BBC bans Michael Jackson music amidst child abuse claims

[bots]

Taking an objective view, a statement made under oath takes precedence over one not under oath. There is no legal ramification for people lying their teeth off about events that happened years ago, when their subject is now dead.

That director is clearly not objective in his reasoning and that will have completely tainted his documentary. Does that mean Jackson is innocent? No it doesn't, but it doesnt mean he is guilty either

[Kazanne]

Bloody Hell Harrison Ford better be careful,he showed that kid how to use his bullwhip, this just seems to be the two guys reliving the fact they got to be with someone famous,the mother seems really enamoured by it all

[Kazanne]

The random nonsensical Ted Bundy comparison. :joker:

And Piers didn't get very far when he was asking about the money factor of it all.

[Niamh.]

Are we watching?Yes grim

[Crimson Dynamo]

Ok so I kind of don't think he is lying

[Marsh.]

I kind of do think he is lying.

[Kazanne]

I think he is lying as he has form.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Is he gay?

[Kazanne]

I didn't really want to watch this at all as I didn't want to give creedence to that director as no doubt this will be a ratings smash and make him the money he knew it would,but if I want to make up my mind properly I have to watch it , but seen nothing yet as proof of what he is accused of.

[Niamh.]

Ok so I kind of don't think he is lyingMe neither

[Niamh.]

I mean the relationships were weird as **** for an adult man to have with kids. How people can deny that is just odd

[Twosugars]

Taking an objective view, a statement made under oath takes precedence over one not under oath. There is no legal ramification for people lying their teeth off about events that happened years ago, when their subject is now dead.

That director is clearly not objective in his reasoning and that will have completely tainted his documentary. Does that mean Jackson is innocent? No it doesn't, but it doesnt mean he is guilty either

Agree

[Marsh.]

I mean the relationships were weird as **** for an adult man to have with kids. How people can deny that is just odd

Oh it was strange. Just not evidence of pedophilia.

[Niamh.]

Oh it was strange. Just not evidence of pedophilia.It's highly unlikely to be anything else though lbr

[Crimson Dynamo]

Oh it was strange. Just not evidence of pedophilia.

Well a man saying he wanked him off as a child would be a start

[Kazanne]

Considering their ages at the time they have extraordinary memories. Blasey- Ford was mocked because she couldn't remember some details about her own sexual abuse when she was seventeen.

[Kazanne]

Well a man saying he wanked him off as a child would be a start

A man who could also be lying

[Niamh.]

A man who could also be lyingEven taking out everything they say, just what we could actually see is ****ed up

[Kazanne]

Even taking out everything they say, just what we could actually see is ****ed up

What have you seen that has ****ed you up :shrug:

[Niamh.]

What have you seen that has ****ed you up :shrug:Oh Kazanne [emoji1787] like you would have left your kids sleep with a 30 odd year old "lonely" man and think nothing of it, come off the stage

[AnnieK]

Kaz, serious question....were/are you a massive MJ fan? I'm struggling a little to understand that you don't think its slightly weird that a grown man would think its ok to share a bed with a child....and you still defend it. I agree hugely with TS in that whether or not you think anything dodgy went on or not, you have to see that the way he swapped his "favourites" as they aged is not strange at best, cruel at worst? Even if the sexual abuse didn't happen, what he did is is abuse to a child that age, in their mind its tantamount to neglect and abandonment.

[Vicky.]

I need to watch this latest documentary I think. I do think its highly likely he was dodgy as ****. Yes I think its partly to do with his own life but, thats not really an excuse. I do suspect that some parents of the kids who were sent to stay at his were seeking compensation..because come on, everyone knew the rumours, which responsible parent would allow their kid to sleep in a bed with him? Really. This does not mean the kids were complicit in their own abuse mind, but I do think some of the parents are suspect.

And also, I love MJs music, a lot of it anyway. Its going to be a bit of a pain in the arse if it ends like Glitters, where I am not allowed to play it at work as a lot of his songs are instant dancefloor fillers!

[Crimson Dynamo]

A man who could also be lying

I'm relatively old and Iv had a life. I've studied criminals at degree level, I'm not daft, Iv been to jail's, nothing Iv seen tonight says they are lying

[Niamh.]

I agree though the parents were totally irresponsible and failed to protect their children

[Crimson Dynamo]

Star struck

[Kazanne]

Oh Kazanne [emoji1787] like you would have left your kids sleep with a 30 odd year old "lonely" man and think nothing of it, come off the stage

I would not ,but people are different and the ones mother said he was like a son so, she let him besides I doubt his bed or bedroom was a tiny little space like most are ,so even if they were in bed together I doubt they were side by side,and he did sleep on the floor a lot people always assume people cant sleep together without getting sexual,you can I've done it myself.I am not denying he was strange but I do not believe these two so far,and why if it was so awful has the one guy kept the jewellery MJ brought him,? give me facts and I will get off the stage.

[Niamh.]

I would not ,but people are different and the ones mother said he was like a son so, she let him besides I doubt his bed or bedroom was a tiny little space like most are ,so even if they were in bed together I doubt they were side by side,and he did sleep on the floor a lot people always assume people cant sleep together without getting sexual,you can I've done it myself.I am not denying he was strange but I do not believe these two so far,and why if it was so awful has the one guy kept the jewellery MJ brought him,? give me facts and I will get off the stage.I don't care if you change your mind or not, you already said enough by answering that question, no responsible parent would allow their 7 year old child share a bedroom with some 30 year old guy because it's dodgy as **** and he's dodgy as ****

[Kazanne]

I'm relatively old and Iv had a life. I've studied criminals at degree level, I'm not daft, Iv been to jail's, nothing Iv seen tonight says they are lying

I'm not doubting that, The FBI secretly investigate Michael Jackson for four years - tracking his where abouts, his computers, phone calls, etc and release a 300 plus page file completely vindicating him, stating there was absolutely nothing to even remotely suggest he was an abuser, and the general public (and media) completely ignores it. Yet two admitted liars and perjurers (one of which who even refers to himself as a ‘master of deception’) can come out with a completely one sided, sensationalist story (yes story not documentary) which contains literally no evidence whatsoever (and is full of inconsistencies) and a large majority of the public doesn’t even question it.

The jurors who found Michael Jackson not guilty in his 2005 trial agree with the FBI. Juror Paulina Coccoz said: ‘It was pretty obvious there was no molestation done...it was pretty obvious that there were ulterior motives on behalf of the family. And the mother, she orchestrated the whole thing..there wasn’t a shred of evidence’.

Just because a story is graphic and disturbing doesn’t make it factual. Before you judge anything do your research. Facts don’t lie, people do.

The bottom line is..

If you want to view Michael Jackson as a pedophile, you will. It’s easy to do. He admitted to allowing children to sleep in his bedroom (which itself is the same size as a small two story house) and has been accused of child molestation more then once. He’s not the guy next door, was undeniably eccentric, and most certainly didn’t live a conventional life.

But to anyone who has bothered to look into the allegations against him - and I mean really look into them - there is more than enough evidence to demonstrate that he was a victim of extortion and of copycat false claims for the past twenty five years. Yet despite the Los Angeles Police Department stating that Jackson should be presumed to be innocent, despite a jury finding him not guilty on every single charge against him, despite the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services twice investigating and clearing him of wrongdoing, despite the FBI conducting a very thorough investigation in which no evidence of wrongdoing was found, and despite the cash grab lawsuits of his posthumous accusers being tossed out of court, the court of public opinion may sadly be what defines this saga and a large part of his legacy.

[AnnieK]

In all honesty kaz, I feel you are answering as a fan rather than a mum. Whether he slept on the floor, in a twin bed or strapped to the roof, he was a grown man wanting to sleep in the same room / area / bed as a kid that he wasn't related to. Any way I look at that, its wrong......from the parents view, wtf, anyone asked that to me with my son regardless of the status, riches or whatever, just no....but MJ was an adult....he was wrong. Then after doing whatever, dropping them for a younger midel is sick, cruel etc etc

Ill tell you what, had it been my kid he'd ****ed with, death would be preferable...sexual or emotional abuse

[Kazanne]

I don't care if you change your mind or not, you already said enough by answering that question, no responsible parent would allow their 7 year old child share a bedroom with some 30 year old guy because it's dodgy as **** and he's dodgy as ****

You can swear as much as you like ,it doesn't make him guilty of being an abuser your opinion is valid to you ,as mine is to me, here we have two liars against a dead man.The parents were irresponsible but they got what they wanted out of it

[Kazanne]

In all honesty kaz, I feel you are answering as a fan rather than a mum. Whether he slept on the floor, in a twin bed or strapped to the roof, he was a grown man wanting to sleep in the same room / area / bed as a kid that he wasn't related to. Any way I look at that, its wrong......from the parents view, wtf, anyone asked that to me with my son regardless of the status, riches or whatever, just no....but MJ was an adult....he was wrong. Then after doing whatever, dropping them for a younger midel is sick, cruel etc etc

Ill tell you what, had it been my kid he'd ****ed with, death would be preferable...sexual or emotional abuse

I've already said Annie I would not have allowed it, I just don't trust the word of these two men, maybe they have done it because they were jealous ,but I do think money has a great deal to play in this,we all know he was very childlike and strange,but not seen any evidence that he was a peado.

[Vicky.]

But to anyone who has bothered to look into the allegations against him - and I mean really look into them - there is more than enough evidence to demonstrate that he was a victim of extortion and of copycat false claims for the past twenty five years. Yet despite the Los Angeles Police Department stating that Jackson should be presumed to be innocent, despite a jury finding him not guilty on every single charge against him, despite the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services twice investigating and clearing him of wrongdoing, despite the FBI conducting a very thorough investigation in which no evidence of wrongdoing was found, and despite the cash grab lawsuits of his posthumous accusers being tossed out of court, the court of public opinion may sadly be what defines this saga and a large part of his legacy.
Possibly. Or possibly, the reason they are 'copycat' is that the same behaviour occurred in each instance.

Along with the parents being ridiculous for continuing to allow their kids to sleep there, MJ was quite ridiculous for (if he just had endless false claims about him) keep allowing random children to sleep in his bed beside him. Surely.

As for not being found guilty in a court, lets not pretend that sexual assault and such have a high conviction rate..hell even when there is a lot of physical proof the guilty tend to go free as its essentially made out to be 'his word against theirs'...

He might well be innocent, but I don't think so. I still like his music, he was a hell of an artist. He might be an endless victim of false claims. Or, he might not be and the reason the claims all seem the same is because the same thing happened, again and again.

Honestly, noone will ever know 'for sure' except those who were there at the time, meaning him, and the kids involved. No doubt more documentaries will come about...because the case, regardless of innocence or guilt, is so odd in so many bloody ways D:

[Niamh.]

You can swear as much as you like ,it doesn't make him guilty of being an abuser your opinion is valid to you ,as mine is to me, here we have two liars against a dead man.The parents were irresponsible but they got what they wanted out of itOh sorry I thought swearing would seal the deal [emoji1787]

[Marsh.]

It's highly unlikely to be anything else though lbr

Is it? How so?

[Marsh.]

Well a man saying he wanked him off as a child would be a start

He could say he wanked off a flying pig, it's not evidence of anything.

[Marsh.]

I'm relatively old and Iv had a life. I've studied criminals at degree level, I'm not daft, Iv been to jail's, nothing Iv seen tonight says they are lying

You've been to jail? Well, why didn't you say before! Who needs the FBI? :joker:

As for "nothing you've seen tonight". Tbf, it's a carefully edited film designed to suit one agenda.

[Kazanne]

Possibly. Or possibly, the reason they are 'copycat' is that the same behaviour occurred in each instance.

Along with the parents being ridiculous for continuing to allow their kids to sleep there, MJ was quite ridiculous for (if he just had endless false claims about him) keep allowing random children to sleep in his bed beside him. Surely.

As for not being found guilty in a court, lets not pretend that sexual assault and such have a high conviction rate..hell even when there is a lot of physical proof the guilty tend to go free as its essentially made out to be 'his word against theirs'...

He might well be innocent, but I don't think so. I still like his music, he was a hell of an artist. He might be an endless victim of false claims. Or, he might not be and the reason the claims all seem the same is because the same thing happened, again and again.

Honestly, noone will ever know 'for sure' except those who were there at the time, meaning him, and the kids involved. No doubt more documentaries will come about...because the case, regardless of innocence or guilt, is so odd in so many bloody ways D:

That's why I don't think he actually abused them as why would he after the trauma he went through going through court ,why would he risk it all again. but we have the other half tomorrow maybe we will see something more factual.He was stupid for letting them sleep over but so were their parents.

[AnnieK]

I've already said Annie I would not have allowed it, I just don't trust the word of these two men, maybe they have done it because they were jealous ,but I do think money has a great deal to play in this,we all know he was very childlike and strange,but not seen any evidence that he was a peado.

I wasn't doubting you would let it happen to your.kids Kaz, I just can't believe that you, or anyone, could gloss over the fact that a grown man sleeping in the same room as non related boys is a normal occurrence and cant see that it is easily conceived to be a possible paedophile paradise to be given free access to pre-pubescent boys???

Given his money, legal team and advisors....why after the.first allegations and massive out of court settlement, did he not stop.....unless there was a "need" driving him????

[Vicky.]

That's why I don't think he actually abused them as why would he after the trauma he went through going through court ,why would he risk it all again. but we have the other half tomorrow maybe we will see something more factual.He was stupid for letting them sleep over but so were their parents.

