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

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

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

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

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

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.

Yeah it was odd the mom did that but not the son I don't think, people are allowed to move?

Pretty much my thoughts in a nut shell

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.

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.

This video highlights just how dishonest and unstable Wade really is

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

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.

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".

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 Annie.

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 .

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.

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:

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

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

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.

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 .