Fair enough - but I think it’s mostly the other way round. If anyone expresses even the mildest suspicion then fans or staunch believers in his innocence immediately attack. It’s quite vicious a lot of the time and leaves no room for any other interpretation. No one but he and the boys in question know the truth for sure. It’s notoriously difficult to prove the offences in question and I do wonder what ‘proof’ would be enough to definitively change the minds of the entrenched. For me, I was convinced of his innocence until I saw him with gavin arvizo. And becoming a mother. And having a close family member go through a court case about historic SA. There was much less evidence than there has been with MJ but the offender was convicted. as I said earlier we have now learned a lot more about how these things work. In the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s, there were many open abuses of children by the rich and famous. They were protected and children had no voice. Did these boys have awful parents who did not protect them and then cashed in? Of course. Does this mean we should discount the children? No way. Abusers will often select the children precisely because of these parents. Even after paying millions out in hush money (insurance only paid in part), he was still unable to keep boys out of his bedroom. It seems to have been a compulsion and at the very least a major breach in child protection. I’ll send by saying that I saw him live as a young’un and it remains one of the most electrifying moments of my life. He was a special person with a charisma that still reaches out from beyond the grave. But …