But, after all the trauma in court, why would he then go onto sleep with yet another child? If he had experience of these horrible people and their lies and knew what it was like to deal with it, what possible reason would there be to allow the same thing to happen again :suspect:

As I said, ****ing odd in many places this story.

[AnnieK]

That's why I don't think he actually abused them as why would he after the trauma he went through going through court ,why would he risk it all again. but we have the other half tomorrow maybe we will see something more factual.He was stupid for letting them sleep over but so were their parents.

He wasn't stupid in letting them....he invited them. Although I agree, what parent would let it happen (apart from financial game which is more than ****ty, effectually prostituting your own kids)

[joeysteele]

Well, sorry but from watching this intently, I don't believe their accounts.

It strikes me the Parents were as strange as Michael Jackson.
It seems the moment these two got seemingly pushed out for Macaulay and the other one.

That is what is behind this storytelling now.

Macaulay and the other guy have continuously insisted nothing sexual took place with them and Michael.


I am with Kazanne on this.
I think had these done a confrontational documentary being independently questioned as to all their accounts.
I feel a lot of holes would appear in said accounts.

I'm not a strong Jackson fan, I like most, not all of his music.
I can't deny the history of pop would have a massive hole in it, without his input over the decades.

I've listened to them, long and hard tonight on this..
I've seen no passion or disdain for what they claim was done to them.

Sorry. I don't believe them.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You've been to jail? Well, why didn't you say before! Who needs the FBI? :joker:

As for "nothing you've seen tonight". Tbf, it's a carefully edited film designed to suit one agenda.

What agenda is that?

[Kazanne]

But, after all the trauma in court, why would he then go onto sleep with yet another child? If he had experience of these horrible people and their lies and knew what it was like to deal with it, what possible reason would there be to allow the same thing to happen again :suspect:

As I said, ****ing odd in many places this story.

I agree I just don't think he would risk that.

[Firewire]

It's hard for someone who has never been sexually abused to accuse some of lying about child sexual abuse.

I believe the victims at this stage, why wouldn't I? Perhaps their accounts aren't 100% accurate (but is anything ever 100% accurate when retold after 30 years...?)

Macaulay Culkin and Corey Feldman have said nothing sexual happened to them... because perhaps it didn't? Just because he is an alleged abuser doesn't mean he abused everyone.

[AnnieK]

Well, sorry but from watching this intently, I don't believe their accounts.

It strikes me the Parents were as strange as Michael Jackson.
It seems the moment these two got seemingly pushed out for Macaulay and the other one.

That is what is behind this storytelling now.

Macaulay and the other guy have continuously insisted nothing sexual took place with them and Michael.


I am with Kazanne on this.
I think had these done a confrontational documentary being independently questioned as to all their accounts.
I feel a lot of holes would appear in said accounts.

I'm not a strong Jackson fan, I like most, not all of his music.
I can't deny the history of pop would have a massive hole in it, without his input over the decades.

I've listened to them, long and hard tonight on this..
I've seen no passion or disdain for what they claim was done to them.

Sorry. I don't believe them.

Again, no one doubts that the parents are at fault....but you can see that Michaels behaviour towards the boys is strange???

[Marsh.]

What agenda is that?

To paint Jacko as a child abuser. Obviously. A one-sided viewpoint that leaves a lot of information out and doesn't address anything that goes against what they want the viewer to believe.

[Crimson Dynamo]

If you can't watch that and see two men not lying I'd suggest you are too young or blinded by fame

It's not complex

In fact it's pretty obvious

[AnnieK]

To paint Jacko as a child abuser. Obviously.

So do you think a man who has open admitted to sharing a bed with pre pubescent boys is normal?? Dropping said boy for a younger model when approaching puberty? Sharing a bed / bedroom with that CHILD??? Playing with the needs and.emotions of a child is abuse....whether you lay a finger on them or not

[Kazanne]

Well, sorry but from watching this intently, I don't believe their accounts.

It strikes me the Parents were as strange as Michael Jackson.
It seems the moment these two got seemingly pushed out for Macaulay and the other one.

That is what is behind this storytelling now.

Macaulay and the other guy have continuously insisted nothing sexual took place with them and Michael.


I am with Kazanne on this.
I think had these done a confrontational documentary being independently questioned as to all their accounts.
I feel a lot of holes would appear in said accounts.

I'm not a strong Jackson fan, I like most, not all of his music.
I can't deny the history of pop would have a massive hole in it, without his input over the decades.

I've listened to them, long and hard tonight on this..
I've seen no passion or disdain for what they claim was done to them.

Sorry. I don't believe them.

The other one was Corey Feldman who released a statement yesterday Joey, and another thing that bothers me now,WHY has the one guy kept the jewellery that this so called abuser brought him, that is not normal behaviour,I think you might be right that jealousy has paid a big part in this, now it's payback time,just a shame MJ is not here to defend himself, I am a fan of MJ I went to see him on his BAD tour,but I do admit he was not like us but I just think he was trying to relive his childhood somewhat,kids made him happy nothing wrong with that imo. and what must his poor kids be going through now.

[Firewire]

The other one was Corey Feldman who released a statement yesterday Joey, and another thing that bothers me now,WHY has the one guy kept the jewellery that this so called abuser brought him, that is not normal behaviour,I think you might be right that jealousy has paid a big part in this, now it's payback time,just a shame MJ is not here to defend himself, I am a fan of MJ I went to see him on his BAD tour,but I do admit he was not like us but I just think he was trying to relive his childhood somewhat,kids made him happy nothing wrong with that imo. and what must his poor kids be going through now.

Do you expect someone who has been sexually abused to act rationally?

[AnnieK]

The other one was Corey Feldman who released a statement yesterday Joey, and another thing that bothers me now,WHY has the one guy kept the jewellery that this so called abuser brought him, that is not normal behaviour,I think you might be right that jealousy has paid a big part in this, now it's payback time,just a shame MJ is not here to defend himself, I am a fan of MJ I went to see him on his BAD tour,but I do admit he was not like us but I just think he was trying to relive his childhood somewhat,kids made him happy nothing wrong with that imo. and what must his poor kids be going through now.

His kids are probably going through the same hell as the kids he shared a bed with

[Niamh.]

So unless Michael abused every boy he met then he abused none of them? Good logic

[Kazanne]

So do you think a man who has open admitted to sharing a bed with pre pubescent boys is normal?? Dropping said boy for a younger model when approaching puberty? Sharing a bed / bedroom with that CHILD??? Playing with the needs and.emotions of a child is abuse....whether you lay a finger on them or not

For him to say himself he shared his bed says he is not hiding anything most people wouldn't even mention that,it's not normal to us but in his mind it was, and the boys he apparently swapped the two accusers for have both said he has done nothing sexual to them,so if he wanted sex why would he have swapped them and done nothing ? maybe the accusers were jealous well they were the one admitted it.maybe their cashcow was running out.

[AnnieK]

So unless Michael abused every boy he met then he abused none of them? Good logic

Kind of looks that way, the ones who have the most to lose (film stars/celebs) say it didn't happen so it couldn't have done:shrug:

[Marsh.]

It's hard for someone who has never been sexually abused to accuse some of lying about child sexual abuse.

I believe the victims at this stage, why wouldn't I? Perhaps their accounts aren't 100% accurate (but is anything ever 100% accurate when retold after 30 years...?)

Macaulay Culkin and Corey Feldman have said nothing sexual happened to them... because perhaps it didn't? Just because he is an alleged abuser doesn't mean he abused everyone.

True, but Macaulay in particular was one of the closest to him, so it seems odd that if his interest in children was sexual, that he would not only avoid abuse but have no knowledge of any of this behaviour happening with all of these children he spent so much time with.

Corey Feldman, well his own story is an entire volume of its own. From his own account he was passed around quite a big network of Hollywood pedophiles. Jacko not being included in this group of powerful entertainment industry influencers is, again, interesting.

[Marsh.]

So do you think a man who has open admitted to sharing a bed with pre pubescent boys is normal?? Dropping said boy for a younger model when approaching puberty? Sharing a bed / bedroom with that CHILD??? Playing with the needs and.emotions of a child is abuse....whether you lay a finger on them or not

Where did I say this?

We can debate all day how weird Jackson is, his behaviour, his family, his entire life and him toying with the lives of these children and their families. I for one find the entire notion of these families practically selling their kids in the hopes of fame and fortune abhorrent.

But, again, that's not evidence of pedophilia.

[Marsh.]

Kind of looks that way, the ones who have the most to lose (film stars/celebs) say it didn't happen so it couldn't have done:shrug:

What exactly does Corey Feldman have to lose by speaking out against Jackson?
He hasn't had much of a career beyond his films as a child star.

His entire life was ruined due to his abuse, and he's spoken about what happened to him for many years. Why would he draw the line at Jacko?

[AnnieK]

For him to say himself he shared his bed says he is not hiding anything most people wouldn't even mention that,it's not normal to us but in his mind it was, and the boys he apparently swapped the two accusers for have both said he has done nothing sexual to them,so if he wanted sex why would he have swapped them and done nothing ? maybe the accusers were jealous well they were the one admitted it.maybe their cashcow was running out.

Whether he did anything sexual or not is irrelevant.....he played with a kids emotions. Emotional abuse is as, if not more devastating to a kid as physical or sexual as it leaves no scars, only in their minds. I can't argue this any more, its making me emotional, if in years to come my lad ever came out with suffering from any kind of abuse in any form whether it be a celebrity, family member ir stranger, I would be after him.to pursue it, criminally, monetarily or plain ****ing revenge

[Marsh.]

If you can't watch that and see two men not lying I'd suggest you are too young or blinded by fame

It's not complex

In fact it's pretty obvious

Oh we can't all be as old as you.

Some of our mind reading skills have yet to flourish. :hee:

[Marsh.]

Whether he did anything sexual or not is irrelevant.....

Not really. It's the difference between him being a kiddie fiddler and not, the entire purpose of the documentary is to condemn him as a sexual abuser.

I can't argue this any more, its making me emotional, if in years to come my lad ever came out with suffering from any kind of abuse in any form whether it be a celebrity, family member ir stranger, I would be after him.to pursue it, criminally, monetarily or plain ****ing revenge

Let's hope he wouldn't aid his abuser to escape justice, reap the financial rewards and then try to capitalise on the attention a decade after his death when the money has dried up.

[AnnieK]

Where did I say this?

We can debate all day how weird Jackson is, his behaviour, his family, his entire life and him toying with the lives of these children and their families. I for one find the entire notion of these families practically selling their kids in the hopes of fame and fortune abhorrent.

But, again, that's not evidence of pedophilia.

So a grown man, not related, who shares a bed with a pre pubescent child, who he purpotes to "love" is not evidence of maybe, even slightly peodo behaviour, grooming, ego stroking??? Whatever the **** you think it is, it is WRONG. Ge had a pull towards children as an adult...wrong. he has a legal team, family, friends around him who should have recognised the behaviour and stopped it. I personally don't feel he was your tabloid fodder predator but regardless kids were involved and have been affected...I don't give a **** if he was the king of pop or the queen of sheba, he or those around him should have stopped it.

[AnnieK]

Not really. It's the difference between him being a kiddie fiddler and not, the entire purpose of the documentary is to condemn him as a sexual abuser.



Let's hope he wouldn't aid his abuser to escape justice, reap the financial rewards and then try to capitalise on the attention a decade after his death when the money has dried up.
He certainly ****ing wouldn't....but keep trying.

If my son were abused, money in the world would make up for that

[Marsh.]

So a grown man, not related, who shares a bed with a pre pubescent child, who he purpotes to "love" is not evidence of maybe, even slightly peodo behaviour, grooming, ego stroking??? Whatever the **** you think it is, it is WRONG. Ge had a pull towards children as an adult...wrong. he has a legal team, family, friends around him who should have recognised the behaviour and stopped it. I personally don't feel he was your tabloid fodder predator but regardless kids were involved and have been affected...I don't give a **** if he was the king of pop or the queen of sheba, he or those around him should have stopped it.

I never said it wasn't wrong. Hollywood and its treatment of kids, child stars, vulnerable people is abhorrent.

But, no, not evidence of pedophilia.

Evidence of a strange man, but then his entire life and persona wasn't exactly normal. Does this mean he was a saint? No. But equally it doesn't mean he's guilty of every label and accusation that can be thrown his way.

[Marsh.]

He certainly ****ing wouldn't....but keep trying.

If my son were abused, money in the world would make up for that

Keep trying what?

You made a reference to what these men are doing, saying you would hope your son if in this situation would want revenge and justice. I was merely pointing out exactly what these men have done over the past two decades isn't really that.

[Kazanne]

What's with the condemnation of MJ this week I switch to channel 5 and another documentary about him 'poor guy' let him bloody rest

[Marsh.]

What's with the condemnation of MJ this week I switch to channel 5 and another documentary about him 'poor guy' let him bloody rest

They've seen the fame and attention MeToo has brought and want a slice of that action. They were refused when trying to capitalise on his death so now they've found another opening.

[Kazanne]

They've seen the fame and attention MeToo has brought and want a slice of that action. They were refused when trying to capitalise on his death so now they've found another opening.

