[Shaun]

Well I'm not saying you have to join in the wuv and kisses but there's still an air of 'trolling' about when people throw up the "paedo" card - and for me it's irritating because it's always a grey area. There're the ones who make jokes about it and that's fine, but there's definitely a difficulty in separating those from the ones who genuinely believe he was a child molestor, and all sorts of other crap.

The fact of the matter is that nobody KNOWS what he did - and whilst there's evidence that looks suspicious, in terms of the "paying off witnesses" stuff, I think that actually goes in his favour.

The father of the main defendant - I don't know his name - was paid off. If your child was touched up by the world's biggest celebrity, would you carry on letting him be successful and adored for a few million dollars despite your son's victim status? Of course you wouldn't, unless you're Karen Matthews.

As for the "well why did he pay him if he's innocent?" argument - either way this was a legal case that was damaging his reputation. Paying them off and getting it over with quickly is a much better alternative to leaving it to the jury to decide.