BBC bans Michael Jackson music amidst child abuse claims

[Vicky.]

Seems bizarre that her Husband would force her to do something like that

Indeed. what on earth would it gain her husband..

Just another weird thing in the case tbh.

[user104658]

I reckon if MJ had come out himself and admitted it you'd probably say he was coerced or something Kaz

I just wonder where the "pivot point" is. I mean, there's no physical evidence against Saville either but admittedly there are far more accusors and no one has trouble believing that he's guilty. But how many would be "enough" for Jackson? 10? 20? 50? I sort of feel like a hundred people could come forward with claims and every single one would be dubbed "lies for money".

[Crimson Dynamo]

I just wonder where the "pivot point" is. I mean, there's no physical evidence against Saville either but admittedly there are far more accusors and no one has trouble believing that he's guilty. But how many would be "enough" for Jackson? 10? 20? 50? I sort of feel like a hundred people could come forward with claims and every single one would be dubbed "lies for money".

If this had been Meatloaf he would have been guilty as sin on page one by all members

[user104658]

If this had been Meatloaf he would have been guilty as sin on page one by all members

Bat Out Of Hell kicks the crap out of anything MJ ever made though :nono:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Bat Out Of Hell kicks the crap out of anything MJ ever made though :nono:

"I will do anything for love but i wont do THAT"

No Meat good lad, but MJ did

[Niamh.]

I just wonder where the "pivot point" is. I mean, there's no physical evidence against Saville either but admittedly there are far more accusors and no one has trouble believing that he's guilty. But how many would be "enough" for Jackson? 10? 20? 50? I sort of feel like a hundred people could come forward with claims and every single one would be dubbed "lies for money".

I wonder if McCauley Culkin came out and said actually MJ did abuse me what people would say? I suspect that it would be because he was trying to raise his profile, get money etc.

[Kazanne]

I reckon if MJ had come out himself and admitted it you'd probably say he was coerced or something Kaz

We'll never know

[user104658]

"I will do anything for love but i wont do THAT"

No Meat good lad, but MJ did

ixlMJE2rpNQ

[joeysteele]

That is a bold and patently false statement there Joey. The world's foremost experts on child grooming wouldn't claim to know all there is to know about it and the idea that you do is just bizarre and I can only assume reactionary because you're feeling questioned. Surely you can appreciate that it's an outlandish claim.

For goodness sake.
I never said I knew all there was about grooming.
For crying out loud.
You suggested I read up on it.
I said I'd read all there was to know on it.

Not that I knew all about grooming totally.

So stop twisting what I say to be so confrontational.
So where did I say I knew all there was rather than I had read all on the issue.

The bizarre thing is you even bother to keep getting at my posts because, as to these 2 individuals in that documentary.
You and I will never ever agree.
I believe they were lying.
Nothing I saw or heard from them over the 2 programmes led me to any other conclusion than that.

Taking in all they said for most of their lives, taking into account the investigation, trial and all the not guilty verdicts given too.
Then watching this documentary.
Putting it all together, I go with the trial verdicts on Jackson.

Not just taking as gospel this 2 programme storytelling with no questioning from anyone as to what they were saying being challenged.
Why would they not want this to be done more in an interview with questioning of their accounts by others..

[user104658]

I wonder if McCauley Culkin came out and said actually MJ did abuse me what people would say? I suspect that it would be because he was trying to raise his profile, get money etc.

"His career has been dead for years, he's an addict and addicts lie, he probably spent all of his own money on drugs, he's probably in debt, he's recovered lately and tried to restart his career but failed, now after money". You can write it without it happening

[Niamh.]

"His career has been dead for years, he's an addict and addicts lie, he probably spent all of his own money on drugs, he's probably in debt, he's recovered lately and tried to restart his career but failed, now after money". You can write it without it happening

Don't forget "well, he said the opposite in court under oath so he's a proved liar ".....

The rule is people are only credible if they're on the "right" side of the fence

[Kazanne]

I just wonder where the "pivot point" is. I mean, there's no physical evidence against Saville either but admittedly there are far more accusors and no one has trouble believing that he's guilty. But how many would be "enough" for Jackson? 10? 20? 50? I sort of feel like a hundred people could come forward with claims and every single one would be dubbed "lies for money".

Wasn't there audio tapes of Saville talking about some of the stuff he'de done plus a lot of his was witnessed by adults in the business and was there any attempt to extort money from him , and did the victims defend him then change their minds :shrug:

[Kazanne]

"His career has been dead for years, he's an addict and addicts lie, he probably spent all of his own money on drugs, he's probably in debt, he's recovered lately and tried to restart his career but failed, now after money". You can write it without it happening

Everyone lies at some point not just addicts

[user104658]

For goodness sake.
I never said I knew all there was about grooming.
For crying out loud.
You suggested I read up on it.
I said I'd read all there was to know on it.

Not that I knew all about grooming totally.

I still find it a pretty outlandish claim Joey, people spend their entire professional lives studying this topic :shrug:. I'm not claiming to be one of those people but I'm also aware that you aren't either...

So stop twisting what I say to be so confrontational.
So where did I say I knew all there was rather than I had read all on the issue.

The bizarre thing is you even bother to keep getting at my posts because, as to these 2 individuals in that documentary.
You and I will never ever agree.
I believe they were lying.
Nothing I saw or heard from them over the 2 programmes led me to any other conclusion than that.

Taking in all they said for most of their lives, taking into account the investigation, trial and all the not guilty verdicts given too.
Then watching this documentary.
Putting it all together, I go with the trial verdicts on Jackson.

Not just taking as gospel this 2 programme storytelling with no questioning from anyone as to what they were saying being challenged.
Why would they not want this to be done more in an interview with questioning of their accounts by others..

I'm not going to argue that it's a balanced documentary, because it isn't. I don't think it pretends to be, though... it's a vehicle for them to tell their story and in my opinion it doesn't pretend to be anything else. I think it's actually very fair in the depiction of Jackson and doesn't demonise him at all, though some will find the accusations demonising enough, the documentary doesn't paint him as evil or calculating at all, it paints him as a damaged individual who probably had no idea that he was causing significant harm and genuinely believed he was in mutual loving relationships that "others wouldn't understand". It could EASILY have painted a monster, but didn't.

But again I won't try to argue that it's an objective examination of the whole thing. I happen to believe them but not just because this show convinced me.

I also agree that a Louis Theroux style piece on it would be very interesting. Old-style Theroux (90's, early 00's) of course where he played the detached observer and asked awkward questions. In recent years he's gone a bit soft.

[user104658]

Everyone lies at some point not just addicts

I know that and a lot of addicts are also extremely, painfully honest in my experience. I'm just thinking of examples of what people would say to discredit him, because they would definitely try to, and his drug problem would be an easy target (much like Wade Robson's bad relationships).

[chuff me dizzy]

Had the one kept the underwear for one instance.
Only he went to get them he said.
He didn't need to get rid of them.
If they had not been conveniently got rid of 'by him himself, not even apparently worrying his blood was on them even, that was solid evidence.

If, I stress if, it was ever the case they existed with blood on them, and his tale had even the slightest element of truth as to it.

Dont forget MJ had got into his head about the lie they would both go to prison,Wade thought he was protecting HIMSELF not Jackson

[chuff me dizzy]

Thank you Kazanne, I figured it may have been discussed already on here, but i didn't have the time to go all the way back to previous pages. I'd only just read about it today

Seems bizarre that her Husband would force her to do something like that

Every chance it was pressure from the family, she said in an interview his Mother tried to cover up stuff

[chuff me dizzy]

"His career has been dead for years, he's an addict and addicts lie, he probably spent all of his own money on drugs, he's probably in debt, he's recovered lately and tried to restart his career but failed, now after money". You can write it without it happening

This is just what I was going to post, he must go down in history as one of the most untrustworthy witness ever, as you say he was on every drug known to man, his career was in tatters ,he got his palm crossed with $$ and took them, MJ would have told him to name his price as he was a well known face

[Vicky.]

"His career has been dead for years, he's an addict and addicts lie, he probably spent all of his own money on drugs, he's probably in debt, he's recovered lately and tried to restart his career but failed, now after money". You can write it without it happening

Yup. Spot on. Regardless of who comes out, how many or whatever, its ALWAYS just going to be lies for money/attention.

[chuff me dizzy]

I see professional parasite Andre has jumped on the bandwagon today as a "near miss " :bored:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/peter-andre-came-second-michael-jackson-dancing-contest-leaving-neverland-accuser-won-131054638.html?fbclid=IwAR0r-i5jqThJHnxkvFpQhOsnDKrlMmCviZ9FmGLSad9CaQQ-mzrxo20Jk7g

[user104658]

I see professional parasite Andre has jumped on the bandwagon today as a "near miss " :bored:Apparently he came second in the dance competition that Wade Robson won? Is that the one he won when he was 5 where they initially said he could dance but wouldn't be eligible to win? :hehe:

Peter Andre: "I think the important thing to learn from this documentary is that I WOZ ROBBED! He wasn't even supposed to be in the contest!"

[chuff me dizzy]

Apparently he came second in the dance competition that Wade Robson won? Is that the one he won when he was 5 where they initially said he could dance but wouldn't be eligible to win? :hehe:

Peter Andre: "I think the important thing to learn from this documentary is that I WOZ ROBBED! He wasn't even supposed to be in the contest!"

Everything Andre says and does boils my blood :rant:

[Beso]

I reckon if MJ had come out himself and admitted it you'd probably say he was coerced or something Kaz

That's really uncalled for imo....no need to rubbish people's opinions or vieWS on a subject..the man has been found not guilty after all. ..really not nice at all.

[Beso]

I just wonder where the "pivot point" is. I mean, there's no physical evidence against Saville either but admittedly there are far more accusors and no one has trouble believing that he's guilty. But how many would be "enough" for Jackson? 10? 20? 50? I sort of feel like a hundred people could come forward with claims and every single one would be dubbed "lies for money".

Uncalled for as well....2 members discussing another member....I don't think Kaz has ever said he ain't guilty, but more she is reluctant to believe these to guys...


This ain't the first time in this thread either.....leave it out.

[user104658]

Uncalled for as well....2 members discussing another member....I don't think Kaz has ever said he ain't guilty, but more she is reluctant to believe these to guys...





This ain't the first time in this thread either.....leave it out.I'm not talking about Kaz, parm :think:.

[iRyan]

What a headache this thread has become

[Kazanne]

That's really uncalled for imo....no need to rubbish people's opinions or vieWS on a subject..the man has been found not guilty after all. ..really not nice at all.

Thankyou Parmy, I'm used to it now,I know my opinions are strong but that's how I feel just like people opinions are strong the other way. I will never agree to anything I don't believe in just to appease people.

[Crimson Dynamo]

What a headache this thread has become

why what did you want a thread about child rape to be about?

[Crimson Dynamo]

tbf on such a subject i think the thread has been pretty well balanced

bearing in mind we have opinions by members so opposed that normally agree?

[joeysteele]

Thankyou Parmy, I'm used to it now,I know my opinions are strong but that's how I feel just like people opinions are strong the other way. I will never agree to anything I don't believe in just to appease people.

Absolutely right Kazanne.
Sorry you are getting a chewy reaction at times.

One thing seems evident.
There's a fair amount more passion being shown here on this thread about that documentary, than came from the actual people on said documentary.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Absolutely right Kazanne.
Sorry you are getting a chewy reaction at times.

One thing seems evident.
There's a fair amount more passion being shown here on this thread about that documentary, than came from the actual people on said documentary.

Joey what type of passion do you want men to show who have been anally raped as children?



:umm2:

[Beso]

I'm drunk..but try and read it.

[Beso]

I'm not talking about Kaz, parm :think:.

I kinda knew that, but you quoted a post with Kaz in it...like before in the thread .That's all pal...I just want everyone to get along in this thread.

[Niamh.]

That's really uncalled for imo....no need to rubbish people's opinions or vieWS on a subject..the man has been found not guilty after all. ..really not nice at all.Oh fgs it was a joke and I wasn't discussing other members I was actually talking to her :rolleyes:

[AnnieK]

I will never agree with a 30 odd year old man sleeping in the same room as pre pubescent boys and it being justified as because he was naive or had a bad childhood. He has ruined multiple lives, whether he laid a finger on them or not. They were children, not playthings

[joeysteele]

Joey what type of passion do you want men to show who have been anally raped as children?



:umm2:


What I've seen from those who have.
Some facial expression that indicates new or mixed emotion.

Anger, even at themselves for what happened.
Regret and filling up for not feeling able to trust any other person.

Dismay and disappointment in now realising what they say had taken place.

Sighs of relief they were now able to get all out in the open, even tears of joy they were able to.

Not just sit there as if they were reading a shopping list or a fairy story.

If all happened as they say, their emotions would be strong and mixed.
With a strong passion too in making the stronger points to show how much this would have, affected their lives.

There was nothing I saw at all, in the whole 2 nights of around 3 and a half hours to demonstrate even the slightest hint of emotion from them.
Sorry LT, you clearly believe they told the truth.
That is your position and I respect that.

This is a serious issue they raise but the time they've done it, means a contradiction and fight against their allegations, from Jackson can't be done.

I'm offsetting that of his past investigation,charges and trial.
Then watching both parts of this documentary from them.
All that's happened is, my suspicious mind has been activated and I'm left believing all is not right from them.
That's my conclusion.

Yours is an opposite one and equally valid.

[Marsh.]

Joey what type of passion do you want men to show who have been anally raped as children?



:umm2:

It's funny considering you questioned the word of all the women who came forward throughout Me Too.

But I suppose if you were already inclined to believe the allegations it's much easier to take them at their word.

[thesheriff443]

Mj never touched me.

[Marsh.]

Mj never touched me.

I'M SPARTACUS!!!

[Beso]

Are tibb banning Michael Jackson song lyrics?

[Beso]

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=yb_ghov9uEMC&pg=PA97&dq=michael+jackson+do+the+bartman&hl=en&sa=X&ei=cgIIUdvjNYek8ASqrYH4AQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=michael%20jackson%20do%20the%20bartman&f=false

[Crimson Dynamo]

What I've seen from those who have.
Some facial expression that indicates new or mixed emotion.