Why are they always so negative about him this one is about his plastic surgery, he is gone , we all know how far he went ,so no need for this witch hunt

[joeysteele]

The other one was Corey Feldman who released a statement yesterday Joey, and another thing that bothers me now,WHY has the one guy kept the jewellery that this so called abuser brought him, that is not normal behaviour,I think you might be right that jealousy has paid a big part in this, now it's payback time,just a shame MJ is not here to defend himself, I am a fan of MJ I went to see him on his BAD tour,but I do admit he was not like us but I just think he was trying to relive his childhood somewhat,kids made him happy nothing wrong with that imo. and what must his poor kids be going through now.


The jewellery part helped lead me to not believe he was being genuine.

He admits even as a child, he loved jewellery.
He fiddled with the rings.
Shoving them on the end of his fingers.
Happily talking about them being bought for him.

No passion or no distress evident.

Then stating he didn't like looking at the jewellery after a fair inclusion of same in this documentary.

He's talking about being abused, things done he didn't like, not any clouding of his eyes.
Tears nowhere to be seen, a drought of them.

The only slight notable change of attitude was when they felt they were no longer a main part of Jackson's inner circle.
After the arrival of others.

I watched this starting with the intention to listen and give them the benefit of the doubt.
The longer it went on, I was just of the view they were far from being truthful on the supposed abuse.

Mixing likely false accusations along with genuine accounts of the times they were made to feel important.

I don't buy what they are saying at all.

[AnnieK]

Where did I say this?

We can debate all day how weird Jackson is, his behaviour, his family, his entire life and him toying with the lives of these children and their families. I for one find the entire notion of these families practically selling their kids in the hopes of fame and fortune abhorrent.

But, again, that's not evidence of pedophilia.

A paedophile is.someone who has urges towards pre-pubescent children, whether they act upon those urges or leave them as fantasies....whether any contact has happened or not, the evidence of naked pictures is evidence of some level.of peado behaviour, I don't have naked pics of my kid at this age as he would be mortified and neither do any of my friends with kids over the age of 2-3 so why would he have pictures of naked, semi naked kids that were.not related if not for some gratification???

[Vicky.]

I'm not doubting that, The FBI secretly investigate Michael Jackson for four years - tracking his where abouts, his computers, phone calls, etc and release a 300 plus page file completely vindicating him, stating there was absolutely nothing to even remotely suggest he was an abuser, and the general public (and media) completely ignores it. Yet two admitted liars and perjurers (one of which who even refers to himself as a ‘master of deception’) can come out with a completely one sided, sensationalist story (yes story not documentary) which contains literally no evidence whatsoever (and is full of inconsistencies) and a large majority of the public doesn’t even question it.

The jurors who found Michael Jackson not guilty in his 2005 trial agree with the FBI. Juror Paulina Coccoz said: ‘It was pretty obvious there was no molestation done...it was pretty obvious that there were ulterior motives on behalf of the family. And the mother, she orchestrated the whole thing..there wasn’t a shred of evidence’.

Just because a story is graphic and disturbing doesn’t make it factual. Before you judge anything do your research. Facts don’t lie, people do.

The bottom line is..

If you want to view Michael Jackson as a pedophile, you will. It’s easy to do. He admitted to allowing children to sleep in his bedroom (which itself is the same size as a small two story house) and has been accused of child molestation more then once. He’s not the guy next door, was undeniably eccentric, and most certainly didn’t live a conventional life.

But to anyone who has bothered to look into the allegations against him - and I mean really look into them - there is more than enough evidence to demonstrate that he was a victim of extortion and of copycat false claims for the past twenty five years. Yet despite the Los Angeles Police Department stating that Jackson should be presumed to be innocent, despite a jury finding him not guilty on every single charge against him, despite the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services twice investigating and clearing him of wrongdoing, despite the FBI conducting a very thorough investigation in which no evidence of wrongdoing was found, and despite the cash grab lawsuits of his posthumous accusers being tossed out of court, the court of public opinion may sadly be what defines this saga and a large part of his legacy.

I quoted the bottom part of this earlier and replied..I cannot sleep so have been looking around at stuff about this, and...well

http://www.damienshields.com/what-the-media-refuses-to-tell-you/

If you want to view Michael Jackson as a pedophile, you will. It’s easy to do. He has admitted to allowing children to sleep in his bedroom (which itself is the same size as a small two-storey house) and has been accused of child molestation on multiple occasions. He’s not the guy next door, was undeniably eccentric, and most certainly didn’t live a conventional life. But to anyone who has bothered to look into the allegations against him—and I mean really look into them—there is more than enough evidence to demonstrate that the pop icon has been a victim of extortion and of copycat false claims for the past twenty-five years. Yet despite the Los Angeles Police Department stating that Jackson should be presumed to be innocent, despite the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services twice investigating and clearing Jackson of wrongdoing, despite the FBI conducting a ten-year investigation into the singer in which no evidence of wrongdoing was found (click here to read the FBI’s 300-page file on Jackson, released under the Freedom of Information Act), and despite the cash-grab lawsuits of Jackson’s posthumous accusers being tossed out of court, the court of public opinion may be what defines this entire saga, and Jackson’s legacy.

Infact when reading this, I had deja vu at so many points. Cutting and pasting replies from someone elses post/writings (changing the odd word here and there..but essentially just pasting someone elses thoughts) without crediting them is quite bad form :laugh:

[Vicky.]

Off to watch this now anyway. Depending on the state of the thread in the morning, might be back :laugh:

[Marsh.]

A paedophile is.someone who has urges towards pre-pubescent children, whether they act upon those urges or leave them as fantasies....whether any contact has happened or not, the evidence of naked pictures is evidence of some level.of peado behaviour, I don't have naked pics of my kid at this age as he would be mortified and neither do any of my friends with kids over the age of 2-3 so why would he have pictures of naked, semi naked kids that were.not related if not for some gratification???

And you were privy to his urges?

[Twosugars]

Watched it and remain sceptical about their claims.
He had Peter Pan syndrome, but that doesn't mean he was a paedo, sorry.

[Twosugars]

Wish you'd put it in a spoiler

Idk about Freddy, but I'd not buy a second hand car from him

[GoldHeart]

I agree ,he was a strange person in some ways , he was very childlike himself . but that doesn't prove he was a peado , just that he was very eccentric and different , amazing talent that some people seem to have always wanted to destroy . Very unfair now that he is dead aswell .

I honestly think MJ had alot of issues and lacked the support and advice he needed . And like you say was very childlike himself , i think he missed his childhood as he had alot of pressure and was thrown into fame soo young with Jackson 5 .

I think he was very naive around children , i think he genuinely just wanted them to be happy . I don't think he ever in his wildest nightmares expected them to all turn against him :bored:.

The Martin Bashir documentary ( Bashire was a 2 faced idiot) , really highlighted how innocent MJ was but things got twisted of course . Plus why do people keep forgetting that MJ himself was telling children to have his bed while he sleeps ELSEWHERE ?? :suspect: . But it sounds like the kids would still want to share a bed with him as they supposedly idolised him.

Also if i was abused by someone , whether it was a celebrity or not i WOULD NEVER demand or want any of their money . Who accepts money from an alleged sexual predator? :facepalm: if they've genuinely been abused by them . That's where these greedy liars messed up .

I think MJ thought it would go away if he kept "paying them off" so to speak . But in my eyes that doesn't make him look guilty it just makes the accusers look dirty and scummy. We all know MJ was sadly wreckless with his finances and he spent hell of alot of money . And lacked guidance .

And it's disgusting how even in death this witch hunt continues , more people attention seeking and cashing in on destroying a dead man's reputation who can't fight back.

[Jake.]

The “he missed his childhood” excuse people always use it completely bogus to me. My grandad didn’t have a childhood, he was beaten senseless by his father for the majority of his childhood life. Yet, he knew how to function as an adult and didn’t allow kids to share his bed.

If MJ was a regular member of society, living down your road, and had the bleached skin, ever-thinning nose and publicly stated that he saw no issues with hanging around with children on their own/having sleepovers in the same bed (and that’s before even going into the actual child molestation accusations), he’d be absolutely lambasted. The fact is, people don’t want to let go of the legacy he brought with his music.

[Beso]

To paint Jacko as a child abuser. Obviously. A one-sided viewpoint that leaves a lot of information out and doesn't address anything that goes against what they want the viewer to believe.

Cause it's a documentary about the 2 boys, not Jackson.

[Beso]

For him to say himself he shared his bed says he is not hiding anything most people wouldn't even mention that,it's not normal to us but in his mind it was, and the boys he apparently swapped the two accusers for have both said he has done nothing sexual to them,so if he wanted sex why would he have swapped them and done nothing ? maybe the accusers were jealous well they were the one admitted it.maybe their cashcow was running out.

When Michael said he shared a bed with kids that was the Bashir documentary and what started this whole thing off....if I remember rightly Michael had to backtrack on that statement saying he meant he offered his bed to children while he slept on the floor....the lying ****.

[thesheriff443]

Louis Theroux has said he believes Mj was a paedophil.

[Beso]

And lets face it sherif, the BBC wouldn't pull his songs if there wasn't an ounce of truth in these claims.

[iRyan]

He could say he wanked off a flying pig, it's not evidence of anything.

There is simply not always going to be hard evidence in sexual abuse cases, especially those involving children. From the way it’s been described, Michael was extremely calculated in how he carried out the abuse. What other evidence could there possibly be other than the word of people who crossed paths with him? I’m sure he was smarter than to have child pornography laying around or have acts that occurred in his own home be recorded on camera. Although there was this particular instance of a housekeeper who testified against him, which rings very clear alarm bells:

“Once, when she was cleaning Jackson’s bedroom, she said, she saw Jackson and a child she believes was the Australian boy in the shower. The boy’s neon-green Spider-Man underwear was on the floor near Jackson’s white briefs, she said. She said she was familiar with their undergarments from doing their laundry.

On two other occasions, she saw Jackson and the boy in bed together watching television. They were partially under the covers and ‘both were nude from the waist up,’ she said.”

Source: https://www.thecut.com/2019/03/the-abuse-allegations-made-by-michael-jacksons-maid.html

But by all means believe what you want I guess.

[iRyan]

True, but Macaulay in particular was one of the closest to him, so it seems odd that if his interest in children was sexual, that he would not only avoid abuse but have no knowledge of any of this behaviour happening with all of these children he spent so much time with.

Corey Feldman, well his own story is an entire volume of its own. From his own account he was passed around quite a big network of Hollywood pedophiles. Jacko not being included in this group of powerful entertainment industry influencers is, again, interesting.

Macaulay Culkin And Corey Feldman were also already famous Hollywood actors prior to meeting Michael, and perhaps had more consciously involved parents that weren’t as blinded or manipulated by MJ’s starpower. They weren’t plucked from obscurity and groomed like Michael’s accusers and their families. It seems likely that he would theoretically choose his victims based on who he believed he could get away with abusing.

[thesheriff443]

And lets face it sherif, the BBC wouldn't pull his songs if there wasn't an ounce of truth in these claims.

True, but the bbc are looking after their brand /image, they are not doing for any other reason.

I also think it’s not a big deal as you can still listen to mj’s music on other stations and other formats.

[iRyan]

In other news, Corey Feldman has retracted his earlier statements, and no longer defends Michael.

https://youtu.be/a4iDbssmTdY

[user104658]

What's interesting is that the "everyone just wants money" defense has been used repeatedly - in every single accusation - for now nearly 30 years. It's become the stock line to dismiss anything anyone has to say negatively about MJ... Ever since that very first out of court settlement.

But like the "piece of work" director said in the GMB interview - who gives a supposedly lying-through-his-teeth 13 year old boy $22 million? Even for Jackson, that's not chump change. That's the sort of money you pay to make a problem go away. They did NOT want the Jordan Chandler case to go to court, but people (fans) refuse to even question why that would be.

They ignore that there wasn't "no evidence" in the 2005 case, and that it wasn't simply thrown out easily; the jurors were extremely conflicted but ultimately the physical evidence was lacking. They ignore that Wade Robson was the key witness in throwing doubt on some of that other evidence and that if he had said now what he's saying today, Jackson may well have been convicted. They tell themselves that people who change their stories "must just be liars", with apparently zero understanding of how long it can take an abuse survivor to process what was done to them.

They also insist that the claims have recently been "thrown out of court" despite it being easy to find the information on these recent lawsuits; they have been dismissed on technicalities involving the length of time since MJ's death, and contention over whether or not the management company can be held liable for the acts of the individual. They have NOT been deemed false claims.


But more than anything, you can tell from the incredulous, mocking tone of most of MJ's defenders that they simply don't want to believe it and will find a reason not to regardless.

I understand people saying "there's no hard evidence so I'm not willing to condemn him". But I don't understand people who are adamant that he DIDN'T do it, especially given the fact that there's no hard proof of his innocence either (yes, I know that's not how it works legally, but we're talking opinions here not convictions). The balance of probability is that he engaged in some very suspect activity but yes its based mainly on witness statement. So being on the fence, sure. Anyone "totally sure" of his innocence though can only possibly have their own reasons for not wanting to even consider it.

[Beso]

I don't think anyone's using mocking tones TS...I think they are just as sure he didn't do it as some are that he did...I wouldn't regard that as mocking tones

[Kazanne]

The “he missed his childhood” excuse people always use it completely bogus to me. My grandad didn’t have a childhood, he was beaten senseless by his father for the majority of his childhood life. Yet, he knew how to function as an adult and didn’t allow kids to share his bed.

If MJ was a regular member of society, living down your road, and had the bleached skin, even-thinning nose and publicly stated that he saw no issues with hanging around with children on their own/having sleepovers in the same bed (and that’s before even going into the actual child molestation accusations), he’d be absolutely lambasted. The fact is, people don’t want to let go of the legacy he brought with his music.

