When prosecutors called Michael Jackson's ex-wife to the stand in his child molestation trial, it was clear she would be forced to discuss at least some of the details of their marriage.
Everyone had an opinion about what she told the court.
Some of our readers found the arrangement between Jackson and Rowe, a nurse who worked for Jackson's dermatologist and bore the King of Pop two children, to be sweet and innocent. Others found it distasteful.
Many of the names Rowe was called don't merit printing, though more than a few made unkind barnyard allusions and worse.
And plenty of you felt we in the media had no business intruding on Jackson and Rowe's personal relationship. (To be fair, the Santa Barbara district attorney's office has some responsibility for raising this topic in Jackson's trial.)
Some of your comments about their marriage:
Not impressed"What a joke, and it never should have been allowed to happen. I'm actually amazed that he (as well as she) has actually never been declared mentally incompetent to enter into any sort of legally binding commitment." -Joe, Chicago, Ill.
"Nothing but a sham. Who in their right mind would marry Michael Jackson?" -Antonia, Philadelphia, Pa.
"I believe that the marriage was solely entered into to deflect away his interest in young boys after the 1993 fiasco." -Bill, Venus, Tex.
"The marriage was a farce just as his marriage to Lisa Marie was a farce. Jackson married both woman for gain. With Presley it was image — let's not forget that it took place during the height of the 1993 allegations of molestation; and with Rowe it's the children. Lisa Marie can walk away and laughingly chalk it up to a lapse of judgement. Rowe on the other hand is emotionally attached." -Kammi, Wisconsin
What was Debbie thinking?"It was truly a marriage of convenience for both. For Michael it was to have children and for Debbie it was for the money. It's so sad, because neither of them are qualified or deserve to be parents!" -Lisa, Springfield, Ohio
"It's sad. Lovesick fan marries the king of manipulation and stands by him even though it is clear he thinks her role in his life is over because the children are born and he has been paid. She's an idiot. I have no idea what goes on in his head, but he is always thinking." -Kelly, Sacramento, Calif.
"How would she know what kind of a father he is? They never shared a home and when she did see the children Michael Jackson was not even around. This woman would say anything or do anything to please him. In her court testimony she stated as much. I hope the jury discounts her testimony." -Jane, San Francisco, Calif.
"She is as crazy as he is." -Miranda, Florence, Ky.
Leave them alone!
"Their marriage and relationship is a little weird, but who are we to judge? Whose marriage is actually sane? People judge Michael entirely because of his facial features and peculiar ways. Until HARD CORE evidence is presented, Michael should be left alone and only be judged by you know who!" -H. Milly, Boston, Mass.
"I think its none of my business, just like it's none of yours! Leave the man and woman alone!! Geesh!" -Ellen, Boulder Creek, Calif.
"Considering that half of marriages and a great percentage of non-marital relationships end, who is anyone to judge Mr. Jackson's marriage? People get married for all kinds of reasons ... " -Derek, Oklahoma City, Okla.
What about the children?"I only wish they would check the DNA on those children. They my be Rowe's children but, I would be extremely surprised if there was a DNA match to Michael." -Larry, Lee's Summit, Mo.
"I think a mother will say and do anything for their child/children. Especially when she hasn't seen them for so long." -Julie, Glendora, Calif.
"It would be nice for them to reconsider their relationship because of the children. I think Michael is the best." -Pamela, Chicago, Ill.
"Why would he want to keep his children away from their mother? If he loves children so much, what possible reason would he have to deny them their mother? She obviously isn't an evil person. I do question her motives as well, but children need both parents." -Jenny, Utah
Sign of the times?"I believe it is a complete mockery against the sanctity of marriage. They both have exploited the beauty of love and family and made it into a publicized joke. It was not a marriage based on love, it was a marriage based on compromise and gain." -Amber, Cleveland, Ohio
"That is NOT marriage! He needed someone to give him kids. To call what they had a marriage is a spit in the eye to the rest of us who are truly married." -Jim, Danbury, Conn.
"In some respects I am glad to see the barriers of what we consider 'normal' marriage redefined. The divorce rate and the unhappiness of many (not all) signifies that we need to change our idea of and practice of marriage. I am not really sure that these two ... had a marriage, other than on paper — if that can be considered a marriage. What is very sad, is that they were certainly at one time friends." -Flo, Minneapolis, Minn.
A beautiful thing"I believe Debbie loves Michael in a way that transcends sexual love. I also believe she gave birth to two of his children as the ultimate gift because of this love. I understand this because I felt the same way when my daughter was born and I saw my husband's tears of happiness." -Patricia, Sun City West, Ariz.
"It's a shame that it didn't last. It could have been wonderful for both and the children. I think Michael would have had happier years and less attackers. I'm sure she would have stood by him, and many of these allegations would have never materialized." -Jerry, Maryland
"Michael and Debbie were very clear about what each expected from the other, and the proof is that to this day they seem to have mutual respect for each other. ... Regardless of whether this union was created for traditional or unconventional reasons, I have great respect for two people that enter a relationship with clearly stated goals, work to meet those goals, and part amicably when the goals have been met." -Avery, North Bend, Wash.
"I admire her ability to communicate with someone so emotionally damaged by his own childhood that he has become lost in the idea of what that childhood should have been for him. I believe that if she had been given the opportunity to live beyond the confinements placed by Michael's 'associates,' the marriage and even Michael could have been stronger. The heavens gave us an angel named Michael, with talent beyond our comprehension, and we have destroyed his delicate soul." -Carly, Frostburg, Md.
Some comments edited for length and clarity.