Anger, even at themselves for what happened.
Regret and filling up for not feeling able to trust any other person.

Dismay and disappointment in now realising what they say had taken place.

Sighs of relief they were now able to get all out in the open, even tears of joy they were able to.

Not just sit there as if they were reading a shopping list or a fairy story.

If all happened as they say, their emotions would be strong and mixed.
With a strong passion too in making the stronger points to show how much this would have, affected their lives.

There was nothing I saw at all, in the whole 2 nights of around 3 and a half hours to demonstrate even the slightest hint of emotion from them.
Sorry LT, you clearly believe they told the truth.
That is your position and I respect that.

This is a serious issue they raise but the time they've done it, means a contradiction and fight against their allegations, from Jackson can't be done.

I'm offsetting that of his past investigation,charges and trial.
Then watching both parts of this documentary from them.
All that's happened is, my suspicious mind has been activated and I'm left believing all is not right from them.
That's my conclusion.

Yours is an opposite one and equally valid.

Who have' you seen that has?

[Nancy.]

Here's a video just show you how disgusting people can be. Offering someone $200,000 to say MJ molested their kids when he didn't is appalling.

1104012880180113409

[user104658]

I will never agree with a 30 odd year old man sleeping in the same room as pre pubescent boys and it being justified as because he was naive or had a bad childhood. He has ruined multiple lives, whether he laid a finger on them or not. They were children, not playthingsYes, I think that's what helps make it so believable for me. Whether you believe the sexual allegations or not, it's surely hard to deny that he used a string of children like playthings, or pets. Claiming to love them and that they were special and then casting them aside when they didn't fit the criteria any more. In fact, people don't usually even treat pets like that. A really grim way to treat a human being and certainly amounting to emotional abuse whether the physical allegations are true or not.

But even then it's not that I don't get it. He was treated like "an object" himself pretty much his entire life, it's not difficult to understand that he was broken or why, I guess the differences in opinion just come down to how far things actually went.

[joeysteele]

Who have' you seen that has?

That I cannot reveal.
For personal reasons.
It's rather an inappropriate question
.
However while it isn't likely to get or see all the emotions I listed above.
It is more than likely to get one or more at the very least.
Certainly however in a prolonged detailing account of it all by them too.

Not none at all, as was the case with these 2 guys.

[user104658]

Here's a video just show you how disgusting people can be. Offering someone $200,000 to say MJ molested their kids when he didn't is appalling.



1104012880180113409

Well it's nice to see that this tweet came from an unbiased twitter account.

[Beso]

Here's a video just show you how disgusting people can be. Offering someone $200,000 to say MJ molested their kids when he didn't is appalling.

1104012880180113409




Jermaine has a new hashtag I see...goodness me he must be up all night...hope he don't come on tibb...


He might you know with his bb connections..that and copious amounts of coca in to keep him awake as he fumbles around the internet trying to stop that dollar dissappear ing.

[Marsh.]

Jermaine has a new hashtag I see...goodness me he must be up all night...hope he don't come on tibb...


He might you know with his bb connections..that and copious amounts of coca in to keep him awake as he fumbles around the internet trying to stop that dollar dissappear ing.

Which dollar disappearing?

[Nancy.]

Well it's nice to see that this tweet came from an unbiased twitter account.

Oh surprise surprise!

It doesn't matter who tweeted it.

Did you actually bother to watch the video to see what Ron had to say or did you see the origin and immediately dismiss it as nonsense? I'm guessing the latter.

[user104658]

That I cannot reveal.

For personal reasons.

It's rather an inappropriate question

.

However while it isn't likely to get or see all the emotions I listed above.

It is more than likely to get one or more at the very least.

Certainly however in a prolonged detailing account of it all by them too.



Not none at all, as was the case with these 2 guys.Joey my wife works with addicts, sadly many of whom have been badly abused as childen, and found Robson and Safechuck's demeanor perfectly within the bounds of "normal" for people talking about these things. Not everyone is the same. I'm not saying that you don't also have experience, just that it is again clearly a matter of opinion.

Also worth noting that these aren't spontaneous things being said to a family member, therapist or in a legal setting... They've been written out for filming and filmed over multiple takes. You can't expect the same raw emotional output that you would get in a face to face discussion.

[Kazanne]

Oh surprise surprise!

It doesn't matter who tweeted it.

Did you actually bother to watch the video to see what Ron had to say or did you see the origin and immediately dismiss it as nonsense? I'm guessing the latter.

Some don't want to hear or see things that dont fit with thier beliefs Nancy,dont be silly ,of course these are just skipped by people who are more interested in who tweeted them:smug:

[user104658]

Oh surprise surprise!



It doesn't matter who tweeted it.



Did you actually bother to watch the video to see what Ron had to say or did you see the origin and immediately dismiss it as nonsense? I'm guessing the latter.I've watched it now... And a tabloid newspaper offered him money for a story during the 2005 trial?

I'm not sure what you're saying this is evidence of, other than tabloids being trash, but that's hardly news. I'm not sure what sort of revelation you think this clip is.

[joeysteele]

Joey my wife works with addicts, sadly many of whom have been badly abused as childen, and found Robson and Safechuck's demeanor perfectly within the bounds of "normal" for people talking about these things. Not everyone is the same. I'm not saying that you don't also have experience, just that it is again clearly a matter of opinion.

Also worth noting that these aren't spontaneous things being said to a family member, therapist or in a legal setting... They've been written out for filming and filmed over multiple takes. You can't expect the same raw emotional output that you would get in a face to face discussion.

Of course its a matter of opinion.
That's all I'm expressing.
It is you challenging mine not vice versa.

As I said to LT. I believe they were not telling the truth.
He does, as you do.
That's fine, you must state your opinion/conclusions just as I am.

This documentary was to present what they claim is their case.
I'd guess near everyone watching it made up their mind, if they could, as to believing them or not.

I am stating I don't and why I don't.
With weighing up what they say, with the only references we have from the man accused, when he answered, fought and won against several past allegations when alive.

I can't hear his defence of himself now.
So really these or anyone could say anything.
However, they've chosen to do so after they cannot now be challenged by him.

I think they were mixing truth with fantasy, so I don't believe them, no.

You do, you can accept their word with no questioning of any other motives by them.
That's your opinion.
I simply can't.

It's differing opinions of course it is.
A matter of opinion.
You're not going to change my view and I'm not going to change yours.

I state my opinion and conclusion only.
Obviously.

[AnnieK]

Some don't want to hear or see things that dont fit with thier beliefs Nancy,dont be silly ,of course these are just skipped by people who are more interested in who tweeted them:smug:

That's the same on both sides though Kaz......you don't believe the allegations and so refute any vids from people saying he is guilty. Same as people who believe the allegations against him will brush over pro MJ vids

[Josy]

If this had been Meatloaf he would have been guilty as sin on page one by all membersNot on my watch pal

Meatloaf>>>>>>>MJ

[Vicky.]

If all happened as they say, their emotions would be strong and mixed.


Its one thing saying you disbelieve them. Its quite another when people say stuff like this. There is no 'right' way to disclose abuse, no right way to act, and so on. I think this kind of thing has been the most upsetting of all throughout the past few days. As this does not just apply to this case, its like..any child abuse case.

Like, taking MJ out of the picture here entirely..Do people really think that if someone does not break down when discussing alleged abuse or something then their story cannot be true? If people do not act the way 'we' expect abuse victims to act then they must be lying? Any expert on child abuse (or any abuse really tbh..) will tell you that every person deals with it their own way, and the reactions are not predictable at all. Nor does how upset one gets over the memories mean they suffered more, or anything like that.

[Marsh.]

If there is no "right" way to react to this situation as people can, and do, react different to all manner of things, then why do we have "experts" telling us their demeanour is exactly that of an abuse victim (or in some cases not typical of an abuse victim)?

If the victim can act any and all ways depending on the individual circumstances, the length of time, the type of abuse, the type of person etc etc etc?

[joeysteele]

Its one thing saying you disbelieve them. Its quite another when people say stuff like this. There is no 'right' way to disclose abuse, no right way to act, and so on. I think this kind of thing has been the most upsetting of all throughout the past few days. As this does not just apply to this case, its like..any child abuse case.

Like, taking MJ out of the picture here entirely..Do people really think that if someone does not break down when discussing alleged abuse or something then their story cannot be true? If people do not act the way 'we' expect abuse victims to act then they must be lying? Any expert on child abuse (or any abuse really tbh..) will tell you that every person deals with it their own way, and the reactions are not predictable at all. Nor does how upset one gets over the memories mean they suffered more, or anything like that.

Excuse me.

I can say what I like as to my opinions and conclusions thank you.
Do all of us who disagree with you and others who think they told the truth, just have to roll over and agree with you.

I don't care whether you agree with me or not or what you think is acceptable for me to say, unless I break forum rules that is.

I make my conclusions from what I heard.
I base it on my experiences in life and coming into contact with people who have been affected by grooming and abuse.

You have different experiences.
Fair enough.
I have different ones to yours.

I've listed far more than just emotions as to why I disbelieve them.
If you bothered to properly read my posts.

Honestly, sometimes I wonder if you want people to post in this site.
Unless they are in agreement.

I say what I think and know from my experiences just as all others do.
Including you.

When have I pulled you up on your conclusions.
We state our opinions and you and others are never going to get me to say I believe someone or something if I don't.

Just as I wouldn't expect to make anyone not believe something they did.

Its.my opinions, my conclusions, what I believe and I'll say them how I like.
Within the rules of the forum of course.

Honestly on here is becoming ridiculous, really it is.

[Vicky.]

Haha joey you really need to chill :D

I literally said, its obviously fine to disbelieve them, up to you. Its the abuse myths I find a bit disturbing. Its moreso on facebook than here actually, but its been fair bit here too. The 'if their abuse was as bad as they said it was, no way could they have not told anyone til now'..kind of thing.

[Vicky.]

If there is no "right" way to react to this situation as people can, and do, react different to all manner of things, then why do we have "experts" telling us their demeanour is exactly that of an abuse victim (or in some cases not typical of an abuse victim)?

If the victim can act any and all ways depending on the individual circumstances, the length of time, the type of abuse, the type of person etc etc etc?

Which experts? I am fairly sure I haven't seen that because, well experts know that its so different for each person..as it has been studied, extensively. An expert might of course say 'their behaviour is totally normal for a victim', but this is pretty much because..well any reaction is normal for a victim, and grooming seems to make it even more confusing than random pervs.

There is a more 'typical/common way' I would imagine (for example it seems pretty 'usual' for people to speak out after having kids), but any reaction/behaviour is 'normal' as there is such a wide range..

[joeysteele]

Haha joey you really need to chill :D

I literally said, its obviously fine to disbelieve them, up to you. Its the abuse myths I find a bit disturbing. Its moreso on facebook than here actually, but its been fair bit here too. The 'if their abuse was as bad as they said it was, no way could they have not told anyone til now'..kind of thing.

I'm perfectly chilled thank you.

[Vicky.]

Great :)

[bots]

I can't for the life of me understand why people are getting so worked up about this .... years after the event and years after he is dead :shrug:

[Twosugars]

I haven't changed my mind about it all, despite watching this docu, reading this thread and skim-reading a couple of books back in 2005 and the Bashir docu. Remain sceptical as to MJ being a paedophile. Not saying he was normal, of course. He was infantile, probably had Peter Pan syndrome and other issues too, but I don't consider him a paedo. Not based on the all above mentioned.

[Marsh.]

Which experts? I am fairly sure I haven't seen that because, well experts know that its so different for each person..as it has been studied, extensively. An expert might of course say 'their behaviour is totally normal for a victim', but this is pretty much because..well any reaction is normal for a victim, and grooming seems to make it even more confusing than random pervs.

There is a more 'typical/common way' I would imagine (for example it seems pretty 'usual' for people to speak out after having kids), but any reaction/behaviour is 'normal' as there is such a wide range..

TS mentioned his wife's professional experience.

Joey my wife works with addicts, sadly many of whom have been badly abused as childen, and found Robson and Safechuck's demeanor perfectly within the bounds of "normal" for people talking about these things.

Therefore, to me, this isn't an indicator of truth in believing an accuser's words because literally ANY behaviour can be "normal" for an abuse victim.

So, a lot of people coming out with "I believe them because when you're groomed you would do this or that, and bottle it up and etc etc. This or that is common in childhood abuse" is just as wide of the mark as anyone saying "I don't believe them because they don't shed tears, or look sad, or behave as x, y, z".

Just find it odd that the people in the 'not believing' camp are having that argument used against theirs, when it equally works against the 'believe everything they say' camp. :shrug:

TL;DR These two men can act and say ANYTHING and it's no indication of whether they're telling the truth or not.

[Ramsay]

In part 2, they both clearly show emotion

[Jake.]

In part 2, they both clearly show emotion

.

And it’s nonsense to suggest otherwise.

Also, the La Tayo interview had been popping back up from the 90’s (not sure if it’s been mentioned already)

[GoldHeart]

looks like these 2 will be crying to the bank to ease their so called pain , I'd never heard of wade robson and james safechuck prior to this documentary . The director will be getting alot of exposure to so hope all 3 of them are happy with themselves and hope they can sleep at night after destroying a dead man's legacy ! :bored: .

I would have no issue with this documentary if it wasn't shockingly biased AF ! , also they conveniently delete from history alot of facts & information as it doesn't fit their agenda ,so instead they enjoy demonising Michael as the monster paedo :suspect: . A fair journalist or director with morals & compassion would ask the Jackson family to take part and give their side of the story , aswell as people associated with MJ like Macualy Culkin & Corey feldman .

It would stay impartial and not try and sway the viewers , it would be left for us to make our own judgement . it would just lay out facts with receipts and try and gets both sides & different points of view from the alleged victims aswell as his friends , family & authorities . Not just 2 randoms who come out the wood work for media attention and focusing entirely on their word against a dead man who can no longer defend himself! i have a huge problem with that.