Wrong Jake he had vitiligo which makes his skin have patches of white, that is a proven fact he did not bleach it he wore make up to even it out

[arista]

[Michael Jackson statue removed from National Football Museum, Manchester
amid sex abuse claims
A new documentary, being aired this week,
features claims by two men who say they were sexually abused by the popstar.

By David Mercer, news reporter

Wednesday 6 March 2019 19:45, UK]


https://news.sky.com/story/michael-jackson-statue-removed-from-national-football-museum-amid-sex-abuse-claims-11656956?fbclid=IwAR3EFu-Lbtjf9Bahqp5dfOfyo0mKMAnKJXfA5hs1j8eAnxTk66lJmQdkx Vc

[Jake.]

Wrong Jake he had vitiligo which makes his skin have patches of white, that is a proven fact he did not bleach it he wore make up to even it out

I’m fully aware of what it is, my mum has it. It’s not proven that he didn’t bleach his skin. It’s just proven that he had vitiligo.

[Kazanne]

In other news, Corey Feldman has retracted his earlier statements, and no longer defends Michael.

https://youtu.be/a4iDbssmTdY

Absolutely nothing in that that points to MJ being an abuser just that he couldn't defend him as he needed to let the 'victims' be heard as well ,He stated very clearly M J never touched him

[joeysteele]

Absolutely nothing in that that points to MJ being an abuser just that he couldn't defend him as he needed to let the 'victims' be heard as well ,He stated very clearly M J never touched him

Yes he did.

I wasn't on about Corey when I said about Macauley and another guy.
The other guy was Brett Barnes.
Mentioned at the end of the documentary.

That both Brett and Macauley had insisted nothing sexual took place with Michael, with them.

So we have 2 stating nothing took place and no interview with them.
Only these 2 stating a changed story from themselves, saying it did.

Again I say, the message from last nights first part of this documentary, for me, only showed a jealousy and annoyance that those other 2, Macauley and Brett, had more or less supplanted them in Michaels inner circle.

I thought again about this on waking this morning and I just think they aren't telling the truth.
So my mind remains the same, this is a loaded documentary only looking one way.
I wouldn't want to rely in these 2 guys testimony on this at all.

[user104658]

So we have 2 stating nothing took place and no interview with them.
Only these 2 stating a changed story from themselves, saying it did.


In this documentary, Joey. Overall there are five who have made abuse claims and three more who have mentioned sexualised behaviour such as watching porn. There are at least three more who refuse to talk about it at all (haven't made claims; but also will not say it didn't happen). Plus at least one staff member who has made claims, and family members of accusers.

To suggest that it's a "one person's word against another 50/50" situation is just not accurate, Joey.

Also even if he didn't abuse Brett and Mcaulay Culkin, that means literally nothing, because the bizarre claim that "paedophiles abuse ALL children they come into contact with" is straight up false.

[GoldHeart]

Absolutely nothing in that that points to MJ being an abuser just that he couldn't defend him as he needed to let the 'victims' be heard as well ,He stated very clearly M J never touched him

I haven't read up much On Corey Feldman , but i get the impression he probably just doesn't want to be involved in this . But i don't understand why people ignore the fact that Macualy aswell who he was very close to defended him. I know a sexual predator doesn't have to abuse every child to be guilty but i still don't think there's concrete proof MJ was a paedophile.

And i 100% think if MJ was alive and kicking today then this documentary probably WOULDN'T exist . It's very suspicious 10 years later this comes out the wood work. It's all just a dirty money making operation to further drag his name through the mud as he can't defend himself.

And i don't even need to watch this documentary to know they'll just fit their own bias agenda that he was an abuser . I hate films like this as it's totally BS and it's hearsay and slander . If it was a fair unbiased portrayal with more facts and other sides of the story then it wouldn't be so bad.

And as predicted there's chunks of information conveniently dropped out :suspect::bored: . The aim is solely to make MJ look like a creepy disturbed grown man who groomed kids.

it's obvious what the motive was for this pathetic programme .And i think they want a cut of his estate .

[Beso]

Culkin certainly changed once he started hanging out with Michael...that can't be denied.

[GoldHeart]

Culkin certainly changed once he started hanging out with Michael...that can't be denied.

Plenty of child stars have "changed" whatever that means, see how easy it is to fit your narrative when you think someone is "guity" , i suppose MJ brainwashed Macaluy then ? :notimpressed: .

Alot of the time the fame is too much too young and they don't know how to deal with it all.

There's adult stars who still don't know how to deal with fame and the media etc .

[Crimson Dynamo]

He put a huge amount of money and time and effort into embedding that into the public imagination,” Reed says. “Neverland, this sort of playground for children – of course designed to attract children and designed to be a playground for him as a rampant predatory paedophile – was a way for Jackson to hide in plain sight… ‘of course I’m walking along holding a little boy’s hand every minute of the day’ – not a girl’s hand, a boy’s hand – ‘of course I do this, because I’m just a child at heart and I love children; of course I’m going to spend the night with your little boy because we just like to play, it’s a slumber party’.

“It’s rubbish. He was raping those children night after night after night in the next room to their mothers. Spending days and nights in little boys’ homes. It’s the most appalling depravity covered up by this façade of angelic childlike purity – that lie was staring us all in the face for so many years.”


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2019/03/04/leaving-neverland-director-dan-reed-interview-michael-jackson/

:skull:

[joeysteele]

In this documentary, Joey. Overall there are five who have made abuse claims and three more who have mentioned sexualised behaviour such as watching porn. There are at least three more who refuse to talk about it at all (haven't made claims; but also will not say it didn't happen). Plus at least one staff member who has made claims, and family members of accusers.

To suggest that it's a "one person's word against another 50/50" situation is just not accurate, Joey.

Also even if he didn't abuse Brett and Mcaulay Culkin, that means literally nothing, because the bizarre claim that "paedophiles abuse ALL children they come into contact with" is straight up false.



I don't aceept that TS sorry.
All we are getting in this documentary is only these 2 guys accounts.

The need was felt to point out at the end, that both Macauley and Brett Barnes had continually insisted nothing sexual took place.
As the credits rolled st the end.

So in that it is a 50/50 scenario .
Although only hearing from the 2 accusers no one else on the programme of equal stature iassociated with Jackson, who would discount the story as to their experiences.

These 2 have an appeal coming up re the Jackson estate.
Interesting timing then with this documentary from them.
I'm sorry, I don't trust their accounts.

I believe it's likely it could be found to get others to say he abused others too, equally as many could be found discounting such claims.

This documentary is all set around only these 2 guys stories.
No one else.
I mentioned Macauley and Brett Barnes, simply because the programme makers, rather than interview them..
Only mentioned them at the end as the credits rolled.

The thing as to this documentary, is are these 2 accusers to be believed.
You clearly think yes.

I on the other hand say I would not trust their testimony on their allegations at all.
Even on this totally loaded one sided documentary only geared to and around their stories, and no one else's.

[Nicky91]

UH what weirdo does do something like that ''night after night after night'' :umm2:


and also like this wasn't already known to public, MJ did spend time with little children

9ElddgJCgyg

only difference this was his own child, that is even more disturbing

or this video some yrs back where he was asked about this

855qMXaFl-E

did any radio station never play MJ songs anymore back then? NO :idc:

[Beso]

Plenty of child stars have "changed" whatever that means, see how easy it is to fit your narrative when you think someone is "guity" , i suppose MJ brainwashed Macaluy then ? :notimpressed: .

Alot of the time the fame is too much too young and they don't know how to deal with it all.

There's adult stars who still don't know how to deal with fame and the media etc .

Nah I doubt he brainwashed him, he probably did introduce him to addiction though and probably abused hom also...maybe culkin himself has a yearning for young boys and maybe that's his reluctance to testify.

[Crimson Dynamo]

There was nothing and i mean nothing in the manner, delivery etc of the 2 men's testimony last night that would lead you to think they were lying

my overwhelming takeaway from what their body language portrayed was that of acute sadness

[Kazanne]

Nah I doubt he brainwashed him, he probably did introduce him to addiction though and probably abused hom also...maybe culkin himself has a yearning for young boys and maybe that's his reluctance to testify.

Why do you keep making scenarios up in your head , this is why things like this 'story' told last night get distorted . people put their own spin on it and sometimes that is a but odd in itself , I can understand you hate the bloke but really c'mon , why all the he 'probably did this and he 'probably' did that, he also PROBABLY didn't , but who cares about that ?

[Beso]

Why do you keep making scenarios up in your head , this is why things like this 'story' told last night get distorted . people put their own spin on it and sometimes that is a but odd in itself , I can understand you hate the bloke but really c'mon , why all the he 'probably did this and he 'probably' did that, he also PROBABLY didn't , but who cares about that ?



It's what I believe to be true..:shrug:

[Niamh.]

What's interesting is that the "everyone just wants money" defense has been used repeatedly - in every single accusation - for now nearly 30 years. It's become the stock line to dismiss anything anyone has to say negatively about MJ... Ever since that very first out of court settlement.

But like the "piece of work" director said in the GMB interview - who gives a supposedly lying-through-his-teeth 13 year old boy $22 million? Even for Jackson, that's not chump change. That's the sort of money you pay to make a problem go away. They did NOT want the Jordan Chandler case to go to court, but people (fans) refuse to even question why that would be.

They ignore that there wasn't "no evidence" in the 2005 case, and that it wasn't simply thrown out easily; the jurors were extremely conflicted but ultimately the physical evidence was lacking. They ignore that Wade Robson was the key witness in throwing doubt on some of that other evidence and that if he had said now what he's saying today, Jackson may well have been convicted. They tell themselves that people who change their stories "must just be liars", with apparently zero understanding of how long it can take an abuse survivor to process what was done to them.

They also insist that the claims have recently been "thrown out of court" despite it being easy to find the information on these recent lawsuits; they have been dismissed on technicalities involving the length of time since MJ's death, and contention over whether or not the management company can be held liable for the acts of the individual. They have NOT been deemed false claims.


But more than anything, you can tell from the incredulous, mocking tone of most of MJ's defenders that they simply don't want to believe it and will find a reason not to regardless.

I understand people saying "there's no hard evidence so I'm not willing to condemn him". But I don't understand people who are adamant that he DIDN'T do it, especially given the fact that there's no hard proof of his innocence either (yes, I know that's not how it works legally, but we're talking opinions here not convictions). The balance of probability is that he engaged in some very suspect activity but yes its based mainly on witness statement. So being on the fence, sure. Anyone "totally sure" of his innocence though can only possibly have their own reasons for not wanting to even consider it.

Unfortunately when it comes to sexual abuse, be that paedophilia or rape in general it's extremely difficult to prove, especially if even a small amount of time has passed before a victim decides to come forward. The accused being found not guilty doesn't actually mean they are innocent, just that there isn't enough proof to convict. It happens in the majority of rape cases aswell

[Kazanne]

There was nothing and i mean nothing in the manner, delivery etc of the 2 men's testimony last night that would lead you to think they were lying

my overwhelming takeaway from what their body language portrayed was that of acute sadness

Yes there was LT , the lack of emotion for a start , the very detailed description they remembered from years back , the keeping of the 'gifts' and the background information on these two needs to be brought to the forefront , as someone said facts don't lie,humans do, all we got was hearsay from two guys who were pissed off that he moved on,what's the betting there will be several more accustations now , they are bound to be 'sad' where do they go from here.

[Niamh.]

Culkin certainly changed once he started hanging out with Michael...that can't be denied.

I always felt sorry for him actually, his family (particularly his father iirc) didn't seem like they protected him at all and saw him as a meal ticket more than anything. It is possible (and this is pure speculation on my part of course) that Macauley could have been abused by Michael but "loved him" and felt it was mutual maybe and is protecting him for that reason. I think Maccauley and Michael probably had a very similar kind of a childhood (or lack of)

[user104658]

Yes there was LT , the lack of emotion for a start , the very detailed description they remembered from years back , the keeping of the 'gifts' and the background information on these two needs to be brought to the forefront , as someone said facts don't lie,humans do, all we got was hearsay from two guys who were pissed off that he moved on,what's the betting there will be several more accustations now , they are bound to be 'sad' where do they go from here.

Pissed off that he moved on from what. Moved on from a friendship? So that he could start a new friendship with someone younger?

Do people often "move on" from friendships to start new ones?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes there was LT , the lack of emotion for a start , the very detailed description they remembered from years back , the keeping of the 'gifts' and the background information on these two needs to be brought to the forefront , as someone said facts don't lie,humans do, all we got was hearsay from two guys who were pissed off that he moved on,what's the betting there will be several more accustations now , they are bound to be 'sad' where do they go from here.

2 children being miffed at not being a favourite is not motivation for 2 adults to make the claims they have made


all children suffer disappointment, we all have but we dont do what they have done. They are taking on the most popular pop music star of the last 40 years, one of the richest people and estates on the planet, for what - because they were upset once as kids?

no

[Niamh.]

Pissed off that he moved on from what. Moved on from a friendship? So that he could start a new friendship with someone younger?

Do people often "move on" from friendships to start new ones?

It's sounds even more sinister if you ask :

Do adult men often "move on" from friendships with young boys to start new ones with younger boys?

