Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldHeart
I also find Reed's whole editing of the film suspicious and deceptive . It's more so obvious with Safechuck's shots that it wasn't all taken in 1 or even 3 days . It looks like it took several months to film . The clip with the pathetic rings and
ridiculous wedding ceremony story looks like it was an after thought to add in the film  .
Wade's shots also look like they were re done alot , but safechuck's stand out more. And when a film is this choppy and padded out it's easy for 2 actors to lie and follow a script and even re film a scene so it's more "believable"  .
If safechuck & Wade were sat for 4 hours straight in a court room raw UNEDITED i guarantee the outcome would be different and they'd crack under pressure , there's no director saying "cut" or telling them what to say when a court of law is involved . Even the Oprah interview was cringy . |
Have you seen this, Goldheart?
Here's more from the person who made that video...
"In response to the more frequent disagreements in the comment section here.
... Yes, a lot of documentaries have interviews that are filmed with multiple takes and very brief shots of the interviewees ... and it's arguably a deception in those films too - it makes the interviewees seem less credible. However, most documentaries actually involve evidence as well as interviews. In a case like this, where the "victims" already lack credibility on account of their own previous court testimonies and TV interviews, it was essential to get interview footage that was as honest and raw as possible. Multiple takes with selective editing was a very poor choice. It has resulted in the interviews having a scripted and acted appearance.
A few people saying that the director has already stated that the interviews were filmed over 2 or 3 days ... good. And I'm glad to bring more attention to that particular aspect of the production as a lot of people would miss the implication of multiple takes - the effort to try and get a strong acting performance that's actually dishonestly spliced together to appear like a natural flow of dialogue.
Regarding the people going on about the body language stuff, I did say in the video I'll be making a separate video on that so please feel free to respond that video when I post it.
Regarding the people asking if I've met any sexual abuse survivors, yes I have. I worked 17 years in the social care field and interacted with thousands of people in that line of work ... probation, homeless, learning difficulties, mental health, and yes ... I met and interacted with dozens of pedophiles and sex abuse victims so I have a personal experience take on both the victims and their abusers.
Regarding the folks who think that Jackson sleeping in the same bedroom as child visitors amounts to proof of sexual abuse. That's witch-hunt logic. A lot of people, adults and kids, sleep in the same bed or bedroom under various circumstances and it's not a foregone conclusion that sexual interaction has occurred. Yes, it does cast suspicion on Jackson and without that particular facet of his life there would be very little grounds for suspicion, but sexual intent is not the only possible motive. Jackson clearly had a child-like mentality in a lot of ways so it is perfectly logical that he enjoyed sleep overs with visitors to compensate for his loneliness and lack of family at the time. Yes, there is a possibility of sexual molestation, but possibility doesn't equal proof. And you need proof to convict in a court of law unless you believe in witch hunts.
Regarding the folks who say that there have been tons of accusers ... there have been a handful and it all kicked off with the discredited Jordy Chandler case. As Razorfist has aptly pointed out,Jackson made the mistake of settling the civil case out of court (without admission) so that he could defend the criminal case (the one that could actually lead to jail time). He defended and was acquitted on all charges, but the pay out given on the civil case gave the green light for other snakes in the grass to come out seeking multi-million payouts. From what I can tell, that has what has been happening on and off since.
"You just can't handle him being a pedo because you like his music". Yes, there are some who would defend Jackson even if proof were found of sexual abuse just as there are some who will keep calling him an abuser despite lack of evidence. Like most people, I fit into neither camp. I loved Kevin Spacey as an actor, Rolf Harris was a great cartoonist and Bill Cosby I found hilarious ... but I'm not trying to defend them.
Thanks for your thoughts folks."