The director sounds like a sleazebag tbqh , and i find it laughable how he insists Robson & Safechuch are "TELLING THE TRUTH" yet anyone who's not convinced who challenges it get's shut down . I guess he must of been sharing a bedroom with MJ and the boys so was he hiding in the cupboard listening to everything??.

The interview Piers did made piers look like the fair person(and that's rare for piers) who tried to get reasonable answers to crucial questions most of us are wondering , and what Reed does is he basically avoids important answers and continues to profess MJ was abusing children . He talks BS , there's nothing mentioned in the documentary that's hard evidence or proof . Everything is still hearsay and it was all originally debunked years ago.

I guess being acquitted means zero then , if years later 2 bitter greedy guys can make up malicious lies . Even though they're both as trustworthy a paper roof !!! :facepalm: . Why do people believe them now? if they're known to be liars , if you keep changing your story then it's basically the boy who cried wolf and i have no time for people like that and you've lost any credibility you once had.

And i don't see any emotion or heartbreak from either of these 2 guys , there's been cases where murderer's have killed their own loved ones and cried their eyes out trying to convince police and everyone that somebody "did it". Later when they're found out experts analyse that those tears were either forced out for the drama or it's just a weird remorseful emotion.

So i personally think even if Wade & James show a shred of "emotion" it's probably either fake or just their own guilt . Also i get the impression the little cogs are turning in their head . Crying & showing emotion doesn't automatically make you a victim especially when it feels calculated & planned.

It speaks volumes that MJ's niece is completely erased despite Wade having like a 10 year relationship with her aswell as other suspicious things

1.Attending Mj's funeral

2. Cheating on gf and using people to get ahead in fame

3 .still trying to be apart of MJ's life

4 .Time line not making sense & alot of inconsistencies

5. keeping gifts from an alleged child molester

6. Emailing himself tabloids about Mj scandals

7. changing their stories over and over again /known to be liars

8. The fact they've been trying to sue Mj's estate for millions for the past few years

9. financial troubles & financial motives to lie for gain

[Beso]

Have you watched it yet goldheart?


If you have you will have seen the numerous clips of Michael denying anything took place.

[chuff me dizzy]

Flip that question around;

Why would he continue to have close, questionable friendships with more children knowing what happened with Jordan Chandler? If they were just innocent friendships that he enjoyed, why wouldn't he say "I know people think it looked bad the last time" and change his way of doing things. And it's not even that he couldn't still befriend children, but why wouldn't he take precautions e.g. always have the kid's parents or another adult around to witness that everything was OK, if any kids sleep over always sleep in separate rooms, just general safeguarding.

Why wouldn't he do that? Unless he had a compulsive reason to want to be alone with children that he wasn't able to keep in check.

:clap1: The reason he carried on doing it was because he was arrogant ... MJ knew he had the power and the money to buy himself out of every situation he got himself into

[chuff me dizzy]

Well it's nice to see that this tweet came from an unbiased twitter account.

:clap1:

[Kazanne]

Haha joey you really need to chill :D

I literally said, its obviously fine to disbelieve them, up to you. Its the abuse myths I find a bit disturbing. Its moreso on facebook than here actually, but its been fair bit here too. The 'if their abuse was as bad as they said it was, no way could they have not told anyone til now'..kind of thing.

If they were so traumatised why beg to go to his funeral,why keep the gifts he gave and why did the one mother sleep with his jacket, most victims would keep well away, There was a case the other week,I don't know the guys name but it was posted on here he faked some homophobic attack ,he was believed at first but got caught out as a liar,Anyone can make anything up and say its fact but you need proof and considering the FBI investigated him for 4 years as did child services and the police,it's not like he was let off because of who he is. I'm with Joey here ,and it's NOT about his music it's about how someone can be vilified by the public and media who totally ignore his acquittal ,it's so wrong he has children too who have to listen and see what people are saying about their dad who was found innocent by a court of law,even when those men tried to sue his estate before it got thrown out, why do you think that is? They were happy to take stuff of him ,he even brought them a house ,but seems they still want more,but that is my opinion and I just know there is more to come.

[Kazanne]

:clap1: The reason he carried on doing it was because he was arrogant ... MJ knew he had the power and the money to buy himself out of every situation he got himself into

You don't know he was arrogant Chuff,I always found him kinda shy,but I suppose to some that would all be an act, people are just sumising about what they THINK he would do.

[chuff me dizzy]

You don't know he was arrogant Chuff,I always found him kinda shy,but I suppose to some that would all be an act, people are just sumising about what they THINK he would do.

I always believed (and still do ) that the shy, simple man/boy Peter Pan thing was fake and a way to draw children in and their parents to believe their children were safe with him

[Ramsay]

If they were so traumatised why beg to go to his funeral,why keep the gifts he gave and why did the one mother sleep with his jacket, most victims would keep well away.

Just Wade went to the funeral and that was because he still had love for MJ at the time, the gifts were kept because there was still love there for MJ and the mother that slept with MJs jacket was Wade's and Wade hadn't come out with his story yet so she still believed MJ was a friend when he died hence sleeping with his jacket. Again you say most victims but when it comes to grooming everyone is different like it has been said MANY times in this thread and elsewhere

[Niamh.]

:clap1: The reason he carried on doing it was because he was arrogant ... MJ knew he had the power and the money to buy himself out of every situation he got himself intoAlso most pedos who actually get convicted reoffend so I don't know why they think MJ would stop just because he's rich? Surely that would make him less likely to stop?

[Wizard.]

La Toya Jackson confirmed this, I believe her!

[user104658]

when those men tried to sue his estate before it got thrown out, why do you think that is?

I feel like this bit needs focused on alone because its been answered so many times but keeps coming back up.

Wade Robson brought a civil case against MJ and one against MJ's management company. The case against MJ was dismissed on technical grounds because it had been too long since his death. The case against the company was dismissed on technical grounds because it was decided that a management company can't be held responsible for the acts of an individual.

It has been made clear BY THE COURTS THEMSELVES that neither case was dismissed based on the validity of the claims being questioned; they never went to trial.

So why keep asking "why do you think those cases were dismissed?" as though you want the answer to be that they were found to be lying. They weren't. It was never examined in court. It was dismissed because of technical grounds.

Theres nothing more to say.

[bots]

Also most pedos who actually get convicted reoffend so I don't know why they think MJ would stop just because he's rich? Surely that would make him less likely to stop?

gary glitter being an obvious example

[chuff me dizzy]

Also most pedos who actually get convicted reoffend so I don't know why they think MJ would stop just because he's rich? Surely that would make him less likely to stop?

Rolf Harris caught in a school playground after his release ............Say no more

[chuff me dizzy]

La Toya Jackson confirmed this, I believe her!

Me too 100% ,her telling about her mother writing cheques to cover MJ arse so they could keep a roof over their heads !! the mother is as sick as him

[chuff me dizzy]

I feel like this bit needs focused on alone because its been answered so many times but keeps coming back up.

Wade Robson brought a civil case against MJ and one against MJ's management company. The case against MJ was dismissed on technical grounds because it had been too long since his death. The case against the company was dismissed on technical grounds because it was decided that a management company can't be held responsible for the acts of an individual.

It has been made clear BY THE COURTS THEMSELVES that neither case was dismissed based on the validity of the claims being questioned; they never went to trial.

So why keep asking "why do you think those cases were dismissed?" as though you want the answer to be that they were found to be lying. They weren't. It was never examined in court. It was dismissed because of technical grounds.

Theres nothing more to say.

:clap1:

[Kazanne]

I feel like this bit needs focused on alone because its been answered so many times but keeps coming back up.

Wade Robson brought a civil case against MJ and one against MJ's management company. The case against MJ was dismissed on technical grounds because it had been too long since his death. The case against the company was dismissed on technical grounds because it was decided that a management company can't be held responsible for the acts of an individual.

It has been made clear BY THE COURTS THEMSELVES that neither case was dismissed based on the validity of the claims being questioned; they never went to trial.

So why keep asking "why do you think those cases were dismissed?" as though you want the answer to be that they were found to be lying. They weren't. It was never examined in court. It was dismissed because of technical grounds.

Theres nothing more to say.

So why did he get aquitted at his trial ?

[Beso]

So why did he get aquitted at his trial ?

I'm not sure but there is a story going round that he was being investigated for abusing 2 Mexican boys by the FBI and they seemingly found a video intitled Michael Jackson favourite boys at neverland..seemingly the FBI did not further any investigation because jackson was about to receive an award from the president...Clinton.



So it was probably down to his fame and power.

[Underscore]

He is a creep

lock him up

[chuff me dizzy]

I would like to know if the bank showed all the cheques La Toya claimed she saw her Mother write to parents of some children

[Kazanne]

I'm not sure but there is a story going round that he was being investigated for abusing 2 Mexican boys by the FBI and they seemingly found a video intitled Michael Jackson favourite boys at neverland..seemingly the FBI did not further any investigation because jackson was about to receive an award from the president...Clinton.



So it was probably down to his fame and power.

So you are you saying the FBI,the police and child services are all liars and corrupt?plus no doubt there will be 100s of allegations now they are exactly what you said 'stories'

[Kazanne]

I would like to know if the bank showed all the cheques La Toya claimed she saw her Mother write to parents of some children

She retracted it all later ,she had fell out with the family at that time,and I am sure if she was telling the truth cheques can be traced and letters.

[Kazanne]

This is also an opposite opinion, if anyone cares to bother to hear some of the other side of this ,maybe this is why some believe those two are not as they seem and Parmy the boy with cancer Gavin is mentioned in here,its a bit annoying as it starts with a song so fast forward to the interviews then there is another break too so fast forward too, I know some wont be bothered but some might like to hear both sides,fast forward to 7.07 then again later, it's quite long ,but interesting.

w4DtFqpLVrs

[joeysteele]

So why did he get aquitted at his trial ?

He got acquitted Kazanne because after a high profile trial,and extensive thorough investigation.
He was found to be not guilty on not just one of the charges he was in court for, but for every one of them.

Something it seems, is considered irrelevant.

As for for their cash claim they made.
The court dismissed it.
Not giving any consideration to it.
Yes the time lapse was relevant however the court effectively ruled out the claim.

No footnote to the decision at all.

Why wait so long to start and change their story and then make a claim is open to all possibilities.

It could be they are now telling the truth, as some believe.
I still don't.
My suspicious mind leads me to thinking they possibly may have waited to see if they'd been left anything from Michael Jackson.
When they hadn't.
Hence where things are now.

That possibility will be shouted down strongly I know that.

However to me, in my personal view only, it's a valid avenue to go down for possible consideration.

[Kazanne]

He got acquitted Kazanne because after a high profile trial,and extensive thorough investigation.
He was found to be not guilty on not just one of the charges he was in court for, but for every one of them.

Something it seems, is considered irrelevant.

As for for their cash claim they made.
The court dismissed it.
Not giving any consideration to it.
Yes the time lapse was relevant however the court effectively ruled out the claim.

No footnote to the decision at all.

Why wait so long to start and change their story and then make a claim is open to all possibilities.

It could be they are now telling the truth, as some believe.
I still don't.
My suspicious mind leads me to thinking they possibly may have waited to see if they'd been left anything from Michael Jackson.
When they hadn't.
Hence where things are now.

That possibility will be shouted down strongly I know that.

However to me, in my personal view only, it's a valid avenue to go down for possible consideration.

Try and watch the video I have just posted Joey,let me know what you think, it sounds more truthful than they did.This video is about all the boys including Gavin, pointless some watching as they have already made thier minds up,but, we are not alone ,lol (excuse the pun)

[Nancy.]

This is also an opposite opinion, if anyone cares to bother to hear some of the other side of this ,maybe this is why some believe those two are not as they seem and Parmy the boy with cancer Gavin is mentioned in here,its a bit annoying as it starts with a song so fast forward to the interviews then there is another break too so fast forward too, I know some wont be bothered but some might like to hear both sides,fast forward to 7.07 then again later, it's quite long ,but interesting.

w4DtFqpLVrs

:clap1: Yeah, I saw this yesterday. Excellent video.

[Beso]

So you are you saying the FBI,the police and child services are all liars and corrupt?plus no doubt there will be 100s of allegations now they are exactly what you said 'stories'

There is photographic evidence of the documents at the time but I can't be arsed looking for them again.

[Beso]

This is also an opposite opinion, if anyone cares to bother to hear some of the other side of this ,maybe this is why some believe those two are not as they seem and Parmy the boy with cancer Gavin is mentioned in here,its a bit annoying as it starts with a song so fast forward to the interviews then there is another break too so fast forward too, I know some wont be bothered but some might like to hear both sides,fast forward to 7.07 then again later, it's quite long ,but interesting.

w4DtFqpLVrs

I will when the rugby's done.....but I already don't trust his beard.

[Kazanne]

There is photographic evidence of the documents at the time but I can't be arsed looking for them again.

If there was that would have been also used against him, sorry Parmy no way would FBI , child services and police all be corrupt and if there is evidence that would generate huge amounts of publicity and money.

[Kazanne]

I will when the rugby's done.....but I already don't trust his beard.

:laugh::laugh: he's just the broadcaster, I hope your teams ball busts,lol

[Marsh.]

She retracted it all later ,she had fell out with the family at that time,and I am sure if she was telling the truth cheques can be traced and letters.

Yeah wasn't this during the period she was with her abusive husband who kept her at arms length from her family?

I'm sure she discussed this in CBB.

[Cherie]

:laugh::laugh: he's just the broadcaster, I hope your teams ball busts,lol

:laugh2:

[thesheriff443]

Mj wore a glove so there’s bound to be no evidence.