[Nicky91]

I always felt sorry for him actually, his family (particularly his father iirc) didn't seem like they protected him at all and saw him as a meal ticket more than anything. It is possible (and this is pure speculation on my part of course) that Macauley could have been abused by Michael but "loved him" and felt it was mutual maybe and is protecting him for that reason. I think Maccauley and Michael probably had a very similar kind of a childhood (or lack of)

that is quite Obvious in MJ's case, agree with you about his father, when Michael was just dead, at his funeral his father was promoting more albums for public to buy/stream and what more music to be released from MJ posthumously

:facepalm: i was like wtf, this is seriously worst timing ever to promote his music, his children were sad and all he thinks about is more sales from his music

[Niamh.]

that is quite Obvious in MJ's case, agree with you about his father, when Michael was just dead, at his funeral his father was promoting more albums for public to buy/stream and what more music to be released from MJ posthumously

:facepalm: i was like wtf, this is seriously worst timing ever to promote his music, his children were sad and all he thinks about is more sales from his music

I was talking about Macauley Culkin and his father there

[user104658]

There was nothing and i mean nothing in the manner, delivery etc of the 2 men's testimony last night that would lead you to think they were lying

my overwhelming takeaway from what their body language portrayed was that of acute sadness

Like I said near the beginning of the thread - if they're lying then they're both undiscovered talent because their acting (especially James Safechuck) is oscar-worthy. His mental health struggles surrounding this and his anxiety in talking about it is really clear, to anyone who knows what an anxiety disorder looks like, in my opinion.

Wade is a slightly more complicated one because I think it's pretty clear that he never really stopped loving Michael and WAS angry and jealous when Michael "moved on" to other kids, and I suspect to this day he still thinks back on their relationship as a loving one, and possibly even his motivation is more in "getting what he feels he's owed" because Michael "dumped him". But I still believe that their "friendship" involved sexual activity, and that still means he was abused and Jackson was a child abuser, whether he "acts like a victim" or not.

[Nicky91]

I was talking about Macauley Culkin and his father there

oh, i don't even know about their father


as for Macauley, yes very sad how he has changed from such a cute child in the home alone movies to now

[bots]

Everyone that Jackson surrounded himself with was psychologically broken in some way. Liz Taylor, Lisa Minnelli, the Presley girl ... all very damaged, and it seems the kids he latched on to were all pretty much the same

[user104658]

It's sounds even more sinister if you ask :

Do adult men often "move on" from friendships with young boys to start new ones with younger boys?

People's reasoning is that he just "liked being around childlike innocence" because he saw himself as a child, so when the kids grew older he wanted new children to be around "but innocently".

Honestly I still say that REGARDLESS of the abuse claims, I cannot fathom how anyone can defend that action? Taking in a kid, treating them as though they're special and amazing, and then dumping them like a cold bag of sick when they hit 14 to find a replacement? It would be a horrendous thing to do to an adult, let alone a child! Not criminal but indefensible IMO.

[Beso]

Strange that his adult friends all seem to be older females...and the rest are you kids....it was all about power with Michael in my opinion...just look at some of the photos with the kids families, the fathers are almost frozen out of the pictures..

[Niamh.]

People's reasoning is that he just "liked being around childlike innocence" because he saw himself as a child, so when the kids grew older he wanted new children to be around "but innocently".

Honestly I still say that REGARDLESS of the abuse claims, I cannot fathom how anyone can defend that action? Taking in a kid, treating them as though they're special and amazing, and then dumping them like a cold bag of sick when they hit 14 to find a replacement? It would be a horrendous thing to do to an adult, let alone a child! Not criminal but indefensible IMO.

Yeah definitely.

I mean it's one thing to say you're childlike and like spending time with kids but why the need to share a bed? And why could he only have one "special friend" at a time?

It's odd we're even debating it though, if he was the local postman people would be tearing him a part

[chuff me dizzy]

1) Who silenced La Toya ?

2) Do the same people wanting the dirty get to "RIP" think Saville deserved to RIP too ?

[Niamh.]

1) Who silenced La Toya ?

2) Do the same people wanting the dirty get to "RIP" think Saville deserved to RIP too ?

Jimmy Saville couldn't sing as good though so ..........

[Beso]

And can you now point to where he touched you on the doll please.

https://goo.gl/images/fujX3J


https://goo.gl/images/fujX3J

[Crimson Dynamo]

Smooth FM have now banned his songs

[Crimson Dynamo]

Songs now banned from radio stations in Australia, New Zealand and Canada

[Niamh.]

Smooth FM have now banned his songs

You could say he's now become a Smooth Criminal

[chuff me dizzy]

Jimmy Saville couldn't sing as good though so ..........

Ive seen people on Facebook/Twitter openly say he should be excused because he made good music ..Now how sick is that ?

[Nicky91]

ban his music now from radio stations, while this has been a topic for so long

yes i can see the logic in that :joker:

[Beso]

ban his music now from radio stations, while this has been a topic for so long

yes i can see the logic in that :joker:

You should ask yourself why.....why now!

[chuff me dizzy]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_1tGqn4jXc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW2jCPOi0-4

[Niamh.]

Ive seen people on Facebook/Twitter openly say he should be excused because he made good music ..Now how sick is that ?

Honestly not even shocking but pretty sick

[GoldHeart]

Nah I doubt he brainwashed him, he probably did introduce him to addiction though and probably abused hom also...maybe culkin himself has a yearning for young boys and maybe that's his reluctance to testify.

There's a lot of "probablies " in your assumptions as that's all it is , wild assumptions.

So now you think Culkin is predatory as well?? :bored: .

[UserSince2005]

Hell is too good for this ****

[chuff me dizzy]

Hell is too good for this ****

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

[chuff me dizzy]

There's a lot of "probablies " in your assumptions as that's all it is , wild assumptions.

So now you think Culkin is predatory as well?? :bored: .

So you are presuming YOUR ideas ( as thats all they are, YOU have no proof either ) are right, and other peoples ideas are wrong ? How arrogant :shocked:

[Beso]

There's a lot of "probablies " in your assumptions as that's all it is , wild assumptions.

So now you think Culkin is predatory as well?? :bored: .





I think there is a good chance he is...I take it from your assumptions you don't?

[Kazanne]

There's a lot of "probablies " in your assumptions as that's all it is , wild assumptions.

So now you think Culkin is predatory as well?? :bored: .


Seems many had already made their minds up that he was a child molester , and don't even doubt it ,even with his acquittal ,people it seems want to believe he did the things he did, so that's up to them , personally I have seen nothing to confirm he is what they think , so I will continue to play his music , watch his videos and admire the artist he was .

[GoldHeart]

Seems many had already made their minds up that he was a child molester , and don't even doubt it ,even with his acquittal ,people it seems want to believe he did the things he did, so that's up to them , personally I have seen nothing to confirm he is what they think , so I will continue to play his music , watch his videos and admire the artist he was .

Yeah exactly and I also like his music, but even if I didn't I still wouldn't automatically think he's a paedophile . It's weird how 2 guys who have lied under oath are now seen as gospel truth :facepalm: .

I don't trust people like that . And why keep gifts if they've been through traumatic events :bored: .

[Kazanne]

So you are presuming YOUR ideas ( as thats all they are, YOU have no proof either ) are right, and other peoples ideas are wrong ? How arrogant :shocked:

No one is saying who is right and wrong we are just giving our perceptions of what we have seen, we all have different views, I saw nothing in that 'story' last night to make me change my mind , infact some of it was making me feel I was right , they are out to make money, but that is just my opinion and no doubt Goldhearts aswell , I know you think Cliff Richards is guilty aswell Chuff but again there is no proof so we have to believe he is innocent, People seem to ignore the posts that explain how he was scrutinised by the FBI,child services etc, for 4 years, why do you think people aren't interested in that,just the smut that makes money and is sensationalised.

[Kazanne]

Yeah exactly and I also like his music, but even if I didn't I still wouldn't automatically think he's a paedophile . It's weird how 2 guys who have lied under oath are now seen as gospel truth :facepalm: .

I don't trust people like that . And why keep gifts if they've been through traumatic events :bored: .

Me neither,I've said before once a liar ,always a liar , as for the gifts,unbelievable he kept them,maybe he will sell them now,they will fetch so much more than before.

[Beso]

There's a lot of "probablies " in your assumptions as that's all it is , wild assumptions.

So now you think Culkin is predatory as well?? :bored: .

Well he did travel to a paedophile island on Thialand where he caught a disease.......from a cat.....then it wasn't a cat it was red meat......I think it was some bodies bleeding bottom myself.

[Livia]

Having watched the programme and listened to all the unsubstantiated circumstantial evidence and hearsay, I believe it less than I did yesterday.

[Kazanne]

Well he did travel to a paedophile island on Thialand where he caught a disease.......from a cat.....then it wasn't a cat it was red meat......I think it was some bodies bleeding bottom myself.

Jesus Parmy get a grip what makes you think of things like that ? really:nono:

[Beso]

Jesus Parmy get a grip what makes you think of things like that ? really:nono:

Well I'm not the one changing my story from contracting it from a cat to some uncooked meat I ate...I'm not the one catching diseases on an island renowned for its paedophile visitors....once a liar always a liar...on this occasion, I think it's true.

[chuff me dizzy]

No one is saying who is right and wrong we are just giving our perceptions of what we have seen, we all have different views, I saw nothing in that 'story' last night to make me change my mind , infact some of it was making me feel I was right , they are out to make money, but that is just my opinion and no doubt Goldhearts aswell , I know you think Cliff Richards is guilty aswell Chuff but again there is no proof so we have to believe he is innocent, People seem to ignore the posts that explain how he was scrutinised by the FBI,child services etc, for 4 years, why do you think people aren't interested in that,just the smut that makes money and is sensationalised.

We will agree to disagree over this :kiss:, but IMO IF he didn't have the money to pay for the best lawyers in USA,and not just one lawyer, he had several top lawyers ....He would have been locked up where IMO he deserved to be ,and yes I do believe Cliff is also a paedophile who's fame, money and hiding behind God is keeping him safe, he will be another who will only be outed once dead due to fear

[Scarlett.]

I swear all of this already happened once before, not sure why the media are suddenly so surprised by the allegations.

[arista]

I swear all of this already happened once before, not sure why the media are suddenly so surprised by the allegations.



Its because its in 2 Hour Docu' for double day
special editing
Extending ever interview longer

[Livia]

I swear all of this already happened once before, not sure why the media are suddenly so surprised by the allegations.

Before, Michael Jackson walked out of court with all charges cleared.

[Crimson Dynamo]

spoiler details from tonites show :umm2:

Robson claims Jackson tried to have anal sex with him when he was 14

In one of the most disturbing moments of the second part of Leaving Neverland, Robson recalls a time where he had begun teaching dance choreography, and was invited to watch Jackson’s rehearsals for his History world tour.

“I don’t remember how exactly it evolved to this,” Robson says. “But what ended up happening is, Michael tried to penetrate me in my anus, with his penis. Trying for a while, I guess he was able to a bit, but it was really painful, too painful for me. So he stopped.”

“I don’t remember us talking about it, or acting like anything particularly different had happened. We kind of went back to our regular sexual routine.”

[Kazanne]

spoiler details from tonites show :umm2:

Robson claims Jackson tried to have anal sex with him when he was 14

In one of the most disturbing moments of the second part of Leaving Neverland, Robson recalls a time where he had begun teaching dance choreography, and was invited to watch Jackson’s rehearsals for his History world tour.

“I don’t remember how exactly it evolved to this,” Robson says. “But what ended up happening is, Michael tried to penetrate me in my anus, with his penis. Trying for a while, I guess he was able to a bit, but it was really painful, too painful for me. So he stopped.”

“I don’t remember us talking about it, or acting like anything particularly different had happened. We kind of went back to our regular sexual routine.”

So more of the same and why the need does he have to be so graphic ? but of course it does make it all so much more intriguing !! any peado watching that will be getting their rocks off.

[user104658]

a4iDbssmTdY

Worth watching; he speaks a lot of sense whether you happen to believe the allegations or not.

[user104658]

Feldman also talks about why it's pointless to go into watching something like this if you've already made up your mind that they're lying. Which is quite relevant to this thread, IMO.

[GoldHeart]

So more of the same and why the need does he have to be so graphic ? but of course it does make it all so much more intriguing !! any peado watching that will be getting their rocks off.

Yeah feels like he's deliberately making it sound more & more graphic for the shock factor.

I'm less & less convinced it happened :suspect:

[Crimson Dynamo]

thing is all paedos dont abuse all children they come across they abuse the ones they think they can without being caught

[user104658]

thing is all paedos dont abuse all children they come across they abuse the ones they think they can without being caught

Indeed which is why I think it's quite feasible that Macaulay Culkin is telling the truth about their relationship, but that's not really very meaningful in itself... he was at the peak of his fame at the time, where part of MJ's process seems to have been engaging with somewhat star-struck kids and families and making it seem like there were "big things ahead" with him as a friend. None of that applied to Culkin. Also, he had a very similar childhood to Jackson. It's perfectly feasible that they WERE just close as friends and doesn't mean that abuse didn't happen elsewhere. Especially as I personally don't think Jackson was "faking the friendships" just for the sexual aspect; the relationships were genuine in themselves but had "a darker side" along with the friendship.

[Vicky.]

