[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

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]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

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]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

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

[Cherry Christmas]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

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]

Originally Posted by Cherie

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]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

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.

[Christmas Lights]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

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.

Wade's ex Brandy aka MJ's niece has said he's burned soo many bridges he's just desperate basically to stay relevant with her family's name next to his name .

And yes Jimmy is an actor that's failed and he's desperate for money , so surely it's easy for him to repeat scripted lies in front on a camera but i guess that get's ignored as we must feel sympathy for these 2 known liars! .

[Denver]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Wade's ex Brandy aka MJ's niece has said he's burned soo many bridges he's just desperate basically to stay relevant with her family's name next to his name .

And yes Jimmy is an actor that's failed and he's desperate for money , so surely it's easy for him to repeat scripted lies in front on a camera but i guess that get's ignored as we must feel sympathy for these 2 known liars! .

Well his niece wont exactly defend him against MJ will she

[Rustic bauble]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Wade's ex Brandy aka MJ's niece has said he's burned soo many bridges he's just desperate basically to stay relevant with her family's name next to his name .

And yes Jimmy is an actor that's failed and he's desperate for money , so surely it's easy for him to repeat scripted lies in front on a camera but i guess that get's ignored as we must feel sympathy for these 2 known liars! .

So what? The ex is hardly going to support him is she....and who cares if it’s for money...it doesnt take away what happened...they deserve every penny they can get imo.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

So what? The ex is hardly going to support him is she....and who cares if it’s for money...it doesnt take away what happened...they deserve every penny they can get imo.

Indeed

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

So what? The ex is hardly going to support him is she....and who cares if it’s for money...it doesnt take away what happened...they deserve every penny they can get imo.

I would agree had I believed this story.They both tried for the money before it was dismissed

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by rusticgal

So what? The ex is hardly going to support him is she....and who cares if it’s for money...it doesnt take away what happened...they deserve every penny they can get imo.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

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]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

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.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

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

Have they? They've used that as "evidence" they're after money?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Have they? They've used that as "evidence" they're after money?

Which is relevant because?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Which is relevant because?

Eh? You're the one that said it. I asked you, hence the question mark.