[arista]

https://c-6rtwjumjzx7877x24nx2eifnqdrfnqx2ehtx2ezp.g00.daily mail.co.uk/g00/3_c-6bbb.ifnqdrfnq.ht.zp_/c-6RTWJUMJZX77x24myyux78x3ax2fx2fn.ifnqdrfnq.ht.zpx2 f6x78x2f7564x2f57x2f73x2f76x2f65972361-1203752-nrflj-f-71_6006834242008.oulx3fn65h.rfwpx3dnrflj_$/$/$/$/$/$/$


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6788287/Michael-Jackson-fans-crowdfunding-campaign-adverts-London-buses-raises-14-000.html?ito=social-facebook

[thesheriff443]

Billy jeans not my lover he’s just a kid that claims I am the one

I’m starting with the man in the mirror I’m asking him to change his ways

Your dealing with a smooth criminal

[arista]

Good Remix thesheriff

[Marsh.]

:unsure:

[Marsh.]

https://c-6rtwjumjzx7877x24nx2eifnqdrfnqx2ehtx2ezp.g00.daily mail.co.uk/g00/3_c-6bbb.ifnqdrfnq.ht.zp_/c-6RTWJUMJZX77x24myyux78x3ax2fx2fn.ifnqdrfnq.ht.zpx2 f6x78x2f7564x2f57x2f73x2f76x2f65972361-1203752-nrflj-f-71_6006834242008.oulx3fn65h.rfwpx3dnrflj_$/$/$/$/$/$/$


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6788287/Michael-Jackson-fans-crowdfunding-campaign-adverts-London-buses-raises-14-000.html?ito=social-facebook

Not Seany from BB8 :skull:

[Kazanne]

Yeah wasn't this during the period she was with her abusive husband who kept her at arms length from her family?

I'm sure she discussed this in CBB.

Yes she did,so not really creditable either:laugh:There seems to be more evidence to prove that he is innocent than there is to say he's not,

[Alf]

Billy jeans not my lover he’s just a kid that claims I am the one

I’m starting with the man in the mirror I’m asking him to change his ways

Your dealing with a smooth criminalSheriff, the two of us need look no more
We both found what we were looking for
With a friend to call my own
I'll never be alone
And you, my friend, will see
You got a friend in me

[AnnieK]

Yes she did,so not really creditable either:laugh:

Her being coerced to tell lies by her husband whilst in an abusive relationship and then changing her story when she was out of that situation is the exact same narrative as the boys being in a groomed abusive relationship with MJ believing they were in a loving relationship and then saying the opposite at a later date. :shrug:

[Kazanne]

Her being coerced to tell lies by her husband whilst in an abusive relationship and then changing her story when she was out of that situation is the exact same narrative as the boys being in a groomed abusive relationship with MJ believing they were in a loving relationship and then saying the opposite at a later date. :shrug:

Maybe, but if you watch the video I posted you can maybe get an idea of why some people do not take those two seriously,

[bots]

I can say with great certainty that Bubbles was innocent

[Crimson Dynamo]

I can say with great certainty that Bubbles was innocent

Im forever blowing Bubbles?

i bet you were you dirty pig

[user104658]

There are commemorative chocolate teapots on ebay at the moment, for all the fans who still believe in Michael's innocence.

[Kazanne]

There are commemorative chocolate teapots on ebay at the moment, for all the fans who still believe in Michael's innocence.

Well they'de be more reliable than those two money grabbers

[Niamh.]

Im forever blowing Bubbles?



i bet you were you dirty pig[emoji1787]

[Smithy]

La Toya Jackson confirmed this, I believe her!

She also said her abusive husband beat her and forced her to say those things, she’s hardly credible

[chuff me dizzy]

She retracted it all later ,she had fell out with the family at that time,and I am sure if she was telling the truth cheques can be traced and letters.

La Toya made the same claim 2 or 3 times over the years

[chuff me dizzy]

If there was that would have been also used against him, sorry Parmy no way would FBI , child services and police all be corrupt and if there is evidence that would generate huge amounts of publicity and money.

McCann case ? another major cover up

[Nancy.]

Well they'de be more reliable than those two money grabbers

:laugh: Exactly.

[chuff me dizzy]

https://c-6rtwjumjzx7877x24nx2eifnqdrfnqx2ehtx2ezp.g00.daily mail.co.uk/g00/3_c-6bbb.ifnqdrfnq.ht.zp_/c-6RTWJUMJZX77x24myyux78x3ax2fx2fn.ifnqdrfnq.ht.zpx2 f6x78x2f7564x2f57x2f73x2f76x2f65972361-1203752-nrflj-f-71_6006834242008.oulx3fn65h.rfwpx3dnrflj_$/$/$/$/$/$/$


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6788287/Michael-Jackson-fans-crowdfunding-campaign-adverts-London-buses-raises-14-000.html?ito=social-facebook

Disgusting ,who allowed this ?

[chuff me dizzy]

https://www.facebook.com/theleftbible/videos/418996412179305/UzpfSTEwMDAwNjY5NjMwOTE2MzoyMzc5NjM2MzI1NjAyODg4/

Creepiest thing ever !!

[Kazanne]

McCann case ? another major cover up

Did you watch the video I posted Chuff looks like it's been ignored but I'm not surprised,looks like people don't want to hear the other side of all this,so until I get proof imo he will always be innocent, this is nothing to do with Saville,Harris,McCanns, this is something totally different,Latoya said those things once then retracted it but I suppose its been resurrected again with a little more added.

[arista]

Disgusting ,who allowed this ?


A load of MJ fans
Crowd Funding UK

[Kazanne]

A load of MJ fans
Crowd Funding UK

Good for them I say,why should those that think he is innocent be silenced.

[chuff me dizzy]

A load of MJ fans
Crowd Funding UK

Pity they have nothing better to do with their money !! Do they not see posting posters on buses and bus stop doesn't prove Jack ? and will never take away his crimes ?

[chuff me dizzy]

Did you watch the video I posted Chuff looks like it's been ignored but I'm not surprised,looks like people don't want to hear the other side of all this,so until I get proof imo he will always be innocent, this is nothing to do with Saville,Harris,McCanns, this is something totally different,Latoya said those things once then retracted it but I suppose its been resurrected again with a little more added.

Kaz I HATE disagreeing with you, we 99% of time agree with each other but I truly cant in this case :kiss:

[Kazanne]

Pity they have nothing better to do with their money !! Do they not see posting posters on buses and bus stop doesn't prove Jack ? and will never take away his crimes ?

And two lying gold diggers doesn't prove anything either

[Marsh.]

Pity they have nothing better to do with their money !! Do they not see posting posters on buses and bus stop doesn't prove Jack ? and will never take away his crimes ?

Two men talking to a camera doesn't prove Jack, Colin or Brian.

[arista]

Pity they have nothing better to do with their money !! Do they not see posting posters on buses and bus stop doesn't prove Jack ? and will never take away his crimes ?




They will not watch the Docu's
they protested outside thew London Ch4 building

[Kazanne]

Kaz I HATE disagreeing with you, we 99% of time agree with each other but I truly cant in this case :kiss:

Same here Chuff but there is no way at this point in time do I believe any of this,did you watch the video I posted earlier ? the Beach radio one a total different take on it ,but some don't want to aknowledge that,so choose to ignore it,so we will have to disagree here Chuff,but no hard feelings about that we all see things differently.:wavey:

[Kazanne]

They will not watch the Docu's
they protested outside thew London Ch4 building

I watched it arista,I didn't want to as didn't want to give either of them creedence but I wanted to debate it so watched,I still do not believe them.

[chuff me dizzy]

Did you watch the video I posted Chuff looks like it's been ignored but I'm not surprised,looks like people don't want to hear the other side of all this,so until I get proof imo he will always be innocent, this is nothing to do with Saville,Harris,McCanns, this is something totally different,Latoya said those things once then retracted it but I suppose its been resurrected again with a little more added.

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

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

3) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo4u_P_R0p4

[chuff me dizzy]

Same here Chuff but there is no way at this point in time do I believe any of this,did you watch the video I posted earlier ? the Beach radio one a total different take on it ,but some don't want to aknowledge that,so choose to ignore it,so we will have to disagree here Chuff,but no hard feelings about that we all see things differently.:wavey:

I will watch it now xx Just clicked on it, its over an hour long, will watch later on tv xxxx

[GoldHeart]

I watched it arista,I didn't want to as didn't want to give either of them creedence but I wanted to debate it so watched,I still do not believe them.

I wrote a long post this morning about why I think the abuse allegations Are BS , also how many people know about Wade's dodgy background, he use to email his mother asking her for details about their time with MJ and what happened, hmm why would he do that if he remembers so vividly his graphic abuse?! :suspect: . I don't trust either of the men but especially Wade !.

Wade also emailed himself old tabloids about MJ scandals, so he could get inspiration for his accusations :facepalm: .

[joeysteele]

And two lying gold diggers doesn't prove anything either

They don't indeed.
You are right and that's how I see them too.
The more I think about it.

As for hearing about Michael Jackson's so called crimes.
What has he been convicted of again.
Oh nothing.

In a court, these 2 cross exanined, the one especially on the bloodstained underwear claim.
I would dare bet they'd be wiped the floor with as to their claims.

I enjoyed the video you posted Kazanne.
Sadly near all of it will probably be dismissed on here.


However I can take on board easily what was said in it about Jackson feeling he could only trust children.


I think he allowed it unwisely to be taken to an extreme but even moreso after watching these 2 talking.
I don't hold he committed anything sexual with them.

Money corrupts.
It seems these got less favourable because the spending and gifts from MJ had dried up as to them.

[Cherie]

Okay so I am half an hour in and I have a question to all the parents on this thread, would you be speaking so fondly about someone who molested your child....so far its mainly Jimmys mother but she doesn't appear to have any anger or regret so far, just wow it was all so wonderful, first class travel yay!


Does she show any anger at all as the interviews progress :umm2:


also is it me but I cant tell the difference between Wade and Jimmy in appearance :skull:

[GoldHeart]

Okay so I am half an hour in and I have a question to all the parents on this thread, would you be speaking so fondly about someone who molested your child....so far its mainly Jimmys mother but she doesn't appear to have any anger or regret so far, just wow it was all so wonderful, first class travel yay!


Does she show any anger at all as the interviews progress :umm2:


also is it me but I cant tell the difference between Wade and Jimmy in appearance :skull:

I saw a clip and they can pass for brothers :facepalm:

[rusticgal]

Okay so I am half an hour in and I have a question to all the parents on this thread, would you be speaking so fondly about someone who molested your child....so far its mainly Jimmys mother but she doesn't appear to have any anger or regret so far, just wow it was all so wonderful, first class travel yay!


Does she show any anger at all as the interviews progress :umm2:


also is it me but I cant tell the difference between Wade and Jimmy in appearance :skull:


We are going to watch it tonight...or Part 1 anyway.
What parent would let their young child sleep around his house in the first place. It seems the mothers are more awestruck with MJ than the welfare of their children.

...and from clips I have seen the two do look alike.

[user104658]

Okay so I am half an hour in and I have a question to all the parents on this thread, would you be speaking so fondly about someone who molested your child....so far its mainly Jimmys mother but she doesn't appear to have any anger or regret so far, just wow it was all so wonderful, first class travel yay!





Does she show any anger at all as the interviews progress :umm2:





also is it me but I cant tell the difference between Wade and Jimmy in appearance :skull:The do look very alike, perhaps MJ had a "type".

To answer your question... No I don't understand their demeanor, HOWEVER, the parents in the Netflix (bizarre) documentary "Abducted in plain sight" have a very similar demeanor in their interviews (smiling and laughing a lot, the mother talking about him fondly) so who knows. There's certainly no doubt over the abuser's guilt in that case so :shrug:.

My honest opinion is that Wade's mother is just coping as well as she can; she seems pretty upset towards the end and her relationship with all of her kids is pretty strained now.

Safechuck's mother just seems kind of callous I guess? But who knows. Could be a defense mechanism I suppose.

[Niamh.]

Okay so I am half an hour in and I have a question to all the parents on this thread, would you be speaking so fondly about someone who molested your child....so far its mainly Jimmys mother but she doesn't appear to have any anger or regret so far, just wow it was all so wonderful, first class travel yay!





Does she show any anger at all as the interviews progress :umm2:





also is it me but I cant tell the difference between Wade and Jimmy in appearance :skull:Jimmy' s mother does but Wades mom is just odd

[Niamh.]

The do look very alike, perhaps MJ had a "type".

To answer your question... No I don't understand their demeanor, HOWEVER, the parents in the Netflix (bizarre) documentary "Abducted in plain sight" have a very similar demeanor in their interviews (smiling and laughing a lot, the mother talking about him fondly) so who knows. There's certainly no doubt over the abuser's guilt in that case so :shrug:.

My honest opinion is that Wade's mother is just coping as well as she can; she seems pretty upset towards the end and her relationship with all of her kids is pretty strained now.

Safechuck's mother just seems kind of callous I guess? But who knows. Could be a defense mechanism I suppose.I thought Jimmy s mother seemed more guilty

[Niamh.]

But yeah the abducted in plain sight parents kind if prove that maybe there's just a type of parent like that too. I mean even allowing your 7 year old sleep with a grown man is bizarre behaviour for a parent even if he never touched them

[Marsh.]

Well there were those mothers who handed their babies over to that Ian Watkins. Humanity can be so depraved.

[Vicky.]

Well there were those mothers who handed their babies over to that Ian Watkins. Humanity can be so depraved.

Jesus, I had forgotten about that case..makes me feel sick to my stomach even thinking about it.

[Niamh.]

Well there were those mothers who handed their babies over to that Ian Watkins. Humanity can be so depraved.It's hard to even try and figure out what goes on in people like that's minds

[user104658]

I thought Jimmy s mother seemed more guiltyYou might be right to be fair. I thought she seemed more accepting of what happened but then, it's been nearly 15 years since James told her (as he told her long before anyone else, back in 2004, but made her promise not to tell anyone else) so she's had time to process it?

Wades mum gets upset towards the end but thinking about it, it feels more like she feels sorry for herself and the damage its done to her relationships than "guilt".

[Cherie]

and where are the Dads, sorry I paused at 30 minutes as that was enough in one hit, as I found it kind of boring ....sorry... did the Dads feature?