So I ended up not going to sleep til 6am because I was watching both parts of this, along with reading a bunch of fan sites that apparently 'discredit' every single one of the
people who ever said anything about Jackson. I didn't look too much into this, but I didn't know there were more witnesses (of course, according to his lawyers more random people after money) and that he basically got off because a few kids said he had never touched them. Erm, thats not quite generally how paedophilia works. They don't tend to abuse every kid they come into contact with, and how the hell that was used to discredit the other kids I don't bloody know, but I guess thats the sad state of ur 'justice system'..and even moreso with sexual abuse where there is not likely to be much physical proof. Tbh, it sounds like this 'childlike persona' was a cover for his 'nighttime activities'. I still cannot believe the two mothers in the show didn't think anything of any of it but again, the fame dazzled them enough to make them not look after their kids properly it seems. Along with them 'falling for' the kid trapped in an adult body line. There is no reason for these men to lie now, and its also quite 'usual' (as usual as child abuse cases get) that they deny it was abuse or whatever to themselves but their perspective changes when they have children themselves. It sounds like he groomed them 'well', the basically coaching them what to say in court, telling them from aged 7 that they would go to prison too if ever found out, etc etc..its odd to think if they had not stood up for him, he probably would have gone to prison then.

I don't see any reason to disbelieve what they say. I really don't. Its even quite normal for groomed kids to still feel 'love' for the person they now recognise as their abuser so quite why so many fans seem to be using that against them..I don't get it really.

In short, I wish I had never read this thread last night as its lead to me feeling very zombified now. I fell asleep with maybe 30 mins left so watching the last bit of it now...but yeah. It sounded dodgy before, and I cannot really see any reason to disbelieve them...and the 'they want money!!!!!' excuse thats been trotted out so many times before really does not apply now either. They are not being compensated, and they have set the more rabid fans onto themselves too, for seemingly no reason. Why? Just why? I actually didn't know quite how nuch work some o the more obsessed fans put into twisting every thing in the sotory to make it 'nasty adults wanting money!'. Its possible a few of the people in this saga did, but its highly unlikely that he was totally innocent and everyone just kept trying to randomly extort him, and coming up with such elaborate stories even after there was no money left to be had...

Something else that interests me, is that I have sen a few people say that people are believing 'two proven liars'. Except, the only way these men are 'proven liars' is if you accept that they lied in court..which is accepting that MJ did touch them as kids?

I don't thin its realistic to ban his music totally. I don't thin its even needed really. He does not profit from it now, his kids have done **** all wrong. But again, I see no reason at all to disbelieve these men. Especially not for not acting like the 'perfect victims', erm, thats kind of how grooming works.

[joeysteele]

Having watched the programme and listened to all the unsubstantiated circumstantial evidence and hearsay, I believe it less than I did yesterday.

:clap1::

Exactly the same for me.

I also am all the way with Kazanne too.

The more the programme went on, the more I found myself moving to not trusting their testimony.

I had questions and challenges, I'd have loved to be able to put to them and particularly their parents too.

By the end of the programme, I was convinced in a challenged confrontational questioning as to their statements.
The holes left from that questioning, would likely leave nothing left.
No wonder they chose a soapbox style documentary.

Michael Jackson was strange, being strange doesn't make someone an abuser of anyone.
From what these 2 came over like last night, I found like yourself, to just disbelieve their accounts more.

[Kazanne]

a4iDbssmTdY

Worth watching; he speaks a lot of sense whether you happen to believe the allegations or not.

This has already been posted.he does make sense he cant be seen to be taking one side of things considering what he says happened to him he has to be neutral.

[user104658]

:clap1::

Exactly the same for me.

I also am all the way with Kazanne too.

The more the programme went on, the more I found myself moving to not trusting their testimony.

I had questions and challenges, I'd have loved to be able to put to them and particularly their parents too.

By the end of the programme, I was convinced in a challenged confrontational questioning as to their statements.
The holes left from that questioning, would likely leave nothing left.
No wonder they chose a soapbox style documentary.

Michael Jackson was strange, being strange doesn't make someone an abuser of anyone.
From what these 2 came over like last night, I found like yourself, to just disbelieve their accounts more.

I just get the impression that you've gone into this with preconceptions and a bias for wanting to believe in his innocence, Joey, it's pretty clear that that's the case for a few people.

[Kazanne]

So I ended up not going to sleep til 6am because I was watching both parts of this, along with reading a bunch of fan sites that apparently 'discredit' every single one of the
people who ever said anything about Jackson. I didn't look too much into this, but I didn't know there were more witnesses (of course, according to his lawyers more random people after money) and that he basically got off because a few kids said he had never touched them. Erm, thats not quite generally how paedophilia works. They don't tend to abuse every kid they come into contact with, and how the hell that was used to discredit the other kids I don't bloody know, but I guess thats the sad state of ur 'justice system'..and even moreso with sexual abuse where there is not likely to be much physical proof. Tbh, it sounds like this 'childlike persona' was a cover for his 'nighttime activities'. I still cannot believe the two mothers in the show didn't think anything of any of it but again, the fame dazzled them enough to make them not look after their kids properly it seems. Along with them 'falling for' the kid trapped in an adult body line. There is no reason for these men to lie now, and its also quite 'usual' (as usual as child abuse cases get) that they deny it was abuse or whatever to themselves but their perspective changes when they have children themselves. It sounds like he groomed them 'well', the basically coaching them what to say in court, telling them from aged 7 that they would go to prison too if ever found out, etc etc..its odd to think if they had not stood up for him, he probably would have gone to prison then.

I don't see any reason to disbelieve what they say. I really don't. Its even quite normal for groomed kids to still feel 'love' for the person they now recognise as their abuser so quite why so many fans seem to be using that against them..I don't get it really.

In short, I wish I had never read this thread last night as its lead to me feeling very zombified now. I fell asleep with maybe 30 mins left so watching the last bit of it now...but yeah. It sounded dodgy before, and I cannot really see any reason to disbelieve them...and the 'they want money!!!!!' excuse thats been trotted out so many times before really does not apply now either. They are not being compensated, and they have set the more rabid fans onto themselves too, for seemingly no reason. Why? Just why? I actually didn't know quite how nuch work some o the more obsessed fans put into twisting every thing in the sotory to make it 'nasty adults wanting money!'. Its possible a few of the people in this saga did, but its highly unlikely that he was totally innocent and everyone just kept trying to randomly extort him, and coming up with such elaborate stories even after there was no money left to be had...

Something else that interests me, is that I have sen a few people say that people are believing 'two proven liars'. Except, the only way these men are 'proven liars' is if you accept that they lied in court..which is accepting that MJ did touch them as kids?

I don't thin its realistic to ban his music totally. I don't thin its even needed really. He does not profit from it now, his kids have done **** all wrong. But again, I see no reason at all to disbelieve these men. Especially not for not acting like the 'perfect victims', erm, thats kind of how grooming works.

They said on oath that MJ never touched them, but we are now 10 after his death are supposed to believe their words now , which says he did , that is why they are NOW perceived as liars.

[Niamh.]

Regarding the "perfect victim" Vicky, just look at how Jan acted around B, she was smitten with him for years after aswell

[Niamh.]

They said on oath that MJ never touched them, but we are now 10 after his death are supposed to believe their words now , which says he did , that is why they are NOW perceived as liars.

So you get to decide which time they were lying? That's convenient

[Livia]

I just get the impression that you've gone into this with preconceptions and a bias for wanting to believe in his innocence, Joey, it's pretty clear that that's the case for a few people.

I had no strong feelings for Michael Jackson either way prior to this. I'd wager Joey hasn't either. Your point seems to be that people who think Jackson is a paedophile have come into this with no preconceptions, but those who think the whole thing is hogwash had biased, preconceived ideas from the off.

[user104658]

They said on oath that MJ never touched them, but we are now 10 after his death are supposed to believe their words now , which says he did , that is why they are NOW perceived as liars.

Yes but the flipside of that, is that we're supposed to believe that they're now willingly confessing to lying under oath in an attempt to make a little bit of money; when there's a high likelihood that the civil suit will still fail on technicalities. It doesn't make sense at all. The next argument is that "they'll make money from interviews" but what? How much? Six figures if they're VERY lucky? And we're then supposed to believe that they've willingly put themselves in the firing line of millions of obsessive fans, destroyed their families, and opened up their parents to a lifetime of shame "for interview money". It's just... well. It's a stretch, isn't it.

[Livia]

So you get to decide which time they were lying? That's convenient

The fact they were ever lying would lead me to believe they're lying now.

[Livia]

Yes but the flipside of that, is that we're supposed to believe that they're now willingly confessing to lying under oath in an attempt to make a little bit of money; when there's a high likelihood that the civil suit will still fail on technicalities. It doesn't make sense at all. The next argument is that "they'll make money from interviews" but what? How much? Six figures if they're VERY lucky? And we're then supposed to believe that they've willingly put themselves in the firing line of millions of obsessive fans, destroyed their families, and opened up their parents to a lifetime of shame "for interview money". It's just... well. It's a stretch, isn't it.

When the book comes out... and then the film of the book... we can meet up here to discuss it.

[user104658]

I had no strong feelings for Michael Jackson either way prior to this. I'd wager Joey hasn't either. Your point seems to be that people who think Jackson is a paedophile have come into this with no preconceptions, but those who think the whole thing is hogwash had biased, preconceived ideas from the off.

I'm commenting purely on the fact that the people who "don't believe it" watching the interviews, also strongly expressed "not believing it" early in the thread before they had seen or read anything about it... thus, it seems fairly clear that those people were never likely to really consider the possibility of guilt.

I'm not saying that I think everyone should come out of it saying "YUP definitely a paedophile", but coming out of it still adamant that everything is 100% innocent seems like it must take a logical leap or two.

[Niamh.]

The fact they were ever lying would lead me to believe they're lying now.

But not then? :laugh:

[GoldHeart]

They said on oath that MJ never touched them, but we are now 10 after his death are supposed to believe their words now , which says he did , that is why they are NOW perceived as liars.

I still don't understand why people ignore the fact they swore on oath ,which is illegal isn't it ?!! .

I think as well some people who have suffered abuse themselves ,have a different view and are led to believe it as it brings back memories .

[user104658]

"Michael Jackson was cleared in 2005 and Wade Robson is a complete and utter LIAR! Once a liar always a liar!"

"A huge part of him being cleared in 2005 was Wade Robson's testimony, he was considered the #1 key witness..."

"Err yes he is a liar now, he was telling the truth in 2005"

[Vicky.]

Sorry their reasons for sticking up for him made sense to me. Hell one of the guys still sounds confused as hell about it all, sounds like he still considers it was a 'relationship' rather than abuse. The other seems a bit more sorted in his head and seems to have realised it was abuse rather than 'love' but still sounds very confused to be quite honest at times, and the anxiety when talking about it..I don't believe that can be faked that well, and if it was, he really should have an amazing career in acting.

[Livia]

But not then? :laugh:

I don't understand.

If they have ever lied, they are likely to again.

[user104658]

I still don't understand why people ignore the fact they swore on oath ,which is illegal isn't it ?!! .


I'm not ignoring it I think it's quite a compelling reason to believe what they have to say; they're admitting to lying in court which is not something someone would normally want to do. I can't think of much reason for them to admit to something like that, if they didn't have a very good reason to do so. A better reason than "because they MIGHT get a book deal or something" at least.

[joeysteele]

I just get the impression that you've gone into this with preconceptions and a bias for wanting to believe in his innocence, Joey, it's pretty clear that that's the case for a few people.

Yes.
I hold the view anyone should be views as possibly innocent until proven guilty.

It's why things like investigations are done and trials occur.
Jackson has already had extensive investigation and trial.
While he was alive.

I've never liked or supported media led kangaroo style court and judgements.


They were not convincing at all.
No one saw anything they said happened.
Their parents were with them.
They said nothing to their parents.
To anyone in fact.

Now they are, when Jackson can no longer again submit himself to answer all this again.

It seems the other way to me actually TS, I'm sorry to say.

That some want to think him guilty and won't accept he's been extensively investigated and tried before.
Acquitted too.

That's a dangerous precedent to follow on such serious allegations.
One thankfully, I'd never want to follow.

I would never describe myself as a Jackson fan.
I like much of his music work.
I watched this, very one sided documentary, and even being so weighted against him.
They did not convince me at all, in fact the more they went on, the less I believed them.

[thesheriff443]

I don't understand.

If they have ever lied, they are likely to again.

They lied has kids and we all know kids can be made to do a lot of things, a child’s mind is different to an adults.

[Livia]

Yes.
I hold the view anyone should be views as possibly innocent until proven guilty.

It's why things like investigations are done and trials occur.
Jackson has already had extensive investigation and trial.
While he was alive.

I've never liked or supported media led kangaroo style court and judgements.


They were not convincing at all.
No one saw anything they said happened.
Their parents were with them.
They said nothing to their parents.
To anyone in fact.

Now they are, when Jackson can no longer again submit himself to answer all this again.

It seems the other way to me actually TS, I'm sorry to say.

That some want to think him guilty and won't accept he's been extensively investigated and tried before.
Acquitted too.

That's a dangerous precedent to follow on such serious allegations.
One thankfully, I'd never want to follow.

I would never describe myself as a Jackson fan.
I like much of his music work.
I watched this, very one sided documentary, and even being so weighted against him.
They did not convince me at all, in fact the more they went on, the less I believed them.

Eloquently put, Joey.

[Vicky.]

If they have ever lied, they are likely to again.

Surely this line of thinking though, accepts that they led when they testified in his favour? which means basically, when asked if he ever touched them and they said no, that was a lie and he did.

So yeah I guess you could deduct from that that they might embellish or whatever now to sensationalise it or whatever. But, it still relies on admitting they lied in the first place, and Wade was one of the major reasons he got off (though I really dont get that..as I said earlier...not abusing every kid does not mean you abused none).

