|
In Reply to: All I can say is posted by Former empoyee on November 20, 2003 at 06:52:31:
You would have had to be 12 or under, very unlikely to tell, to get that close. Frankly, I think his arrest is way past due and I don't approve of the special treatment he is getting regarding the time to turn himself in etc. He knew that he was suspected of child molestation in the past and accused of it officially. What got him off then was that children who had been abused did not have to testify. Thanks to Michael's past run in with the law, this law was changed so that children could be protected in spite of parents best interest in the pay offs. It says a lot that Michael is where he is at again with these charges. He took the risk of being unsupervised with minors. What does that say? Then he accuses the victims of being opportunists. The children weren't the opportunists here. The parents, in some cases YES. Michael, I believe most definitely. But not the children.
