Law and Order:SVU episode entitled 'Sick'

So I've heard about this episode of Law and Oder: Special Victims Unit for years. I remember it first aired during the trial (or just before). I heard about the similarities between the MJ case and the program. But I didn’t take it too seriously. But for the first time, I watched the episode on TV last night and I was shocked!

^^^ Law and Order episodes that are based on real events are not subtle no matter how much that they say they are. They always use the Disclaimer that It's not based on the real case but it is (probably so they won't get sued). Many other crime shows do too.

Stranger said:

So I've heard about this episode of Law and Oder: Special Victims Unit for years. I remember it first aired during the trial (or just before). I heard about the similarities between the MJ case and the program. But I didn’t take it too seriously. But for the first time, I watched the episode on TV last night and I was shocked!


It’s not just strange coincidences, the entire case is based on MJ. It’s not even subtle at all. It’s a complete copy. I was absolutely disgusted. Some things I noted:


1) The settlement with a 12 year old
2) The greedy parents who cared more about the money than their son
3) The billionaire toy shop man who lived in a child's playhouse
4) His childlike nature
5) His physical appearance
6) Being know for helping hundreds of sick and dying children
7) The staff loyalty
8) The press coverage
9) The identifying marks on his anatomy
10) The use of the same language in regards to sleeping with boys
11) The lawyers
12) The cancer patient’s claims
13) The mother being a money grabber.
14) The mother poisoning and using her child for financial gain
15) The mother conning kind people out of their money
16) The collapse of the criminal case due to the witness disappearing
17) The dollar amount
18) The victory party
19) The treasure room
20) The whole “What is a 35 year old man doing sleeping with kids not his own?”
21) The whole “The most loving thing you can do is share your bed”
22) The Peter Pan lifestyle
23) His bedroom being the site of the sleepovers
24) The house looking like Neverland


I mean, the list goes on and on. And it’s wrong. In the program, it seemed to come off as the man was guilty, but got away with it. He used the exact same words MJ used when he was defending himself to Martin Bashir. Exactly.

And it seemed so unrealistic. There could never be a man who owned a toy factory or whatever, who could live a life like that. MJ was different because of his fame, wealth, childhood etc. It was just so stupid, almost like a caricature.

And it wasn’t harmless. I dread to think what would have happened if one of the jurors were exposed to this. It was very convincing to the uneducated eye. I just don’t understand how they can have a disclaimer, saying that no actual person or event has been depicted. So someone just guessed all of these details, did they?

I’m telling you, the producers based it on MJ and what’s more, they based it on their belief that MJ was a rich child molester who got away with it!

How is this fair?

Click to expand...

If it's any consolation, from what I remember of the episode (and yes, I watched the whole thing), turned out that the mother was a major grifter. And they proved it in the end.

I vaguely remember this episode.

I guess it would depend on how the defendant in the episode was portrayed? Did they try and make him out to be like they did Michael or was it factual and based on the evidence?
I guess it's to be expected though, the case was huge at that time and I bet it pulled in alot of ratings.

Yes they did prove that the mother was a grifter who made her daughter lie about the molestation, but it was clear that the first boy whose parents received the settlement was actually abused by the man. Thats what irked me the most.

Thank god I didn't see this episode but i heard about it and I watch law and order svu

I used to like that show , after I saw that episode , I have never ever watched it again . It was sure based on MJ, they made fun of the whole peter pan syndrome, the Chinese psychiatric made a remark that "a man who claims he is peter pan" is actually a pedophile . the man was presented as guilty as hell but got off on a technicality .

It was the ONLY episode where the "guilty" was not caught , he got off because the mother was a grifter and they made a remark at the end that he would do it again and they would get him next time .

It was definitely about MJ , no doubt whatever .

^^ And that's the sad thing. They always put up the disclaimer about how fictional the episode is so they won't be sued. Even though it conveniently shows the same events as the real events in a case.

And yep, It's about Michael definitely. And they are calling him a pedo too.

Here's another episode with a Mike allusion, on the Main Law and Order series.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Law_%26_Order_episodes_(season_20)

441 (20008) "Doped" November 6, 2009 Inspired by the Taconic Parkway Crash and the death of Michael Jackson 8.41

Click to expand...

How do those two get combined?

And summery of the episode.

http://www.tv.com/law-and-order/doped/episode/1306838/summary.html

All I can say is that I NEVER want to see that..

Law and Order and similar shows are just a load of s#!t,IMO. I know what having such a show means to the uneducated schmuck, however, this is less of a concern to me than the people who are trashing MJ for a living like Diane Dimond and co. Law and Order is hyped up garbage produced with the trashy uneducated audience in mind. I know it's no consolation to us but the people who make this show do it for the money and they know what sells. If it wasn't for people like Dimond and Grace, this particular episode would have probably never been produced. It is out of their great evil that this lesser evil is spawned, of course, this makes it no less deplorable.

As for the "any man who believes he's Peter Pan is a pedophile" argument...it is monumentally weak. I am willing to bet good money that most pedophiles in fact do not believe they are Peter Pan. The two things are unrelated, as anyone who has ever read JM Barrie's famous book can say. Pedophiles exhibit certain characteristics, as I kindly said in Diane Dimond's website under the pseudonym Valkyrie Mitford, and Michael Jackson just doesn't fit the bill. The masses, with their pathetic lack of knowledge about psychological, legal and scientific manners--and their surplus of interest in all that is salacious abd scandalous, will undoubtedly applaud such an episode. We have seen, after all, what most of them think of the real case, despite the facts pointing to Michael's innocence. Law and Order, like everything else in the media, is a reflection of the collective psyche of our increasingly stupid culture. The people who make these things don't care about the facts and neither do the viewers.

I would like to make one thing clear, however. I am not defending Michael Jackson because of who he is. Although I love him, there are bigger concerns here: mainly, the destruction of that which our nation has held to be the greatest justice--to have one be tried in just manner by a jury of one's peers and be considered innocent until proven guilty. With all the media hogwash being notoriously anti-Jackson, the chances that Michael would receive a fair trial were always very, very slim...yet justice prevailed.

Despite that, I fear for our legal system. It is shows like these, with their accent on drama and the plebeian love for all that is scandalous, that I have great fear indeed...for the fact that you all were able to make such a connection from a show which claims not to be explicitly based on real events proves that this sort of programs are far from harmless indeed.

thank God I didnt see this nonsense

I remember an add for this saying that it was based on Michael Jackson. I watched the first 5 minuetes of it, said 'this is bullshit' and turned it off.

i,ve never seen it,and i never want to see it,

Ugh...