Jimmys Mom is like a stepford wife, so coiffed and I think she made them use a filter on her :laugh:

[Cherie]

The stand out line so far is Michael introduced me to masturbation in Paris

[user104658]

and where are the Dads, sorry I paused at 30 minutes as that was enough in one hit, as I found it kind of boring ....sorry... did the Dads feature?



Jimmys Mom is like a stepford wife, so coiffed and I think she made them use a filter on her [emoji23]James' father I'm not entirely sure. Wade Robson's father killed himself after the mother took him and his sister off to live in the US :umm2: (though being fair it seems he had lifelong mental health issues.)

[Cherie]

James' father I'm not entirely sure. Wade Robson's father killed himself after the mother took him and his sister off to live in the US :umm2: (though being fair it seems he had lifelong mental health issues.)

oh right, yes taking him to the US from Australia does seem Stage Mom gone into overdrive

[Niamh.]

James' father I'm not entirely sure. Wade Robson's father killed himself after the mother took him and his sister off to live in the US :umm2: (though being fair it seems he had lifelong mental health issues.)He killed himself after the older brother left him to join them years later iirc

[Cherie]

He killed himself after the older brother left him to join them years later iirc

how cold is that, that is why I am having difficulty with their stance now, they are obviously money hungry!

[Niamh.]

how cold is that, that is why I am having difficulty with their stance now, they are obviously money hungry!What the brother leaving? Ah it's hardly his fault for wanting to see the rest if his family though?

[Cherie]

What the brother leaving? Ah it's hardly his fault for wanting to see the rest if his family though?

well its odd to up sticks and go to another country, but then she did say she was a stage Mom,,, re the brother wasn't he much older? so he must have had a life in Australia...its all very odd

[GoldHeart]

Interesting how facts and important information get ignored while fabrications and hearsay take centre stage :whistle:

[Cherie]

Okay so now I am at the bit where Wade's whole family abandon him at the Neverland ranch at 7 years of age while they bugger (pun) off to camp at the Grand Canyon in their motor home...this is parents...AND grand parents.... and no one raised a flag ..? so either they thought MJ was completely innocuous or they didn't in which case they should be prosecuted for child neglect?


also I find Wade's memory of minor details that happened in 1990 pretty incredible

[Kazanne]

Did anyone bother to watch the beach radio video I posted as not had any feedback I wonder why,?

[Cherie]

I'm actually stunned that anyone could watch this white wash and not be cynical about the motives behind it

[rusticgal]

I have just watched the first programme. I find the two men believable. It’s easy to see the two sides of the coin but At the end of the day MJs relationships with young boys is simply unnatural. If he wanted to relive his childhood and have the company of young children to play with, so be it. However wanting them to share his bed takes it to another level...and there is no way they just slept together.
As for the parents...who in their right mind would allow their 7 year old to spend the night with him...let alone leave him there for a week on his own. These two mothers were the real gold diggers and opportunists and they should be ashamed of themselves.
MJ was a massive talent..but he is not the only person who spent his childhood in the spotlight. I don’t know how he got away with it...but then many did and it’s all coming to the fore.

[Niamh.]

well its odd to up sticks and go to another country, but then she did say she was a stage Mom,,, re the brother wasn't he much older? so he must have had a life in Australia...its all very oddYeah it was odd the mom did that but not the son I don't think, people are allowed to move?

[Niamh.]

I have just watched the first programme. I find the two men believable. It’s easy to see the two sides of the coin but At the end of the day MJs relationships with young boys is simply unnatural. If he wanted to relive his childhood and have the company of young children to play with, so be it. However wanting them to share his bed takes it to another level...and there is no way they just slept together.

As for the parents...who in their right mind would allow their 7 year old to spend the night with him...let alone leave him there for a week on his own. These two mothers were the real gold diggers and opportunists and they should be ashamed of themselves.

MJ was a massive talent..but he is not the only person who spent his childhood in the spotlight. I don’t know how he got away with it...but then many did and it’s all coming to the fore.Pretty much my thoughts in a nut shell

[joeysteele]

Did anyone bother to watch the beach radio video I posted as not had any feedback I wonder why,?

I gave you feedback Kazanne earlier.
It was interesting.

Of course it was more in line with my thoughts anyway but it was informative and it made strong points.

Thank you for posting it.
I still think overall it would be poo pooed as just biased towards him on here sadly.
However it had facts, no changes of opinion and I think opened the door to the more likely scenario, this was a carefully rehearsed, non confrontational, no awkward questioning documentary.
.Done in the hope probably it could help with the appeal they have coming up, against the Jackson estate.

I don't think I've watched anything like this, where all through the people talking on it, came across so unconvincing as to the content of what they were claiming.

[Kazanne]

I gave you feedback Kazanne earlier.
It was interesting.

Of course it was more in line with my thoughts anyway but it was informative and it made strong points.

Thank you for posting it.
I still think overall it would be poo pooed as just biased towards him on here sadly.
However it had facts, no changes of opinion and I think opened the door to the more likely scenario, this was a carefully rehearsed, non confrontational, no awkward questioning documentary.
.Done in the hope probably it could help with the appeal they have coming up, against the Jackson estate.

I don't think I've watched anything like this, where all through the people talking on it, came across so unconvincing as to the content of what they were claiming.

Sorry Joey yes you did give feedback on it, yes it in line with what I think aswell,but yes you are right people wont be interested in something that might make them question the validity of those two,This ones an eye opener too about someone changing thier mind.
E0uaJSYX68g

[GoldHeart]

Sorry Joey yes you did give feedback on it, yes it in line with what I think aswell,but yes you are right people wont be interested in something that might make them question the validity of those two,This ones an eye opener too about someone changing thier mind.
E0uaJSYX68g

Kaz there's another good video on YouTube which uses proper facts and goes into more information . But of course important stuff gets ignored as we must listen to the golden boys and ignore everything else :bored: . And all of a sudden the director Reed knows everything and is an expert on Wade & James' abuse allegations.

[GoldHeart]

This video highlights just how dishonest and unstable Wade really is

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgSbSotJgUY&t=4s

[AnnieK]

My final word on this (as I believe we are just gping round in circles) is this....forget MJ is involved. If a rich unfamous guy, in his 30s, created a childhood paradise ideal, fairground, unlimited treats etc etc, invited children and families to stay, asked pre pubescent children to sleep in his room, away from their parents.....then after treating them this way, in a few years after they were older, dropped them for younger boys who became gia favourite.....is anyone really going to suggest that there was no ulterior motive?

I am, and have said many times through this thread, shocked at the lack of empathy for these boys. Regardless of the fact of whether you believe jackson abused them sexually, he abused them emotionally by dropping them when they were older and replacing them with younger models. At best, its abandonment.

As a parent, it is like having an child then sending it away when you give birth to another.

[Marsh.]

And the point of a hypothetical concerning a non existent man is?

The point is this IS about Michael Jackson which colours the discussion for good and bad on both sides of the argument.

Asking how you'd react to Ken next door inviting kids in for sleepovers is not relevant.

The context to the entire thing is so specific there's no use in an "imagine this was someone else".

[GoldHeart]

My final word on this (as I believe we are just gping round in circles) is this....forget MJ is involved. If a rich unfamous guy, in his 30s, created a childhood paradise ideal, fairground, unlimited treats etc etc, invited children and families to stay, asked pre pubescent children to sleep in his room, away from their parents.....then after treating them this way, in a few years after they were older, dropped them for younger boys who became gia favourite.....is anyone really going to suggest that there was no ulterior motive?

I am, and have said many times through this thread, shocked at the lack of empathy for these boys. Regardless of the fact of whether you believe jackson abused them sexually, he abused them emotionally by dropping them when they were older and replacing them with younger models. At best, its abandonment.

As a parent, it is like having an child then sending it away when you give birth to another.

Once again the same argument about the "average joe down the road" :sleep: .

Why won't you also realise that MJ was a target for greedy families who saw him as a cash cow and too gullible and trusting . Average Joe down the road wouldn't be accused multiple times of "child molestation" while paying out millions , he'd just be thrown in prison if there was substantial evidence . You don't sue a potential paedophile for his money , you report him to the police and you hope he never get's let out of prison!!. That's what justice looks like .

Why do people ignore the fact that MJ was acquitted and was investigated for years and authorities , FBI you name it went in his personal business , his home , his documents everything he owned . He was the most scrutinised person ever !! .

Nobody said it was sensible what MJ was doing , but it's so easy to see things as weird and uncomfortable when people twist things and don't get facts straight . Corey feldman said him and MJ spoke for ages and it was so innocent there was nothing that ever made him suspect MJ was a child molester .

Maculay is the same he praising MJ and continues to say it was just a fun friendship , there was nothing inappropriate going on . Maculay is the type of guy and same with Corey who wouldn't be afraid to confess all , so why do people ignore these 2? but we're suppose to believe wade & james?? who are proved liars!! this is what i can't get my head round people supporting them :facepalm: . Say a lie enough times and people jump on the band wagon especially when it becomes more and more graphic and shocking like what we're seeing .

It just reminds me of the other one sided slanderous programme they did on MJ 15 years ago where again shocking accusations were made about MJ showering with kids etc . Then later on the same person who claimed she saw MJ in a shower with a young kid later admitted she was lying and just saw MJ on his own in the shower! . All money motivated!! .


When facts are laid out for people their so called accusations crumble or they contradict themselves.

[Niamh.]

My final word on this (as I believe we are just gping round in circles) is this....forget MJ is involved. If a rich unfamous guy, in his 30s, created a childhood paradise ideal, fairground, unlimited treats etc etc, invited children and families to stay, asked pre pubescent children to sleep in his room, away from their parents.....then after treating them this way, in a few years after they were older, dropped them for younger boys who became gia favourite.....is anyone really going to suggest that there was no ulterior motive?

I am, and have said many times through this thread, shocked at the lack of empathy for these boys. Regardless of the fact of whether you believe jackson abused them sexually, he abused them emotionally by dropping them when they were older and replacing them with younger models. At best, its abandonment.

As a parent, it is like having an child then sending it away when you give birth to another.Absolutely Annie.

[Jordan.]

And the point of a hypothetical concerning a non existent man is?

The point is this IS about Michael Jackson which colours the discussion for good and bad on both sides of the argument.

Asking how you'd react to Ken next door inviting kids in for sleepovers is not relevant.

The context to the entire thing is so specific there's no use in an "imagine this was someone else".

This. I think comparing him to the average bloke off the council estate is a really lazy argument because it completely dismisses the unorthodox upbringing he had. You have to take into account MJ himself was thrust into an adult world at an early age and spent the majority of his childhood surrounded by and socialing with adults therefore it became something that was "normalised" to him, he was oblivious and naive to how anyone would find it perverted or seedy.

[GoldHeart]

This. I think comparing him to the average bloke off the council estate is a really lazy argument because it completely dismisses the unorthodox upbringing he had. You have to take into account MJ himself was thrust into an adult world at an early age and spent the majority of his childhood surrounded by and socialing with adults therefore it became something that was "normalised" to him, he was oblivious and naive to how anyone would find it perverted or seedy.

That average joe down the road argument is tiresome and irrelevant. If MJ was a nobody living down the road in a 1 bedroom flat with no money to his name then he wouldn't of been used by all these families in the first place and he wouldn't of been seen as a cash cow which people seem to forget .

Celebrities are easy targets especially ones as naive and trusting as MJ and they get accused all the time , the alleged victims want their 10 mins of fame and a cut of money ! . Greed makes some people do and say some disgusting stuff ! :bored:.

People sell lies to tabloids all the time .pretty pathetic really when they have to stoop so low for a quick buck .

[joeysteele]

Once again the same argument about the "average joe down the road" :sleep: .

Why won't you also realise that MJ was a target for greedy families who saw him as a cash cow and too gullible and trusting . Average Joe down the road wouldn't be accused multiple times of "child molestation" while paying out millions , he'd just be thrown in prison if there was substantial evidence . You don't sue a potential paedophile for his money , you report him to the police and you hope he never get's let out of prison!!. That's what justice looks like .

Why do people ignore the fact that MJ was acquitted and was investigated for years and authorities , FBI you name it went in his personal business , his home , his documents everything he owned . He was the most scrutinised person ever !! .

Nobody said it was sensible what MJ was doing , but it's so easy to see things as weird and uncomfortable when people twist things and don't get facts straight . Corey feldman said him and MJ spoke for ages and it was so innocent there was nothing that ever made him suspect MJ was a child molester .

Maculay is the same he praising MJ and continues to say it was just a fun friendship , there was nothing inappropriate going on . Maculay is the type of guy and same with Corey who wouldn't be afraid to confess all , so why do people ignore these 2? but we're suppose to believe wade & james?? who are proved liars!! this is what i can't get my head round people supporting them :facepalm: . Say a lie enough times and people jump on the band wagon especially when it becomes more and more graphic and shocking like what we're seeing .

It just reminds me of the other one sided slanderous programme they did on MJ 15 years ago where again shocking accusations were made about MJ showering with kids etc . Then later on the same person who claimed she saw MJ in a shower with a young kid later admitted she was lying and just saw MJ on his own in the shower! . All money motivated!! .


When facts are laid out for people their so called accusations crumble or they contradict themselves.

Absolutely brilliant post Goldheart.

It's incredible that a full legal process resulting in acquittal, is just bypassed and seen as irrelevant.
Because years later, when they got nothing as yet, from the Jackson estate, 2 clear liars then before, have changed their minds.

Excellent post and I agree with Marsh too.

Plus since we are in the realms of hypothetical scenarios,taking MJ out while only to take account of the 2 currently being in the media.

How about in a hypothetical scenario, if this was a loved one of those supporting these 2, now being accused like this, by 2 people.
When their loved one had been investigated, charged, found not guilty of ALL charges, and who had now died.

Would they be wanting people to condemn their own loved one on the strength of 2 mind changers, seeking money from an estate.
Taking part in a rehearsed, no questions asked of them, documentary and no challenge to their claims.

I can answer easily for myself,NO, I would not.
I've always hated these kangaroo media court style of trial and judgement.
Which is again all this is, despite years of thorough investigation, charges and trial, then full unreserved acquittal..
That's the one full, true known fact on Michael Jackson and this serious issue.