[user104658]

Sorry their reasons for sticking up for him made sense to me. Hell one of the guys still sounds confused as hell about it all, sounds like he still considers it was a 'relationship' rather than abuse. The other seems a bit more sorted in his head and seems to have realised it was abuse rather than 'love' but still sounds very confused to be quite honest at times, and the anxiety when talking about it..I don't believe that can be faked that well, and if it was, he really should have an amazing career in acting.

I agree and in all honesty I think that if Jackson was still alive, and that distance / headspace wasn't there, Wade Robson may quite likely still be friends with him to this day. Though I doubt he would be leaving him alone with his son.

James Safechuck just seems utterly broken and I have no idea how people imagine one "fakes" something like that in an attempt to get some money. As you say, if he's faking it then he's an exceptional method actor.

[Niamh.]

Sorry their reasons for sticking up for him made sense to me. Hell one of the guys still sounds confused as hell about it all, sounds like he still considers it was a 'relationship' rather than abuse. The other seems a bit more sorted in his head and seems to have realised it was abuse rather than 'love' but still sounds very confused to be quite honest at times, and the anxiety when talking about it..I don't believe that can be faked that well, and if it was, he really should have an amazing career in acting.

Yeah, to me the two men looked and sounded like they were telling the truth, like you say. The mothers and I mean both of them giggled through the interview and looked almost nostalagic thinking back to the first class flights and hotel rooms, that in itself, for me is pretty telling on how the abuse happened like it did, they were the perfect targets for MJ with mothers like them two "protecting" them

[Kazanne]

So you get to decide which time they were lying? That's convenient

Not at all , but if someone says one thing then the exact opposite after they are a liar.

[GoldHeart]

Sorry their reasons for sticking up for him made sense to me. Hell one of the guys still sounds confused as hell about it all, sounds like he still considers it was a 'relationship' rather than abuse. The other seems a bit more sorted in his head and seems to have realised it was abuse rather than 'love' but still sounds very confused to be quite honest at times, and the anxiety when talking about it..I don't believe that can be faked that well, and if it was, he really should have an amazing career in acting.


I'm not convinced . Why wait 10 years!??? , and they can't be that confused if they're happy to take part in a documentary claiming Jackson was a paedophile .

I still think it's money motivated with a dash of jealousy at the attention he gave other kids . And by attention I don't mean anything inappropriate . Yes he was a strange guy with issues who shouldn't of invited kids in his home like that , but in his mind he obviously didn't see it as odd .

[Livia]

Surely this line of thinking though, accepts that they led when they testified in his favour? which means basically, when asked if he ever touched them and they said no, that was a lie and he did.

So yeah I guess you could deduct from that that they might embellish or whatever now to sensationalise it or whatever. But, it still relies on admitting they lied in the first place, and Wade was one of the major reasons he got off (though I really dont get that..as I said earlier...not abusing every kid does not mean you abused none).

I'm with Judge Judy on this one. If you get caught lying once, I'm always going to assume you're not being wholly truthful.

[Livia]

Yeah, to me the two men looked and sounded like they were telling the truth, like you say. The mothers and I mean both of them giggled through the interview and looked almost nostalagic thinking back to the first class flights and hotel rooms, that in itself, for me is pretty telling on how the abuse happened like it did, they were the perfect targets for MJ with mothers like them two "protecting" them

They were both consummate performers. And have been since they were kids.

[Vicky.]

Yeah, to me the two men looked and sounded like they were telling the truth, like you say. The mothers and I mean both of them giggled through the interview and looked almost nostalagic thinking back to the first class flights and hotel rooms, that in itself, for me is pretty telling on how the abuse happened like it did, they were the perfect targets for MJ with mothers like them two "protecting" them

Quite. And you know, if I think hard enough I can kind of see how that happened too, but cannot imagine myself ever being so blinded by someones fame or whatever as to allow random adult men to sleep with my 7 year old, on their own. Like, how the **** did they suspect nothing when their rooms started getting further and further from the adult who was sleeping with their kid?

They were definitely the perfect targets. Unfortunately, they did not behave the way victims should...random crying and getting emotional and telling everyone in secret at the time, etc etc. Which, tbh I would think is probably much more 'typical' than the victim the public tend to expect.

[Vicky.]

I'm not convinced . Why wait 10 years!??? , and they can't be that confused if they're happy to take part in a documentary claiming Jackson was a paedophile .

I still think it's money motivated with a dash of jealousy at the attention he gave other kids . And by attention I don't mean anything inappropriate . Yes he was a strange guy with issues who shouldn't of invited kids in his home like that , but in his mind he obviously didn't see it as odd .

You could say this about thousands of victims of grooming, why wait so long to say anything.

[Livia]

Quite. And you know, if I think hard enough I can kind of see how that happened too, but cannot imagine myself ever being so blinded by someones fame or whatever as to allow random adult men to sleep with my 7 year old, on their own. Like, how the **** did they suspect nothing when their rooms started getting further and further from the adult who was sleeping with their kid?

They were definitely the perfect targets. Unfortunately, they did not behave the way victims should...random crying and getting emotional and telling everyone in secret at the time, etc etc. Which, tbh I would think is probably much more 'typical' than the victim the public tend to expect.

Whatever happened with Jackson, I have to say... if what the parents said about the kids sleeping separately from their parents, the parents themselves would be partially culpable.

[AnnieK]

Not at all , but if someone says one thing then the exact opposite after they are a liar.

But no-one really has any proof as to which time they were lying....people took their word as gospel when it fit their narrative.

Even is MJ was still alive, he would still vehemently deny it and regardless of anything else, his actions towards children have led to broken people today

[Vicky.]

I'm with Judge Judy on this one. If you get caught lying once, I'm always going to assume you're not being wholly truthful.

Fair enough. But this does kind of say, that the testimony that got him off was lies also, as it was told by a liar :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

what is it that the nay sayers think is the motive for this?

I mean just how much money can you make by saying you had painful anal sex with bleeding with an adult when you were a child?

[Vicky.]

Whatever happened with Jackson, I have to say... if what the parents said about the kids sleeping separately from their parents, the parents themselves would be partially culpable.

Oh ****ing definitely. They way the mothers were giggling on and that kind of sickened me. Still don't see themselves as wrong, seemingly, though they said the words at a few points.

Like, you have 'known' this random guy a few days, and you leave your young child there and **** off touring America, leaving your child with this random adult man who...while yeah he was famous, you still DONT EVEN KNOW!

Its bonkers. The parents have a definite part to play in this.

[Livia]

Fair enough. But this does kind of say, that the testimony that got him off was lies also, as it was told by a liar :laugh:

If someone lies under oath, they are the ones who've broken the law. So people believe he was telling the truth at the trial or lying? What about now? We know he's capable of lying... how can we tell?

[Vicky.]

And sorry but the parents also just 'believing' the 'random extortionist' line too. And still allowing their kids to sleep alone with this man who has been accused of being a nonce. Nah.

[user104658]

Yes.
I hold the view anyone should be views as possibly innocent until proven guilty.


In legal terms, I agree with you but I don't think legal proceedings and personal opinion are ultimately, or necessarily, interchangeable and I think it's a mistake to view the world in those terms. Doing so requires believing in an infallible legal system and unfortunately, such a thing simply does not exist. Each to their own on that though, I suppose.

Taking the legal judgement out of it; you're not even doing what you suggest you support? You say that everyone should be viewed as possibly innocent until proven guilty, yet you go on to say that you feel that Jackson is definitely innocent. And in doing so, you demonstrate that you do NOT believe that everyone should be viewed as innocent until proven guilty, as you will happily assert that Robson and Safechuck are guilty of lying about this abuse when there is - likewise - no concrete evidence on which to base that assumption that guilt? It's bias, Joey. The most you can say if you truly believe in hardline proof, is that there's not enough evidence to condemn Jackson OR his accusers - and yet, you freely condemn his accusers on "personal feeling".



It seems the other way to me actually TS, I'm sorry to say.

That some want to think him guilty and won't accept he's been extensively investigated and tried before.
Acquitted too.


Historically I've actually been inclined to believe that MJ was "weird but not necessarily an abuser" - indeed to give him the benefit of the doubt due to lack of evidence - but having watched this and having read around it and watched other footage - as I agree that the documentary is biased - I honestly feel that the weight of circumstantial evidence at this point is heavily suggestive of there being inappropriate behaviour. Would it be enough for me to put him behind bars, if I was Judge Dredd and had absolute power to do so? No, probably not. But to circle back around; personal views and absolute legal certainty are not (and don't need to be) the same thing at all.

[Vicky.]

If someone lies under oath, they are the ones who've broken the law. So people believe he was telling the truth at the trial or lying? What about now? We know he's capable of lying... how can we tell?

Well we can't 'tell' as such, but one can try and weigh up the balance of probabilities. I just find it odd that fans seem to be declaring them liars now...because they lied back then, but refusing to follow that to its logical conclusion. If you declare them liars now because of the testimony then, that discounts the testimony then also. Surely...

[Livia]

In legal terms, I agree with you but I don't think legal proceedings and personal opinion are ultimately, or necessarily, interchangeable and I think it's a mistake to view the world in those terms. Doing so requires believing in an infallible legal system and unfortunately, such a thing simply does not exist. Each to their own on that though, I suppose.

Taking the legal judgement out of it; you're not even doing what you suggest you support? You say that everyone should be viewed as possibly innocent until proven guilty, yet you go on to say that you feel that Jackson is definitely innocent. And in doing so, you demonstrate that you do NOT believe that everyone should be viewed as innocent until proven guilty, as you will happily assert that Robson and Safechuck are guilty of lying about this abuse when there is - likewise - no concrete evidence on which to base that assumption that guilt? It's bias, Joey. The most you can say if you truly believe in hardline proof, is that there's not enough evidence to condemn Jackson OR his accusers - and yet, you freely condemn his accusers on "personal feeling".





Historically I've actually been inclined to believe that MJ was "weird but not necessarily an abuser" - indeed to give him the benefit of the doubt due to lack of evidence - but having watched this and having read around it and watched other footage - as I agree that the documentary is biased - I honestly feel that the weight of circumstantial evidence at this point is heavily suggestive of there being inappropriate behaviour. Would it be enough for me to put him behind bars, if I was Judge Dredd and had absolute power to do so? No, probably not. But to circle back around; personal views and absolute legal certainty are not (and don't need to be) the same thing at all.

It's inevitable that someone trained in law, who works in the law, will have that information colour all their opinions TS, whether you like it or not.

[Crimson Dynamo]

what age were they when they told the "lies"?

(i dont know so genuine q)

[Livia]

Well we can't 'tell' as such, but one can try and weigh up the balance of probabilities. I just find it odd that fans seem to be declaring them liars now...because they lied back then, but refusing to follow that to its logical conclusion. If you declare them liars now because of the testimony then, that discounts the testimony then also. Surely...

All it tells me is that they unreliable witnesses.

[thesheriff443]

Not at all , but if someone says one thing then the exact opposite after they are a liar.

But they were kids surrounded by adults, the maid said lots of videos were removed before the first police raid.

[Niamh.]

I'm not convinced . Why wait 10 years!??? , and they can't be that confused if they're happy to take part in a documentary claiming Jackson was a paedophile .

I still think it's money motivated with a dash of jealousy at the attention he gave other kids . And by attention I don't mean anything inappropriate . Yes he was a strange guy with issues who shouldn't of invited kids in his home like that , but in his mind he obviously didn't see it as odd .

That sentence just sounds so messed up though, you're even talking about them like they're scorned lovers.........which is not far off the truth imo

[user104658]

It's inevitable that someone trained in law, who works in the law, will have that information colour all their opinions TS, whether you like it or not.

I would HOPE that someone trained in law and who works in law understands better than most that legal rulings are not 100% infallible or even close to it?

If you're trying to tell me that most lawyers believe that "legal ruling = objective truth" then that's really quite terrifying.

[Beso]

I still don't understand why people ignore the fact they swore on oath ,which is illegal isn't it ?!! .

I think as well some people who have suffered abuse themselves ,have a different view and are led to believe it as it brings back memories .

Or they just may have a better understanding of what these boys went through and how they feel mentally about it all now...

[user104658]

All it tells me is that they unreliable witnesses.

So you agree that the #1 key witness - described as such by Jackson's own legal team - in the 2005 trial, instrumental in his acquittal, is in fact by your own judgement "an unreliable witness" and thus the outcome of that trial is in question.

At least we're getting somewhere.

[thesheriff443]

So you agree that the #1 key witness - described as such by Jackson's own legal team - in the 2005 trial, instrumental in his acquittal, is in fact by your own judgement "an unreliable witness" and thus the outcome of that trial is in question.

At least we're getting somewhere.

You might as well be a dog chasing it’s tail.

[Beso]

One thing stands out for me in all this.



The fact the fathers were very rarely invited to neverland with the mothers and kids.

[GoldHeart]

That sentence just sounds so messed up though, you're even talking about them like they're scorned lovers.........which is not far off the truth imo

They're the ones twisting it to sound that way .I'm not saying it that way ! but think about it another way, if loads of kids idolise and spend time with their fav celebrity and they then find out actually that celebrity has other fans who get more attention then I think some would get jealous . An ordinary kid wouldn't care they'd just accept it , but if we're dealing with kids who are obsessive then that opens up all sorts .

