There’s a certain amount of unease in the endless tributes paid to Michael Jackson over the past few days. Yes, Jackson was a talented, hugely influential artist. Yes, he had a difficult life and was denied a childhood. But should we ignore the elephant in the room? AC Kleinheider says no:

Can someone explain to me when Michael Jackson joined respectable society again? I seem to have missed it.

Last time I checked I remember Jackson flagrantly flouting inviting children into his bed and barely beating a charge of child molestation by the skin of his teeth. This, of course, after he paid another alleged victim off ten years previous for dropping a similar charge.

Now, of course, I understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty. I do. But I thought that we all had come to the conclusion that Jacko was about as innocent of child molestation as O.J. was of killing Nicole.

Was I wrong?

There’s some unease in bringing these facts up as well, so soon after Jackson’s death. But does musical talent really override what Jackson almost certainly did? I mean, had Jackson died saving a kid from a house fire or something similarly heroic, perhaps a case could be made for redemption. And I also get that he most likely suffered from mental illness, and suspect that those around him did nothing to get him help. These items are worth keeping in mind. Still, the endless media adoration smacks of over-the-top hero worship to me.