[Cherie]

The do look very alike, perhaps MJ had a "type".

To answer your question... No I don't understand their demeanor, HOWEVER, the parents in the Netflix (bizarre) documentary "Abducted in plain sight" have a very similar demeanor in their interviews (smiling and laughing a lot, the mother talking about him fondly) so who knows. There's certainly no doubt over the abuser's guilt in that case so :shrug:.

My honest opinion is that Wade's mother is just coping as well as she can; she seems pretty upset towards the end and her relationship with all of her kids is pretty strained now.

Safechuck's mother just seems kind of callous I guess? But who knows. Could be a defense mechanism I suppose.

they dont look alike as kids though, only as adults, I wonder is something in the edit has been done to achieve this similarity in appearance :suspect:

[Cherie]

My final word on this (as I believe we are just gping round in circles) is this....forget MJ is involved. If a rich unfamous guy, in his 30s, created a childhood paradise ideal, fairground, unlimited treats etc etc, invited children and families to stay, asked pre pubescent children to sleep in his room, away from their parents.....then after treating them this way, in a few years after they were older, dropped them for younger boys who became gia favourite.....is anyone really going to suggest that there was no ulterior motive?

I am, and have said many times through this thread, shocked at the lack of empathy for these boys. Regardless of the fact of whether you believe jackson abused them sexually, he abused them emotionally by dropping them when they were older and replacing them with younger models. At best, its abandonment.

As a parent, it is like having an child then sending it away when you give birth to another.

Maybe we should look at in in a positive way he backed off as they got older so they could start to lead normal teenage lives rather than be forever kids, also I am not sure that he did back off with Wade, but stage Mom felt threatened enough to pack up and move to American... from what we are told he 'moved on' from two sexual relationships with young boys to two non sexual ones with Brett and Macauley which showed incredbile restraint on his part

[Cherie]

Also how did Wades Mom manage to move to the States, was she already an American citizen or something?

[user104658]

I can answer easily for myself,NO, I would not.

I've always hated these kangaroo media court style of trial and judgement.

Which is again all this is, despite years of thorough investigation, charges and trial, then full unreserved acquittal..

That's the one full, true known fact on Michael Jackson and this serious issue.

It wasn't full and unreserved though, jury members have openly expressed doubts but that there wasn't sufficient evidence, so they had little choice but to aquit as the US legal system is very clear about "beyond reasonable doubt".

The legal outcome is not being overlooked Joey and hasn't been at any point it's been discussed at length, and repeatedly stating that its "overlooked" isn't going to make it true.

It's just that a legal "not guilty" outcome of a trial is not proof of innocence or even close to it and never has been, it is proof that the crime was not PROVEN and nothing more, which is correct legally because of the risk of innocent people going to prison but it in no way dictates what personal opinion should be. With conviction rates for all varieties of sexual assault being ABYSMALLY low - you surely understand that?

A TINY proportion of sexual abuse and sexual assault cases even make it to court, and then a tiny proportion of those that do result in conviction. It's well known that the vast majority of rapists walk free through lack of evidence. It doesn't mean anything.

I can't possibly believe that you're naive enough to think that the legal system usually or even particularly often "gets it right" when it comes to sex crimes.

[Kazanne]

Once again the same argument about the "average joe down the road" :sleep: .

Why won't you also realise that MJ was a target for greedy families who saw him as a cash cow and too gullible and trusting . Average Joe down the road wouldn't be accused multiple times of "child molestation" while paying out millions , he'd just be thrown in prison if there was substantial evidence . You don't sue a potential paedophile for his money , you report him to the police and you hope he never get's let out of prison!!. That's what justice looks like .

Why do people ignore the fact that MJ was acquitted and was investigated for years and authorities , FBI you name it went in his personal business , his home , his documents everything he owned . He was the most scrutinised person ever !! .

Nobody said it was sensible what MJ was doing , but it's so easy to see things as weird and uncomfortable when people twist things and don't get facts straight . Corey feldman said him and MJ spoke for ages and it was so innocent there was nothing that ever made him suspect MJ was a child molester .

Maculay is the same he praising MJ and continues to say it was just a fun friendship , there was nothing inappropriate going on . Maculay is the type of guy and same with Corey who wouldn't be afraid to confess all , so why do people ignore these 2? but we're suppose to believe wade & james?? who are proved liars!! this is what i can't get my head round people supporting them :facepalm: . Say a lie enough times and people jump on the band wagon especially when it becomes more and more graphic and shocking like what we're seeing .

It just reminds me of the other one sided slanderous programme they did on MJ 15 years ago where again shocking accusations were made about MJ showering with kids etc . Then later on the same person who claimed she saw MJ in a shower with a young kid later admitted she was lying and just saw MJ on his own in the shower! . All money motivated!! .


When facts are laid out for people their so called accusations crumble or they contradict themselves.

Old Willie Wonka will be the next in line :laugh: this is all so silly the ignoring of facts it's funny talk about tunnel vision.Goldheart .

[Niamh.]

Old Willie Wonka will be the next in line [emoji23] this is all so silly the ignoring of facts it's funny talk about tunnel vision.Goldheart .Well you know who Johnny Depp based his version of Willy Wonka on, don't You?

[Kazanne]

It wasn't full and unreserved though, jury members have openly expressed doubts but that there wasn't sufficient evidence, so they had little choice but to aquit as the US legal system is very clear about "beyond reasonable doubt".

The legal outcome is not being overlooked Joey and hasn't been at any point it's been discussed at length, and repeatedly stating that its "overlooked" isn't going to make it true.

It's just that a legal "not guilty" outcome of a trial is not proof of innocence or even close to it and never has been, it is proof that the crime was not PROVEN and nothing more, which is correct legally because of the risk of innocent people going to prison but it in no way dictates what personal opinion should be. With conviction rates for all varieties of sexual assault being ABYSMALLY low - you surely understand that?

A TINY proportion of sexual abuse and sexual assault cases even make it to court, and then a tiny proportion of those that do result in conviction. It's well known that the vast majority of rapists walk free through lack of evidence. It doesn't mean anything.

I can't possibly believe that you're naive enough to think that the legal system usually or even particularly often "gets it right" when it comes to sex crimes.

I take it you did not watch the videos TS,as you would have heard that there was not ONE scrap of evidence against him ,why would you believe otherwise,this is after the FBI,child services and the police investigated him and also proven evidence of people lying about what they had seen,none existant photographs,surely if people can spare 4 hours to condemn him sure 1 hour of video to give the other side of the coin is worth a watch

[Kazanne]

Well you know who Johnny Depp based his version of Willy Wonka on, don't You?

no idea but no doubt you do.

[Niamh.]

no idea but no doubt you do.Michael Jackson [emoji1787]

[Kazanne]

Michael Jackson [emoji1787]

Oh never saw that coming,how hilarious,splitting my sides here.Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery.He looks more like him in Scissorhands.

[Niamh.]

Oh how hilarious,splitting my sides here.Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery.He looks more like him in Scissorhands.Glad to be of service :douf:

[user104658]

I take it you did not watch the videos TS,as you would have heard that there was not ONE scrap of evidence against him ,why would you believe otherwise,this is after the FBI,child services and the police investigated him and also proven evidence of people lying about what they had seen,none existant photographs,surely if people can spare 4 hours to condemn him sure 1 hour of video to give the other side of the coin is worth a watch

This is exactly why most sexual assault cases fail in court though Kazanne; that there is no physical evidence and the entire case relies on witness statement. Why would there be physical evidence? Why would there be witnesses other than the victims? Why would he keep things like pictures or videos on his property knowing that a raid by the authorities was imminent?

The fact that there is no physical evidence is exactly what it is; a lack of evidence. It's not proof of innocence.

Are you really arguing that every case of sexual crime that goes nowhere through lack of evidence must be "false"? Less than 1% of sex crimes result in conviction. That statistic means something.

Ive also stated repeatedly that my opinion on the Jackson case is not based even "mostly" on this documentary.


I agree Annie though; there's not much point in this thread continuing at this point. We've all made up our minds and I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Kazanne]

Wade Robson talking about MJ

rgSbSotJgUY

[Kazanne]

This is exactly why most sexual assault cases fail in court though Kazanne; that there is no physical evidence and the entire case relies on witness statement. Why would there be physical evidence? Why would there be witnesses other than the victims? Why would he keep things like pictures or videos on his property knowing that a raid by the authorities was imminent?

The fact that there is no physical evidence is exactly what it is; a lack of evidence. It's not proof of innocence.

Are you really arguing that every case of sexual crime that goes nowhere through lack of evidence must be "false"? Less than 1% of sex crimes result in conviction. That statistic means something.

Ive also stated repeatedly that my opinion on the Jackson case is not based even "mostly" on this documentary.


I agree Annie though; there's not much point in this thread continuing at this point. We've all made up our minds and I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

Why do you think there is no point in the thread now? I think it's a good debate mostly and yes some already have made there minds up,but it's good to see some people willing to be open minded to all info not just the so called 'documentry' and if there is no evidence why do some believe he is a peado ?Is it his looks the way he acts,his love for kids,having kids sleep over,none of which prove anything other than he was of a different mindset to us :shrug:

[user104658]

Why do you think there is no point in the thread now? I think it's a good debate mostly and yes some already have made there minds up,but it's good to see some people willing to be open minded to all info not just the so called 'documentry' and if there is no evidence why do some believe he is a peado ?Is it his looks the way he acts,his love for kids,having kids sleep over,none of which prove anything other than he was of a different mindset to us :shrug:Nothing new is being said, the same arguments are being reposted over and over from all sides and the responses are the same :joker:. I guess it's up to each individual to decide if there's a point in continuing but there isn't as far as I'm concerned. The general trend across the Internet now seems to be a concentrated effort to discredit and shame the accusers and I'm deeply uncomfortable with that, personally, no matter which side you come down on. I think Feldman covered that quite eloquently in his latter interview.

[Niamh.]

"He loves kids" no he loves little boys between the ages if 7 and 12. . . Nothing suspicious about that all

[Cherie]

Nothing new is being said, the same arguments are being reposted over and over from all sides and the responses are the same :joker:. I guess it's up to each individual to decide if there's a point in continuing but there isn't as far as I'm concerned. The general trend across the Internet now seems to be a concentrated effort to discredit and shame the accusers and I'm deeply uncomfortable with that, personally, no matter which side you come down on. I think Feldman covered that quite eloquently in his latter interview.

I have asked some pertinent questions and brought a fresh feel to the thread :hehe:

Not that anyone has responded :bawling:


The American citizenship for Wades family is puzzling me, can anyone answer how they got it and so quickly?

[Niamh.]

Nothing new is being said, the same arguments are being reposted over and over from all sides and the responses are the same :joker:. I guess it's up to each individual to decide if there's a point in continuing but there isn't as far as I'm concerned. The general trend across the Internet now seems to be a concentrated effort to discredit and shame the accusers and I'm deeply uncomfortable with that, personally, no matter which side you come down on. I think Feldman covered that quite eloquently in his latter interview.I really like Corey, he went through so much as kid but comes across so together these days.

[Niamh.]

I have asked some pertinent questions and brought a fresh feel to the thread :hehe:



Not that anyone has responded :bawling:





The American citizenship for Wades family is puzzling me, can anyone answer how they got it and so quickly?No idea, sorry Cherie

[bots]

Here is my take.

Jackson was in a unique position to be able to do something about disadvantaged kids. Set up trusts, set up charities and give something back to the community.

What did he choose to do? Set up an exclusive club that was open only to little boys of his choosing. Go figure .....

[Kazanne]

"He loves kids" no he loves little boys between the ages if 7 and 12. . . Nothing suspicious about that all

media just homing in on the boys , girls stayed there aswell.

[joeysteele]

It wasn't full and unreserved though, jury members have openly expressed doubts but that there wasn't sufficient evidence, so they had little choice but to aquit as the US legal system is very clear about "beyond reasonable doubt".

The legal outcome is not being overlooked Joey and hasn't been at any point it's been discussed at length, and repeatedly stating that its "overlooked" isn't going to make it true.

It's just that a legal "not guilty" outcome of a trial is not proof of innocence or even close to it and never has been, it is proof that the crime was not PROVEN and nothing more, which is correct legally because of the risk of innocent people going to prison but it in no way dictates what personal opinion should be. With conviction rates for all varieties of sexual assault being ABYSMALLY low - you surely understand that?

A TINY proportion of sexual abuse and sexual assault cases even make it to court, and then a tiny proportion of those that do result in conviction. It's well known that the vast majority of rapists walk free through lack of evidence. It doesn't mean anything.

I can't possibly believe that you're naive enough to think that the legal system usually or even particularly often "gets it right" when it comes to sex crimes.

I work in law.
The law doesn't always come up with the right result.

However, you can dismiss all you want the court verdict.
Adding any footnotes you like, that neither the jury or judge did.


The fact, fact being the word is after years of investigation, charges and trial.
On every single charge he was found not guilty.

Now in the absence of all the investigators and what the court had, you can add conditions to all those not guilty verdicts.
I never could or would.

Had his case only rested on these 2 individuals, then that would present an issue
He wasn't acquitted just on this pairs connection and statements.
He was because the court believed from all the evidence, he was not guilty.

You can keep saying he is all you like but in law you are wrong. Sorry.

I've seen many examples of false accusations, a lot of cases fail because the one alleging cries off appearing in court.
Sex crimes are a difficult area and a lot of the problems round them are people making false accusations and claims.

You say the legal facts of MJs trial aren't being overlooked and are being discussed.
They are mentioned and at tines as you are doing, adding conditions not in place by jury or judge.
So not overlooked but being clouded or dismissed.

While accepting in full the now new and changed claims of these 2 men.

I'll stick with the court verdicts, even not taking into consideration what these were saying at the time of the trial.
Accepting what all other witnesses said under oath.

Unlike the now conveniently changed things this pair are saying now.
Waiting until the man is dead to do so.
Some may possibly be being naive here but it ain't me.