[user104658]

Just another statistic to add as a matter of interest (for those who are sure it's not true because "it took so long to say anything");

The average time for an adult survivor of childhood abuse processing their experience and coming forward to speak out is 22 years from the incidents of abuse. With the abuse occuring in the early 90's, the timeframe for this actually fits the statistics perfectly.

[Vicky.]

Just another statistic to add as a matter of interest (for those who are sure it's not true because "it took so long to say anything");

The average time for an adult survivor of childhood abuse processing their experience and coming forward to speak out is 22 years from the incidents of abuse. With the abuse occuring in the early 90's, the timeframe for this actually fits the statistics perfectly.
Yeah I tried to say this earlier but was not quite so clear. Its utterly 'normal' for child abuse victims to not actually process or 'admit' or however you want to put it, until they are adults, and having their own kids seems to be a familiar trigger too.

[GoldHeart]

Just another statistic to add as a matter of interest (for those who are sure it's not true because "it took so long to say anything");

The average time for an adult survivor of childhood abuse processing their experience and coming forward to speak out is 22 years from the incidents of abuse. With the abuse occuring in the early 90's, the timeframe for this actually fits the statistics perfectly.

But it's not just the time they took to come forward :facepalm: , there's quite a few other suspect things that make me doubt them .

[user104658]

Yeah I tried to say this earlier but was not quite so clear. Its utterly 'normal' for child abuse victims to not actually process or 'admit' or however you want to put it, until they are adults, and having their own kids seems to be a familiar trigger too.

Yes, people justify and normalise the activity to protect themselves emotionally and "make it OK in their head", then they have a kid of their own and suddenly realise "Oh wait... very much not OK".

[Livia]

So you agree that the #1 key witness - described as such by Jackson's own legal team - in the 2005 trial, instrumental in his acquittal, is in fact by your own judgement "an unreliable witness" and thus the outcome of that trial is in question.

At least we're getting somewhere.

I can't answer you without referring to my legal training and you hate that... so no comment.

[Beso]

They're the ones twisting it to sound that way .I'm not saying it that way ! but think about it another way, if loads of kids idolise and spend time with their fav celebrity and they then find out actually that celebrity has other fans who get more attention then I think some would get jealous . An ordinary kid wouldn't care they'd just accept it , but if we're dealing with kids who are obsessive then that opens up all sorts .



Omg..it's a tactic pedos use...they make targets compete against eachother for attention, then to maintain that attention they perform the act required...well, until the pedo gets bored and wants a new play thinqg, then they get tossed to the side, often ridiculed as they are sent packing....

[Niamh.]

They're the ones twisting it to sound that way .I'm not saying it that way ! but think about it another way, if loads of kids idolise and spend time with their fav celebrity and they then find out actually that celebrity has other fans who get more attention then I think some would get jealous . An ordinary kid wouldn't care they'd just accept it , but if we're dealing with kids who are obsessive then that opens up all sorts .

You're not talking about a simple thing like a kid meeting his celebrity hero though, you're talking about a 7 year old who used to sleep in the same bed as a grown man and then being "dumped" for a younger model

[bots]

This documentary should absolutely not be used to define Jackson's guilt or innocence. It's the TV equivalent of click bait

However, that being said, I made my mind up about Jackson years (decades) ago and it hasn't changed since. He wasn't normal, but he is dead now so ... really, who cares.

For me this is a bit similar to Kevin Spacey .... To me he is guilty as sin, but that doesnt stop me admiring his work as an actor. You don't need to condone one thing to appreciate the other.

[Niamh.]

Yeah I tried to say this earlier but was not quite so clear. Its utterly 'normal' for child abuse victims to not actually process or 'admit' or however you want to put it, until they are adults, and having their own kids seems to be a familiar trigger too.

And that's totally understandable aswell, It must be a totally confusing state to be in, trying to process all that, I'd imagine there's alot of self blame attached to it and also probably confusing feelings of having "love" for this person. Even Macauley Culkin who defends MJ describes him as charming which is an odd adjective to use in a platonic buddy kind of a way, especially from a childs perspective

[Niamh.]

Omg..it's a tactic pedos use...they make targets compete against eachother for attention, then to maintain that attention they perform the act required...well, until the pedo gets bored and wants a new play thinqg, then they get tossed to the side, often ridiculed as they are sent packing....

He ticks so many of the pedo tactic list. Befriending the family then slowly pushing them away from the kid as well

[Vicky.]

A lot of peoples view of a paedo is a random perv hiding in bushes groping random kids. While it does sometimes happen that way, it usually does not and involves a lot of work on the paedos part to get close enough to both abuse/ear parents trust, and keep the victim quiet..which is often by telling the victim that they will also get in trouble if anyone ever finds out.

[GoldHeart]

He ticks so many of the pedo tactic list. Befriending the family then slowly pushing them away from the kid as well

And yet the parents were happy to let their kids stay with him ?? .

[chuff me dizzy]

I just get the impression that you've gone into this with preconceptions and a bias for wanting to believe in his innocence, Joey, it's pretty clear that that's the case for a few people.

My daughter a Jackson fan, wont even watch it and has dismissed it as lies ,and I think a lot of this has gone on, people don't want to believe, therefore they wont

[Crimson Dynamo]

And yet the parents were happy to let their kids stay with him ?? .

blinded with fame and the prospect of easy money

[Vicky.]

And yet the parents were happy to let their kids stay with him ?? .

The parents are to blame also. The mother giggling her way through a doc about abuse her kid suffered because SHE wanted fame, is vile.

[Niamh.]

And yet the parents were happy to let their kids stay with him ?? .

The parents were idiots and neglectful, totally ridiculous. What's your point?

[chuff me dizzy]

He ticks so many of the pedo tactic list. Befriending the family then slowly pushing them away from the kid as well

He wasn't only grooming the kids, he was also grooming the parents .........Ive got 4 children ( all grown up ) and no amount of money in the world would make me allow them to sleep in any mans bed ,the parents have a lot of feel guilty about too, if they had refused to let their boys sleep with him, none of this would have happened

[Niamh.]

He wasn't only grooming the kids, he was also grooming the parents .........Ive got 4 children ( all grown up ) and no amount of money in the world would make me allow them to sleep in any mans bed ,the parents have a lot of feel guilty about too, if they had refused to let their boys sleep with him, none of this would have happened

Yep. 100%

[GoldHeart]

The parents are to blame also. The mother giggling her way through a doc about abuse her kid suffered because SHE wanted fame, is vile.

If your child had genuinely been abused you wouldn't be laughing / smirking on camera unless of course she's effed in the head .

Sounds more like they're enjoying the attention .

[Vicky.]

If your child had genuinely been abused you wouldn't be laughing / smirking on camera unless of course she's effed in the head .

Sounds more like they're enjoying the attention .

The parents may well be. I don't think many 'stage parents' come off well tbh, they seem much more concerned with fame than they are about their childs safety. No way do I believe there was never any alarm bells ringing for them, they just ignored it as they liked the lifestyle. Having ****ty parents is not the kids fault though.

[Niamh.]

If your child had genuinely been abused you wouldn't be laughing / smirking on camera unless of course she's effed in the head .

Sounds more like they're enjoying the attention .

I mean whether all this is lies or not, they clearly are not good parents, whether MJ did anything sexual with these kids or not, they still allowed their young sons sleep in the same bed with this 30 odd year old man so I mean that point proves nothing really, either way they're shockingly neglectful parents :shrug:

[Niamh.]

The parents may well be. I don't think many 'stage parents' come off well tbh, they seem much more concerned with fame than they are about their childs safety. No way do I believe there was never any alarm bells ringing for them, they just ignored it as they liked the lifestyle. Having ****ty parents is not the kids fault though.

.

[chuff me dizzy]

1.25 onwards ,seriously turns my stomach

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJaWSdKKvGU

Opening minute the boy says MJ said " If you love me you will sleep in my bed " and he's NOT a sick paedophile ? Come on folks

[Beso]

Can we say mothers instead of parents please....because its my understanding that the fathers were not happy at all and filed for custody etc after finding out Michael had been in bed with their child..thank you in advance.

[Crimson Dynamo]

1.25 onwards ,seriously turns my stomach

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJaWSdKKvGU

Opening minute the boy says MJ said " If you love me you will sleep in my bed " and he's NOT a sick paedophile ? Come on folks

watching that again is quite horrific

[chuff me dizzy]

Can we say mothers instead of parents please....because its my understanding that the fathers were not happy at all and filed for custody etc after finding t Michael was in bed with their child..thank you in advance.

Both marriages had broken down i think ? but early days when the grooming of the parents started both Dads were all for it

[chuff me dizzy]

watching that again is quite horrific

The way that boy is gripping his hand and snuggling into his shoulder !!

[Beso]

Both marriages had broken down i think ? but early days when the grooming of the parents started both Dads were all for it

Oh well, he should invited the dad's along to never ever land more often than he did...are you sure it wasn't the step dad's that were up for it?...I know it was that way for cory..

[Beso]

The way that boy is gripping his hand and snuggling into his shoulder !!

Oh yuck...it's like watching that us senator fondle all the workers families as he thanks them for the work they have done..Can't remember his name but it was sick.

[chuff me dizzy]

Oh yuck...it's like watching that us senator fondle all the workers families as he thanks them for the work they have done..Can't remember his name but it was sick.

Made me feel sick ......why did the parents ( mostly Mams ) not stop this from the start ?

[Beso]

Joe Biden was his name.

[chuff me dizzy]

Joe Biden was his name.

Oh yes I remember him !!

[chuff me dizzy]

Another 11 boys ( never girls is it ? ) have come forward


http://rtl247.uk/michael-jacksons-body-may-be-exhumed-as-11-new-accusers-come-forward/?fbclid=IwAR2u5NjQbBX_ApD-ZA0Jj-eaESQWtOhMG0eU22Q-1dKAfj3YExHL63my5bM

[Niamh.]

Can we say mothers instead of parents please....because its my understanding that the fathers were not happy at all and filed for custody etc after finding out Michael had been in bed with their child..thank you in advance.

The mothers definitely look worse (because they actually feature in the Doc) however what did the dads actually do to stop it while they were with the mothers? Nothing. They were in the photos too so clearly knew their sons were sleeping with MJ

[Beso]

The mothers definitely look worse (because they actually feature in the Doc) however what did the dads actually do to stop it while they were with the mothers? Nothing. They were in the photos too so clearly knew their sons were sleeping with MJ

Too much for some of them..

https://nypost.com/2009/11/18/jacko-molest-rap-dad-kills-himself/

[Niamh.]

Too much for some of them..

https://nypost.com/2009/11/18/jacko-molest-rap-dad-kills-himself/

He isn't one of the guys in the Documentaries parents though, that's who I'm discussing

[Beso]

He isn't one of the guys in the Documentaries parents though, that's who I'm discussing

Oh ok...well I brought it up and I was discussing them all..:blush:

[Niamh.]

Oh ok...well I brought it up and I was discussing them all..:blush:

I did read that article though, it sounded like he killed himself because of harassment by MJ fans and was very paranoid over that aswell

[Kazanne]

what age were they when they told the "lies"?

(i dont know so genuine q)

One was 20,so I presume the other one was close

[Kazanne]

They lied has kids and we all know kids can be made to do a lot of things, a child’s mind is different to an adults.

kids? they were grown men

[Kazanne]

They were both consummate performers. And have been since they were kids.

Yes,isn't one a budding actor but isn't working at the moment ?

[Kazanne]

My daughter a Jackson fan, wont even watch it and has dismissed it as lies ,and I think a lot of this has gone on, people don't want to believe, therefore they wont

And the same could be said the other way round Chuff,people have it in their head he was guilty and that wont ever change in their minds , I watched it and it made me feel even more that something was not on the level.

[chuff me dizzy]

And the same could be said the other way round Chuff,people have it in their head he was guilty and that wont ever change in their minds , I watched it and it made me feel even more that something was not on the level.

I remember the Martin Bashir film, thats the time my MASSIVE doubts on him started and nothing Ive seen over the years since have changed my mind ,the docu on Tuesday night was more damning than last nights film too

[Kazanne]

I remember the Martin Bashir film, thats the time my MASSIVE doubts on him started and nothing Ive seen over the years since have changed my mind ,the docu on Tuesday night was more damning than last nights film too

Yes and Bashir got a lot of stick for that as he twisted a fair bit of stuff, the 'story' tonight will no doubt be more or less like last nights,but I will watch it,not that I want to,not because I don't want to hear it but because I hate to think I have put any coffers or time into any of this,but if I am to comment I have to watch.

[chuff me dizzy]

Yes and Bashir got a lot of stick for that as he twisted a fair bit of stuff, the 'story' tonight will no doubt be more or less like last nights,but I will watch it,not that I want to,not because I don't want to hear it but because I hate to think I have put any coffers or time into any of this,but if I am to comment I have to watch.

Did you watch Tuesday nights documentary ? IMO it was far more damning than last nights ... In Bashirs film Jackson showed himself to be a liar ,he openly denied having facial surgery apart from having his nose done " to breath easier :joker: " then back tracked and said he had maybe had 2 surgeries then it went to 3 !!

[Vicky.]

Has the second bit not been shown yet? Watched online so obviously both were there..

[chuff me dizzy]

Has the second bit not been shown yet? Watched online so obviously both were there..

On tonight

[arista]

Has the second bit not been shown yet? Watched online so obviously both were there..


No the 2nd HBO 2 Hour
is Tonight Ch4HD 9PM

[Vicky.]

Ah right, am ahead of everyone then