There is a HUGE, HUGE difference between the few extortionists that had whatever twisted and sick agendas to accuse an innocent Michael- and the gigantic occurrence of molestation that Sandusky was found guilty of.Originally Posted by [B
Sandusky was the 'abuser profile come to life' of every profiler- abused after abused, after abused.
It is both a slap into the face of Michael- and Sandusky's victims to make that a "key similarity". Sandysky was convicted of over 40 (!!!!!!) accounts of molestation.
Little tidbits like that do sit in the public's 'court of opinion' because Sneddon tried very hard to find this mass of accusers- and never found them. Sneddon tried extremely hard to play the 'mass abuser' card- it's time any inference of mass abuse is nipped in the bud when it comes to Michael. A lot of people are walking through the world with this "why was he accused so often" - Sneddon must be pouring himself a beer in celebration of that.
While I appreciate the general conclusion of this article- I still walk away feeling the general approach of wanting to equalize, appease and wanting to be appear 'neutral' in MJ's case - when I read articles that flat out state the truth without the aftertaste of not wanting to appear too sympathetic to Michael- then I will applaud it whole heartedly.
And I completely understand if I come across as the party spoiler - but it's this 'similarity' stuff that makes makes me sad. First it was the sick OJ comparison and now it's Sandusky. Michael has absolutely nothing more in common with them that all of them were male. Nothing more.