[Niamh.]

media just homing in on the boys , girls stayed there aswell.Which girls went on tour with him and slept with him? How come it was only boys of that age bracket ever made allegations against him?

[Kazanne]

Here is my take.

Jackson was in a unique position to be able to do something about disadvantaged kids. Set up trusts, set up charities and give something back to the community.

What did he choose to do? Set up an exclusive club that was open only to little boys of his choosing. Go figure .....

He did do those things bots :shrug: He paid for lots of kids treatments etc :shrug: Neverland was not built with children in mind,did you watch any of the videos ? it was built to impress Elizabeth Taylor who he was very close to and also Marlon Brando

[user104658]

You can keep saying he is all you like but in law you are wrong. Sorry.







Joey I keep repeating that the legal verdict means little to nothing to me in forming my opinion in this case. I am skeptical of the legal system, I am skeptical of authority in general in all situations. I try to take an open and more philosophical view of topics and not be constrained by the rigid constructs of "the letter of law" when it's just a discussion; though I appreciate why it exists in practical terms.

I understand that you work in law and so you likely have a greater respect for the line of law and authority than I do but you need to accept that "in terms of the law you are wrong" simply means very little to me - with no judgement intended - but pointing out that there's no need to clarify the technicalities repeatedly.

[user104658]

Which girls went on tour with him and slept with him? How come it was only boys of that age bracket ever made allegations against him?Perhaps only the boys are greedy and want some of that sweet Jackson Estate pudding. Men! :hmph:

[user104658]

He did do those things bots :shrug: He paid for lots of kids treatments etc :shrug: Neverland was not built with children in mind,did you watch any of the videos ? it was built to impress Elizabeth Taylor who he was very close to and also Marlon BrandoIIRC he himself stated quite explicitly in the Bashir documentary that he built it for children to come and enjoy :think:. They may even have played an audio clip in Leaving Neverland, though I'm not 100% sure on that, it may have been one of the participants that said it.

[Niamh.]

Perhaps only the boys are greedy and want some of that sweet Jackson Estate pudding. Men! :hmph:Well it makes a change anyway it's usually the women being accused of doing that [emoji12]

[Cherie]

Honestly I lean in and out of him being guilty, not guilty, but nothing have seen in the new documentary cements a guilty for me, I would love a body language expert to comment on them and the mothers testimony

and as for the families, just like abducted in plain sight, how they have the brass neck to sit there and accept no responsibility for their actions really sticks in my craw

[chuff me dizzy]

You might be right to be fair. I thought she seemed more accepting of what happened but then, it's been nearly 15 years since James told her (as he told her long before anyone else, back in 2004, but made her promise not to tell anyone else) so she's had time to process it?

Wades mum gets upset towards the end but thinking about it, it feels more like she feels sorry for herself and the damage its done to her relationships than "guilt".

She pulled the faces, but not a single tear

[chuff me dizzy]

We are going to watch it tonight...or Part 1 anyway.
What parent would let their young child sleep around his house in the first place. It seems the mothers are more awestruck with MJ than the welfare of their children.

...and from clips I have seen the two do look alike.

Wades Mam agreed to share her son for a year with MJ ? WTAF ?

[user104658]

She pulled the faces, but not a single tearI can't really judge based on that because I can count on one hand the times I've literally "cried with tears" over a real life situation in the last decade, and I've had plenty of reasons to by "society's standards". It doesn't come easily to some of us, which is probably sad. I'm more likely to cry at a movie or TV show than when something genuinely bad has happened in my life.

[chuff me dizzy]

"He loves kids" no he loves little boys between the ages if 7 and 12. . . Nothing suspicious about that all

:clap1:

No girls involved and you cannot "love children" if you want to abuse them and wreck their lives

[rusticgal]

Which girls went on tour with him and slept with him? How come it was only boys of that age bracket ever made allegations against him?


In the documentary Wades and his sister spent the night in his room...but I don’t think he was interested in girls but he had to balance his story out and not make it too obvious..imo.

[Niamh.]

In the documentary Wades and his sister spent the night in his room...but I don’t think he was interested in girls but he had to balance his story out and not make it too obvious..imo.Oh yeah but not on their own with him like he did with the boys

[Marsh.]

they dont look alike as kids though, only as adults, I wonder is something in the edit has been done to achieve this similarity in appearance :suspect:

Not CGI. THE LITTLE RATS!

[Marsh.]

Well you know who Johnny Depp based his version of Willy Wonka on, don't You?

A stoned George Bush? :smug:

[chuff me dizzy]

In the documentary Wades and his sister spent the night in his room...but I don’t think he was interested in girls but he had to balance his story out and not make it too obvious..imo.

Never on her own ,she wasn't asked to be kept for a year either

[Niamh.]

A stoned George Bush? :smug:[emoji1787]

[Cherie]

Never on her own ,she wasn't asked to be kept for a year either

we only have Wades Moms word on that, I would't trust that woman as far as I would throw her, she has dollar signs in her eyes, any mother that would leave her 7 year old with a stranger for days on end with no contact, and then pass it off as 'starstruck' more like 'dollarstruck'

[Marsh.]

we only have Wades Moms word on that, I would't trust that woman as far as I would throw her, she has dollar signs in her eyes, any mother that would leave her 7 year old with a stranger for days on end with no contact, and then pass it off as 'starstruck' more like 'dollarstruck'

:clap1:

[user104658]

I know this argument is coming up a lot so I think it's just worth pointing out;

It is logically false to say that potential for money to be made, or even money being the main motivation, means that the claims are false.

Pose this hypothetical scenario.

Let's say Wade Robson was genuinely sexually involved with Michael but he doesn't care, he's fine with what happened between them, it didn't bother him then and it doesn't bother him now, he thinks their relationship was one of genuine love and affection. He is now broke and is like "Hey I could make some money if I tell people about that and pretend it bothers me!", and his entire reason for doing it is the $$$$.

I'm not saying that is the truth but let's pretend it is, for hypothetical reasons.

Would that make any difference to the moral rights and wrongs of their relationship. Does the motivation for sharing the facts in any way alter the objective morality of those facts. Does it matter if they're doing it purely for money if it is also true.

Just worth some thought IMO.

Because overall my opinion is that Wade DID have sexual contact with Michael but that if Michael was still alive and Wade's career was thriving, then yes, he would probably still be friends with Michael and seeking his attention and approval. That doesn't make it in any way more acceptable for that relationship to have occurred. It's entirely irrelevant.

[chuff me dizzy]

we only have Wades Moms word on that, I would't trust that woman as far as I would throw her, she has dollar signs in her eyes, any mother that would leave her 7 year old with a stranger for days on end with no contact, and then pass it off as 'starstruck' more like 'dollarstruck'

Awful woman ......... But the girl never said she had stayed in his bed alone either

[chuff me dizzy]

I know this argument is coming up a lot so I think it's just worth pointing out;

It is logically false to say that potential for money to be made, or even money being the main motivation, means that the claims are false.

Pose this hypothetical scenario.

Let's say Wade Robson was genuinely sexually involved with Michael but he doesn't care, he's fine with what happened between them, it didn't bother him then and it doesn't bother him now, he thinks their relationship was one of genuine love and affection. He is now broke and is like "Hey I could make some money if I tell people about that and pretend it bothers me!", and his entire reason for doing it is the $$$$.

I'm not saying that is the truth but let's pretend it is, for hypothetical reasons.

Would that make any difference to the moral rights and wrongs of their relationship. Does the motivation for sharing the facts in any way alter the objective morality of those facts. Does it matter if they're doing it purely for money if it is also true.

Just worth some thought IMO.

Because overall my opinion is that Wade DID have sexual contact with Michael but that if Michael was still alive and Wade's career was thriving, then yes, he would probably still be friends with Michael and seeking his attention and approval. That doesn't make it in any way more acceptable for that relationship to have occurred. It's entirely irrelevant.

:clap1: I believe he slept and had sexual contact with both of the men and countless others, many who took his hush money ,IMO it won't be long before lots more find the strength to come out about it all, these 2 men are the tip of the iceberg

[Marsh.]

I know this argument is coming up a lot so I think it's just worth pointing out;

It is logically false to say that potential for money to be made, or even money being the main motivation, means that the claims are false.

Pose this hypothetical scenario.

Let's say Wade Robson was genuinely sexually involved with Michael but he doesn't care, he's fine with what happened between them, it didn't bother him then and it doesn't bother him now, he thinks their relationship was one of genuine love and affection. He is now broke and is like "Hey I could make some money if I tell people about that and pretend it bothers me!", and his entire reason for doing it is the $$$$.

I'm not saying that is the truth but let's pretend it is, for hypothetical reasons.

Would that make any difference to the moral rights and wrongs of their relationship. Does the motivation for sharing the facts in any way alter the objective morality of those facts. Does it matter if they're doing it purely for money if it is also true.

Just worth some thought IMO.

Because overall my opinion is that Wade DID have sexual contact with Michael but that if Michael was still alive and Wade's career was thriving, then yes, he would probably still be friends with Michael and seeking his attention and approval. That doesn't make it in any way more acceptable for that relationship to have occurred. It's entirely irrelevant.

But... if it were as you say.... we still wouldn't know anything other than the words of Wade so the hypothetical is rather pointless and leads to the same conclusion.

[user104658]

But... if it were as you say.... we still wouldn't know anything other than the words of Wade so the hypothetical is rather pointless and leads to the same conclusion.

All I'm illustrating is that "They want money!" can be true without making "He did abuse them" necessarily false. Both can be true. The claim that they want money is repeatedly being used in an attempt to "prove" that the abuse allegations are false. It actually has no bearing... it doesn't matter if they have dollar signs in their eyes if the claims are still true.

[chuff me dizzy]

All I'm illustrating is that "They want money!" can be true without making "He did abuse them" necessarily false. Both can be true. The claim that they want money is repeatedly being used in an attempt to "prove" that the abuse allegations are false. It actually has no bearing... it doesn't matter if they have dollar signs in their eyes if the claims are still true.

Call me naive but I don't think for one minute they spoke out for money ,both seem to have good careers ,I think they spoke out to make people see what a monster he was ,and to cleanse themselves

[Marsh.]

All I'm illustrating is that "They want money!" can be true without making "He did abuse them" necessarily false. Both can be true. The claim that they want money is repeatedly being used in an attempt to "prove" that the abuse allegations are false. It actually has no bearing... it doesn't matter if they have dollar signs in their eyes if the claims are still true.

But people have given opinions on both. Nobody's said they can't both be true. Doesn't change the fact they don't believe it to be true.

[user104658]

But people have given opinions on both. Nobody's said they can't both be true. Doesn't change the fact they don't believe it to be true.

Multiple people have used "AHA look they have a civil case on appeal" as supposed evidence that they are lying. More than once.

[Cherie]

Call me naive but I don't think for one minute they spoke out for money ,both seem to have good careers ,I think they spoke out to make people see what a monster he was ,and to cleanse themselves

they should be questioning their mothers given they are alive to answer to their part in any alleged abuse

[chuff me dizzy]

they should be questioning their mothers given they are alive to answer to their part in any alleged abuse

The Mothers need charging with child neglect, aiding and abetting a crime

[Kazanne]

And not one of you who believes he is a child molester has commented on any of the videos some of us posted giving details ,interviews etc about his innocence ,that in itself tell me what I need to know,people are afraid they might hear or see something that they would have to admit is dodgy and they really don't want to explain that. Joey said they would get ignored, and he was right

[Niamh.]

And not one of you who believes he is a child molester has commented on any of the videos some of us posted giving details ,interviews etc about his innocence ,that in itself tell me what I need to know,people are afraid they might hear or see something that they would have to admit is dodgy and they really don't want to explain that. Joey said they would get ignored, and he was rightThat they don't want to watch the video?

[Kazanne]

Call me naive but I don't think for one minute they spoke out for money ,both seem to have good careers ,I think they spoke out to make people see what a monster he was ,and to cleanse themselves

Sorry Chuff that's wrong their careers are failing, one is an actor who cant get work, the nervous breakdown that he said occurred was because of this NOT MJ, but I know that wont be believed which is your prerogative,but it's all there to be seen and heard in other videos.

[Kazanne]

That they don't want to watch the video?

Of course they don't ,wonder why.:smug:

[Cherie]

Marlon says the family – and a team of attorneys, who put Robson on the stand to defend Jackson in 2005 – has been through all of this before. The surviving Jackson brothers don't know Safechuck, they say, but Taj did, and he calls Robson’s changed narrative the “ultimate betrayal.”

Family members have their own opinions about why Robson’s story has changed. The choreographer was grateful for an invitation to Jackson’s memorial – he attended with his family, Taj says – and danced “right behind” Janet Jackson for a tribute at MTV's Video Music Awards. He even “wanted to get close to MJ’s kids” in 2009, Taj says.


From left, Wade Robson, director Dan Reed and James Safechuck pose for a portrait to promote the film "Leaving Neverland." The Michael Jackson estate has sent a letter to the U.K.’s Channel 4 warning that the documentary on Robson and Safechuck, who accuse the singer of molesting them as boys, violates the network's programming guidelines.
Taylor Jewell/Invision/AP
But things soured, the family says. They say that when Robson was passed over to direct and choreograph Cirque du Soleil's "One" show spotlighting Michael in Las Vegas, his financial troubles began. That’s when they say Robson began selling off his Jackson memorabilia and pitching a book with allegations against the pop star before suing the family in 2013.

“It’s never been about justice for him," Taj says. "It’s always been about fame and money.”

The accusers' lawyer, Vince Finaldi, scoffs at the suggested timeline: "It's just another example of the Jackson press machine manipulating facts and telling half-truths in order to try and discredit a victim," he says.

Finaldi says Robson was hired to choreograph the "One" show but suffered a nervous breakdown and dropped out.

As described in "Leaving Neverland," "after the birth of his son, he started having visions of his son being abused by Michael Jackson and reflecting on the abuse that he suffered, and realizing how bad that was from a different perspective," Finaldi says. Robson pulled away from the entertainment industry, which he found triggering. "Did he suffer financial stresses because of it? Absolutely. But he's never been fired from a job in his life."

