reference that disgusting and highly edited Bashir documentary is highly ignorant of the writer of this blog. As shown by Jackson’s own film run simultaneously to Bashir’s, Michael Jackson “shared” his bed by giving his bed to others. He was not in it and slept on the floor. There are witnesses that can coraborate that fact. A corrupt DA who planted evidence like fingerprints, changed the date of the alleged crime as Jackson was out of the country during the original date, and tried to threaten witnesses by making them unindicted co-conspirators couldn’t gain a conviction from an all white conservative jury. Trial transcripts are available for those who want the true story and not the irresponsible media version. When I think about how the media manipulates the truth about so many things, I feel enraged and preyed upon.

  3. Sue Adams says:

    The author is ignorant and totally lame to come out with his crock of tabloid sensationalism BS! There is no comparison whatsoever – Jerry Sandusky is GUILTY; Michael Jackson most certainly was NOT and proved to be NOT GUILTY in a court of law! Stop being a filthy hyaena Sir and feeding off the bones of an innocent dead man – its partly because of the likes of you and a media-frenzied Salem-Witchhunt like trial in 2005 that Michael Jackson IS DEAD anyways so don’t give us the judgmental garbage lowdown! How very “brave” of you to raise this sick idiocy now a man is no longer here to defend himself!

  4. Poe says:


    tober says:
    November 17, 2011 at 1:03 pm
    With the abundance of overwhelming info out there proving Michael’s complete innocence, anyone who still believes he’s guilty either chooses to believe that way, or is a complete idiot.

  5. Robert P Lott says:

    Denying the obvious parallels to these 2 men accused of improper relationships with young boys is nothing more than the usual attempt to ignore the elephant in the room.

    Michael was found not guilty in the courtroom to molestation but that doesn’t mean his relationships with young boys was healthy or completely innocent.

    Both men looked to children to feed their personal needs. Sexual or not sexual, they both used children.

    Showers or snuggling in bed. Middle aged men should never be cavorting with children as if they were their peers.

  6. OriginalMan says:

    I agree with the previous commentors on here who clarified the difference between mj and sandusky like day and night. I am appalled that the author of this article would make such comparisons mike clearly had every intent to care for and help children you can just feel it through his spirit. He was clearly an humanitarian at best and didnt have one ounce of wickedness in his veins. Sandusky just comes off as creepy and troubled, taking showers with boys on a numerous occasions does not sound innocent to me so where does the comparisons begin? I never heard mike even take his shirt off around the kids he had at his place. They took him through so much hell even without no concrete evidence to prove he did but this devil of a man sandusky has all
    kinds of evidence piled against him yet he gets to post bail and be home with
    his family…smh But that is what the good ol usa is about innocent until proven quilty but for only white people.

  7. Anita N says:

    This article was written by someone who never took the time to research the Michael Jackson case in it’s entirety. After the 1993 allegations and the end of the case (for which Michael was charged only with child endangerment) and his insurance company settled the case with the family against the wishes of Michael and his attorneys, Michael was labeled by the media and those who chose to vilify him endlessly as a “child predator” without any facts to back it up. He never said he slept in the bed with children. He said: Share your bed. If people took the time to read or view the articles or tapes, it was shown (by friends and acquaintances) and by that his real friends and not hangers-on that the children slept in the bed, and Michael slept on the floor in a sleeping bag. Those trying to make a buck sold their made up stories to tabloids for a few $100,000s for sensationalism.

    Also as stated before, the FBI released their report that after spending millions in taxpayer money, they never found anything on Michael Jackson, even after interviewing many witness that included numerous children, household staff, former staff, bodyguard, etc. Even Sneddon, former District Attorney for Santa Barbara who spent untold millions of money on vendetta against him and the trial of 2005, where Michael was acquitted, spent years traipsing around the globe looking for just one or two children to cooberate the story of the Arviso children. He tried to coerce other children to get them to lie, but to no avail.

    Michael did not do the things this man accused him of. I agree that he would not jeopardize his career for what they accused him of. For some reason he was a scapegoat. People didn’t have their facts, and he was an easy target. The media slandered him, and everytime someone is accused of a crime of this nature, Michael’s name is synonymous with it. Stop vilifying him for it. Sandusky and Michael are nothing alike.

  8. Nina Hamilton says:

    One simple observaation I want to add to my recent comment. Is it likely that the most famous man on the planet, (probably now one of those in history) and so wanted to be loved and make people happy with his music and dancing, and ‘Heal The World’ with his songs’ lyric messages, would have put all that at risk, jeopardise everything he had worked so hard for all his life? The author of that article should listen to ‘Earth Song’,’We Are The World’ and ‘All The Lost Children’, for a start, to know the heart and soul of Michael Jackson.

  9. Nina Hamilton says:

    Well, there is not much else I can add to all these comments, except that I strongly support every word that defends Michael Jackson’s innocence against the usual ignorant remarks by those who keep jumping on the same old bandwagon. Something new I can add though, was a surprising fact written, I believe, by mjjjusticeproject; surprising because I certainly had never read it anywhere before. In 2002, Michael Jackson set up The Michael Jackson Institute for Investigation into Child Abuse, in conjunction with Child Help USA. Hardly the actions of someone guilty of those terrible false allegations.

  10. Marty says:

    “Eerily reminiscent?” Who needs a jury to make a decision following a trial when we have bloggers and “journalists” who make everyone’s minds up for them.

