There's also the issue of experience: Jackson has existed on this planet for approximately three decades longer than many of his playmates, and there's evidence to suggest he's been in not-dissimilar situations several times over the years, with successive 'rounds' of early-teenage boys (who he subsequently drops); by now, he must have a fairly good idea of which carrots and sticks work. He's therefore likely to be rather more practised at certain forms of manipulation than most children. By contrast, a 13-year-old befriending Jackson is likely to be overwhelmed by novelty, and thus on an unequal footing. It's also worth pointing out that some of his young playmates might be considered vulnerable for other reasons.
Intellectually? Well, unlike the earlier Forrest Gump example, Jackson is not - to the best of my knowledge - borderline learning-disabled. His IQ would, of course, be relatively easy to assess...
It's more our attitude to him that I'm questioning, and the fact that his celebrity and financial circumstances seem to work against him so.
Yes and no. They've also worked for him in the past, in the sense that he had the resources to pay his way out of facing the consequences of the Jordy Chandler affair. He's also been able to dictate the terms and conditions of his arrest in a manner generally denied to non-celebrities.
It just strikes me that his 'weirdness' is seen as entirely damning and not in any way mitigating - even on a moral rather than legal level.
Maybe not here, on Barbelith. Discussing Jackson in any wider arena, however, one frequently encounters the weird-but-harmless, had-a-tough-upbringing, not-really-a-paedophile argument. To many, 'inappropriate' + 'money' really does = 'eccentric'.
I remember Bashir furrowing his brow theatrically at MJ and saying 'But *I* wouldn't let children sleep in the same bed as me', when quite clearly he wouldn't live in a fucking fun-fair or seek the friendship of chimps either.
The more pertinent point being, if Bashir slept in the same bed as other people's children, he would have faced rather more by way of consequence, a helluva lot sooner.
To a certain extent, I recognise that Jackson's evidently stunted emotional development is, arguably, a mitigating factor - if only on a moral level. The same case could, of course, be made for the majority of adults who molest children, as they're more-likely-than-not to have been abused themselves, as children; in this non-ideal world, they are, however, still considered fully responsible for actions carried out as adults. From what I've read, however, it would appear that Jackson's capable of behaving like an adult when it suits him to do so; I'm therefore unsure to what extent I buy the 'poor emotional development' argument. |