But the documentary, with graphic descriptions of alleged sexual abuse, prompts direct questions:

Was Michael Jackson ever sexually abused as a child? The brothers shake their heads. “Never,” Jackie says.

In “Leaving Neverland,” it’s alleged that the pop star would spend five or six hours at a time on the phone with young children. Doesn’t his family find this odd?

No, they say. “He would talk to me and my brothers for hours and hours,” Taj says. “My uncle didn’t have a (traditional) childhood, so he lived vicariously through children. He’d say to me: 'You’re so lucky you had a birthday party. What was it like?'... He was constantly trying to reclaim his childhood, and I don’t think people understand that, because people didn’t live though Michael Jackson’s life."

Do they acknowledge that their brother’s behavior was, at the very least, eccentric when it came to spending time with children, including nights in his bed?

Marlon Jackson calls it all innocent. “Taj is the same age as all these kids they used to spend nights (with) all the time. A bunch of kids would come over and have pillow fights, (watch) “Three Stooges,” swim, all this stuff. Watching movies, they’re tired, they’d fall asleep.”

“(Marlon’s) children were there,” Jackie says. “My kids were there. Tito’s children were there.”

After accusations of sexual misconduct, did the brothers ever suggest Michael change his behavior with children, whose hands he often held in public?

“We didn’t really have to,” Jackie says. “Because I knew my brother and what his mission was all about, was helping children, helping people around the world.”

The family calls Jackson an easy target, made easier now because under the American legal system, it's not possible to sue, shame or slander a dead man. The brothers point to Michael Jackson’s search to reclaim his childhood, international charity work, and how he’d open up Neverland to nearby hospitals and schools while he was touring.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2019/02/27/michael-jackson-family-slams-film-leaving-neverland-money/3005672002/

[chuff me dizzy]

Marlon says the family – and a team of attorneys, who put Robson on the stand to defend Jackson in 2005 – has been through all of this before. The surviving Jackson brothers don't know Safechuck, they say, but Taj did, and he calls Robson’s changed narrative the “ultimate betrayal.”

Family members have their own opinions about why Robson’s story has changed. The choreographer was grateful for an invitation to Jackson’s memorial – he attended with his family, Taj says – and danced “right behind” Janet Jackson for a tribute at MTV's Video Music Awards. He even “wanted to get close to MJ’s kids” in 2009, Taj says.


From left, Wade Robson, director Dan Reed and James Safechuck pose for a portrait to promote the film "Leaving Neverland." The Michael Jackson estate has sent a letter to the U.K.’s Channel 4 warning that the documentary on Robson and Safechuck, who accuse the singer of molesting them as boys, violates the network's programming guidelines.
Taylor Jewell/Invision/AP
But things soured, the family says. They say that when Robson was passed over to direct and choreograph Cirque du Soleil's "One" show spotlighting Michael in Las Vegas, his financial troubles began. That’s when they say Robson began selling off his Jackson memorabilia and pitching a book with allegations against the pop star before suing the family in 2013.

“It’s never been about justice for him," Taj says. "It’s always been about fame and money.”

The accusers' lawyer, Vince Finaldi, scoffs at the suggested timeline: "It's just another example of the Jackson press machine manipulating facts and telling half-truths in order to try and discredit a victim," he says.

Finaldi says Robson was hired to choreograph the "One" show but suffered a nervous breakdown and dropped out.

As described in "Leaving Neverland," "after the birth of his son, he started having visions of his son being abused by Michael Jackson and reflecting on the abuse that he suffered, and realizing how bad that was from a different perspective," Finaldi says. Robson pulled away from the entertainment industry, which he found triggering. "Did he suffer financial stresses because of it? Absolutely. But he's never been fired from a job in his life."

But the documentary, with graphic descriptions of alleged sexual abuse, prompts direct questions:

Was Michael Jackson ever sexually abused as a child? The brothers shake their heads. “Never,” Jackie says.

In “Leaving Neverland,” it’s alleged that the pop star would spend five or six hours at a time on the phone with young children. Doesn’t his family find this odd?

No, they say. “He would talk to me and my brothers for hours and hours,” Taj says. “My uncle didn’t have a (traditional) childhood, so he lived vicariously through children. He’d say to me: 'You’re so lucky you had a birthday party. What was it like?'... He was constantly trying to reclaim his childhood, and I don’t think people understand that, because people didn’t live though Michael Jackson’s life."

Do they acknowledge that their brother’s behavior was, at the very least, eccentric when it came to spending time with children, including nights in his bed?

Marlon Jackson calls it all innocent. “Taj is the same age as all these kids they used to spend nights (with) all the time. A bunch of kids would come over and have pillow fights, (watch) “Three Stooges,” swim, all this stuff. Watching movies, they’re tired, they’d fall asleep.”

“(Marlon’s) children were there,” Jackie says. “My kids were there. Tito’s children were there.”

After accusations of sexual misconduct, did the brothers ever suggest Michael change his behavior with children, whose hands he often held in public?

“We didn’t really have to,” Jackie says. “Because I knew my brother and what his mission was all about, was helping children, helping people around the world.”

The family calls Jackson an easy target, made easier now because under the American legal system, it's not possible to sue, shame or slander a dead man. The brothers point to Michael Jackson’s search to reclaim his childhood, international charity work, and how he’d open up Neverland to nearby hospitals and schools while he was touring.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/life/tv/2019/02/27/michael-jackson-family-slams-film-leaving-neverland-money/3005672002/

I hope you've not copied and pasted this :joker:

[Niamh.]

Of course they don't ,wonder why.:smug:Because the last one posted was half an hour long

[Cherie]

I hope you've not copied and pasted this :joker:

:omgno:

[Niamh.]

I hope you've not copied and pasted this :joker:She did link though, spot the difference

[Cherie]

Because the last one posted was half an hour long

Tbf though if we are to get a balanced view and we are willing to sit through 4 hours of accusations, we should at least watch some of the rebuttals, and I will Kazanne when I finish watching this one

[chuff me dizzy]

I haven't watched any videos defending MJ as IMO he's indefensible ,and watching people in the videos making out he was a saint is too much for me, I have my opinion from MJ over many years and nothing can change my opinion of him ,as have his fans and no one should tell anyone else they are wrong for being in whichever camp they are in

[chuff me dizzy]

She did link though, spot the difference

Im joking

[Niamh.]

Tbf though if we are to get a balanced view and we are willing to sit through 4 hours of accusations, we should at least watch some of the rebuttals, and I will Kazanne when I finish watching this oneYes but I don't think he's guilty because of that show, I've thought he was guilty for years because of how he behaves with young boys, stuff that no video can say is lies because it's right there in photos, videos and from MJs own mouth

[chuff me dizzy]

Yes but I don't think he's guilty because of that show, I've thought he was guilty for years because of how he behaves with young boys, stuff that no video can say is lies because it's right there in photos, videos and from MJs own mouth

Me totally ^^^^

[bots]

Any information that comes out now is nothing more than navel gazing unless it's accompanied by hard evidence. Thats why I havent bothered watching the latest documentary. It's been produced by a producer with a specific agenda so it can't be considered investigative journalism. I've thought Jackson was dodgy for many, many years, and my opinion is not going to change.

Also, somewhat amusing, the BBC are saying that they are not banning his music, the original topic of the thread :laugh:

[rusticgal]

Never on her own ,she wasn't asked to be kept for a year either

Exactly.

Even if I watch clips/videos of these boys saying how much they loved him...even when they said they spoke the truth about him not touching them..even if they didn’t testify against him..it means nothing. These were two young boys who had secrets with MJ...MJ adorned them with gifts and they enjoyed his playground..he had a hold over them right up until his death and it’s now it’s their word against a dead man...a famous dead man. Even after they were pushed aside for younger boys they were still in awe of him...because of all the wonderful things he did for them and the love they had for him over powered the abuse.
Maybe telling their story will help them...and if it brings them financial gain then they deserve it...but let’s hope they don’t share it with their mothers who are as guilty of abuse as I believe MJ is.
I just don’t see any normal person can justify his mentality and behaviour and believe that the whole set up of Neverland was completely innocent. :shrug:

[rusticgal]

I know this argument is coming up a lot so I think it's just worth pointing out;

It is logically false to say that potential for money to be made, or even money being the main motivation, means that the claims are false.

Pose this hypothetical scenario.

Let's say Wade Robson was genuinely sexually involved with Michael but he doesn't care, he's fine with what happened between them, it didn't bother him then and it doesn't bother him now, he thinks their relationship was one of genuine love and affection. He is now broke and is like "Hey I could make some money if I tell people about that and pretend it bothers me!", and his entire reason for doing it is the $$$$.

I'm not saying that is the truth but let's pretend it is, for hypothetical reasons.

Would that make any difference to the moral rights and wrongs of their relationship. Does the motivation for sharing the facts in any way alter the objective morality of those facts. Does it matter if they're doing it purely for money if it is also true.

Just worth some thought IMO.

Because overall my opinion is that Wade DID have sexual contact with Michael but that if Michael was still alive and Wade's career was thriving, then yes, he would probably still be friends with Michael and seeking his attention and approval. That doesn't make it in any way more acceptable for that relationship to have occurred. It's entirely irrelevant.

Precisely...agree whole heartedly.

[rusticgal]

And not one of you who believes he is a child molester has commented on any of the videos some of us posted giving details ,interviews etc about his innocence ,that in itself tell me what I need to know,people are afraid they might hear or see something that they would have to admit is dodgy and they really don't want to explain that. Joey said they would get ignored, and he was right

I watched one of the videos you posted Kaz...but to me it means nothing because of what I said in my post above. I could watch ten of them and still not be convinced of his innocence.
His money, influence and power...his gentle child-like behaviour gave him the opportunity to draw these young boys into his world and abuse them. WHY would he want to have them sleep in his bed? This is a grown man. I’m not afraid of seeing anything dodgy in their behaviour..to me it’s justified if they have suffered abuse.
However I don’t understand how anyone can justify how an adult man has a string of young boys for sleepovers in his bed!!

Ps...you know I love you but I’m on the opposite side of the fence on this one. :wavey:

[Beso]

The boys simply said nothing in the beginning because they saw no wrong in it themselves...the metoo movement moved the goalposts.

[chuff me dizzy]

Exactly.

Even if I watch clips/videos of these boys saying how much they loved him...even when they said they spoke the truth about him not touching them..even if they didn’t testify against him..it means nothing. These were two young boys who had secrets with MJ...MJ adorned them with gifts and they enjoyed his playground..he had a hold over them right up until his death and it’s now it’s their word against a dead man...a famous dead man. Even after they were pushed aside for younger boys they were still in awe of him...because of all the wonderful things he did for them and the love they had for him over powered the abuse.
Maybe telling their story will help them...and if it brings them financial gain then they deserve it...but let’s hope they don’t share it with their mothers who are as guilty of abuse as I believe MJ is.
I just don’t see any normal person can justify his mentality and behaviour and believe that the whole set up of Neverland was completely innocent. :shrug:

Excellent post Rusti xx

[chuff me dizzy]

The boys simply said nothing in the beginning because they saw no wrong in it themselves...the metoo movement moved the goalposts.

And I doubt they would have spoken out when younger due to MJ threatening them with life in prison

[Crimson Dynamo]

I am sure that every Jackson sibling knows that MJ was a paedo but they are happy to deny it as it would effect them and their cushy lives of adoration and wealth

they would rather lie and defend a paedo than risk what they have

what a vile family of vipers

[chuff me dizzy]

I am sure that every Jackson sibling knows that MJ was a paedo but they are happy to deny it as it would effect them and their cushy lives of adoration and wealth

they would rather lie and defend a paedo than risk what they have

what a vile family of vipers

Terrible family, always has been ,remember one of them calling Jade Goody and her family " White trash " Ive never believed and never will believe any of the children are naturally his, Paris is the image of Mark Lesters daughter ,he lied on Martin Bashiers documentary about Blanket ,saying 1st time he was in a relationship with his mother, then when asked again said he had never met her, she was a surrogate

[joeysteele]

would you trust Jackson with your 7 year old son to stay at Neverland alone in his room?

yes or no?

I have no children but no I wouldn't.

Their parents did though.

However to qualify a little, alone in a room doesn't itself mean bad.
If you feel and know you can trust an individual..
I wouldn't let them sleep in his room, no.

Then having said that too, abuse happens often by family members or neighbours.
Even at school by teachers.

Vigilance is what's needed with children.
Something these parents weren't bothered about at all.

So they trusted MJ.
All through too, their children showed no indication either of any abuse taking place.
Consistently, firmly denying it.

[chuff me dizzy]

I have no children but no I wouldn't.

Their parents did though.

However to qualify a little, alone in a room doesn't itself mean bad.
If you feel and know you can trust an individual..
I wouldn't let them sleep in his room, no.

Then having said that too, abuse happens often by family members or neighbours.
Even at school by teachers.

Vigilance is what's needed with children.
Something these parents weren't bothered about at all.

So they trusted MJ.
All through too, their children showed no indication either of any abuse taking place.
Consistently, firmly denying it.

Some kids even into adulthood live in denial ,its their way of coping

[joeysteele]

And not one of you who believes he is a child molester has commented on any of the videos some of us posted giving details ,interviews etc about his innocence ,that in itself tell me what I need to know,people are afraid they might hear or see something that they would have to admit is dodgy and they really don't want to explain that. Joey said they would get ignored, and he was right

Told you Kazanne.

It makes me wonder what we ever need courts or the law for..
When condemnation and judgement can just come from thinking, rather than substantiated hard evidence.

Then even when the result is, someone gets tried, then fully acquitted.
It's not valid to accept that.
Nor to even listen to the other side, or read it if the other person is dead.

Thank all powers that be though that the law does exist.
It would be a sad society indeed probably otherwise to have people judged on crimes,on likes or dislikes.

[Matthew.]

remember one of them calling Jade Goody and her family " White trash "

Did that happen though

[chuff me dizzy]

Did that happen though

Yes it did

[Tony Montana]

Did that happen though

Yeah it did

Jermaine said it