  11. Ona says:

    The 2 cases are so different. Mr. Jackson was a victim of extortion; Sandusky is not living this problem. There was money to be made in accusing Michael Jackson….but not Sandusky.

    The prosecution never succeeded in producing accusers against Mr. Jackson. In 15 years of research, the FBI officially claimed Mr.Jackson NEVER HURT A CHILD. Not ONE CREDIBLE witness could be found for Jackson, and they were all proven liars. Sandusky, on the other hand, was seen raping a child and reported.

    What a strange, innacurate, wrong article.

  12. DJ says:

    Natalie, I like your moves. If anyone knew anything about the MJ cases, they would know that one child later retracted is allegation, and that the other child’s parents had been previously investigated for extortion. Look, when you’re the biggest star on the planet, and you are in the business of helping kids, someone is bound to break that trust and try to take advantage of you. You’re bound to run into a few bad eggs(parents) who see the opportunity to make it rich, and are willing to take it. Quite frankly, in that regard, I would have been surprised to see no allegations at all. MJ is innocent, and is in no way comparable to Sandusky. I mean, my God, 40 counts and counting. It unprecedented. Not the same thing at all.

  13. Natalie says:

    Here I am, another blog full of BS. You only mentioned Michael Jackson because first and foremost, you know nothing about him or the allegations of child molestation. Secondly,to bring more attention to this crap. Ok, talk all you want about Sandusky but leave Michael Jackson out of it. I have THOROUGHLY researched the trial against MJ as well as the allegations BEFORE I BECAME A FAN AND SUPPORTER.

    If you did the same you would know there is just an outrageous amount of lies floating around about his trial that media folks liked to publicize while the truth went unnoticed. You, like the reporters, would rather trash someone because it gets more attention than good news. Michael Jackson helped thousands of children. The FBI released files that spread throughout 20 years and they could not FIND A SINGLE SHRED OF EVIDECE AGAINST MICHAEL JACKSON THROUGH THAT WHOLE TIME. When the DA went looking for children ALL AROUND THE WORLD-WAISTING TAX PAYER DOLLARS- They could not find another child to say Michael did anything inappropriate to them. A child molestor with as much super stardom as Michael Jackson and who had been around children as much as MJ had would have had plenty of victims to come forth, but no, there were only these 2 “victims” which were both unreliable witnesses to their own cases.

    Both who had something to win from conspiring against the man who helped them while their families got more greedy as time went on. They wanted more and more and more from MJ and when MJ decided he didn’t want to spend as much money and time on this one family anymore, they wanted to tear him down where it would hurt most. They didn’t care about Michael the man anymore, they only saw dollar signs. Which is exactly why Michael did not trust adults.

    Conclusively, Michael Jackson and Jerry Sandsuky have NOTHING IN COMMON and no parallels to the cases. Kindly educate yourself and hush up until you have all your facts in a row.

    You haters can call us fanatics all you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that you KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING OF THE CASE AGAINST MICHAEL JACKSON. You haven’t read the transcripts, you haven’t read the books which bring him tremendous redemption, you haven’t read FBI Files, you know nothing. Its sad. They say ignorance is bliss, but really it just makes you look an idiot.

  14. Will says:

    You can say what you want but I wouldn’t want a drugged up, crotch grabbin, baby making 40 year old man sleeping in the bed with my child. I don’t even let my son and daughter sleep together, how am I gonna let them sleep some plastic surgery wearin dude that has already settled a case for child molestation. Are they gonna be playin house or doctor? People must be stupid.

  15. Terry says:

    I agree with the words of @Ms Smith.

    Following Michael Jackson’s death in June 2009, I honestly didnt know if he was innocent of unspeakable crimes against children or not so I went and researched that whole period of his life and am more than convinced that he never did, could never, is entirely incapable of ever hurting a child. He fell victim to greedy extortionists – plain and simple. As he himself said “I would rather slit my wrists than hurt a child”. It just wasn’t in his DNA to ever hurt a child.

    Could you please do your research better in future and stop comparing the actions of two people who are polar opposites of each other.

    I think the evil deed that has been committed here is by the writer/s of this article. You deliberately used Michael Jackson’s name to draw readers to your site when he has nothing to do with the actions of Sandusky. Shame on you.

  16. Lana says:

    Sandusky alleged crimes are egregious and the alleged victim pool is growing weekly. It’s stupid to compare this case to that of Michael Jackson, who was found innocent of all charges and was simply being exploited back in 1993. What parent would ever accept money if their child was truly abused? Even that settlement, which Mr. Jackson regretted later, did not stop him from being prosecuted. There simply was no valid evidence to do so. Stop comparing him to Sandusky. Michael Jackson could not and did not ever hurt children, but championed them.

  17. courtney says:

    Oh boy here go again trashing a dad man just leave him alone. Two years ago FBI files was release to the public not one shred of evidence points to Michael Jackson as a monster people tried to make him out to be , I’m sick of hearing about this every freaking week trashing him when ever something happens in a different place and time period, you cant destroy his legacy no matter how hard you try people will always love and miss him no matter what you say. I suggest you write about something else one that doesn’t includes talking smack about someone who no longer can defend themselves. oh and by the way watch your motive you fake journalist b/c it sure ass hell will turn right back around and bite you in the booty 🙂 .

  18. Trish says:

    I have to concur with the overwhelming number of comments here. This is not about being a fan of Michael Jackson, it’s about being a fan of truth and factual evidence.

    Please, if you’re going to claim to be a journalist or expert, get them straight. The Sandusky case has NO parallels to Michael Jackson whatsoever.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!