[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yes, Vicky posted the Saville thread yesterday, it was jammed full of familiar faces insisting that Saville's accusers were "after money". Honestly a fascinating read given that it was a full 7 years ago. So I guess you have to assume that social media was similar.

TBH quite a few people STILL defend ol' Harris.

what exactly are you suggesting here TS? It's not the first time you've gone for fms rather than their arguments

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

We ploughed through the R Kelly documentary (it's called "Surviving R Kelly") yesterday, it's pretty long (about 5 and a half hours) but honestly, in some ways it's an even wilder ride than this one.

Plus like I said a couple of pages back, it illustrates a lot about the power of stardom. He went to trial on child porn charges and was found guilty. THERE WAS A VIDEO! The jury saw it! The press and even the lawyers were considering the trial to be practically a formality, everyone saw the tape and knew it was real, and yet the jury was like "nah" . His own lawyer from the trial admits that he was definitely guilty and yet .

Was also interesting to note that he was an acquaintance of MJ at one point.

Interesting to note Liza Minelli was an acquintance of MJ and she was never accused of anything.
MJ had probably thousands of aquaintances. He was bezzy mates with Elizabeth Taylor. Does it meant she was a nonce too?

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

I seem to think R Kelly defended him at his trial ?

Not found any evidence to that at all.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Actually I would probably wank him off for 5g

He wants your bum for that price.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

He wants your bum for that price.

He can pretend he had it for that price, I will charge him 1.75m

[bots]

Linda McCartney told me to fook off once. I think all Beatles and Wings music should be banned.

[Beso]

In fact. ..at the time I would probably be moonwalking about the school going, I got tossed of by Michael Jackson last night......so I dunno maybe these rumours ain't true after all...cause at that age....ask yourself. Could you keep it in?

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Not found any evidence to that at all.

Me niether and even if there was ,why does other people defending MJ get ignored?? .

There's also a theory that safechuck got that grooming jewellery from a tacky pawn shop cheap

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Me niether and even if there was ,why does other people defending MJ get ignored?? .

There's also a theory that safechuck got that grooming jewellery from a tacky pawn shop cheap

Really ? I wonder if the media will relay that,doubt it,lets face it they were always vile about MJ.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Me niether and even if there was ,why does other people defending MJ get ignored?? .

There's also a theory that safechuck got that grooming jewellery from a tacky pawn shop cheap

He did or michael did???..maybe Michael thought he just didn't do it for him that night so decided to further humiliate him by making fun of him by buying cheap **** saying it was great....mbut secretly giggling to himself about his scrawny ass being useless that night as he slept.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

Really ? I wonder if the media will relay that,doubt it,lets face it they were always vile about MJ.

Why did safechuck Keep jewellery from a "child abuser" , plus wouldn't police take it as evidence?? .

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

what exactly are you suggesting here TS? It's not the first time you've gone for fms rather than their arguments

That they were wrong then and I suspect they're wrong now. Going for their arguments - by demonstrating that their logic was flawed in the past yet they're using the same reasoning now - is exactly what I'm doing.

As for playing the "Das against da rules" game 2S... It's lame even from the people who are relatively good at it and you're doing a mediocre job of copying them . Be yourself! Or if you're not going to be yourself, goodness gracious don't be LT .

[Beso]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Why did safechuck Keep jewellery from a "child abuser" , plus wouldn't police take it as evidence?? .

Because he loved him....it really is as easy as that goldheart.


Edit bit....they would also have to take every playstation game, etc etc etc etc.

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Because he loved him....it really is as easy as that goldheart.

I don't think so , and usually victims no matter how much they've been groomed don't usually keep jewellery neatly displayed in a box of trinkets

[Beso]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I don't think so , and usually victims no matter how much they've been groomed don't usually keep jewellery neatly displayed in a box of trinkets

You don't think a young boy moonwalking on stage in a sparkly hat and white coat loves the guy he's imitating?


Oh, ok..guess it's joke time now...it's been long enough, don't you think?

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by parmnion

You don't think a young boy moonwalking on stage in a sparkly hat and white coat loves the guy he's imitating?


Oh, ok..guess it's joke time now...it's been long enough, don't you think?

Stop twisting things

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

what exactly are you suggesting here TS? It's not the first time you've gone for fms rather than their arguments


Interesting to note Liza Minelli was an acquintance of MJ and she was never accused of anything.
MJ had probably thousands of aquaintances. He was bezzy mates with Elizabeth Taylor. Does it meant she was a nonce too?

Only Mj's male friends get suspected you know how the media works lol

[Beso]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Stop twisting things

How on earth is me putting myself into the mind of a besotted young fan twisting things? I'm confused?

[GoldHeart]

Also why is HBO or website now cutting out bits from the film , that in itself sounds suspicious.

[Beso]

Ok seeing as I have already stayed my experiences earlier in the thread goldheart, and you just ignored me..

The MJ case is so much like my experience.


1..young, impressionable moving to a new house with my family next door to our cousins..instantly looking up to my stronger older by 2 and a half years cousin...

2..he pitches a tent in his back garden in the summer and obvioysly I'm up for camping..

3..normal jokey nights to begin with, then a little experimenting..


4..the doing it because you looked up to him..it felt ok, didn't it...at the time.


5..just guilt for years really, guilt for it feeling ok.

6..ah **** this, am no having this **** anymorem

[Beso]

I'm imagining that's how it feels for them...pretty confusing, and a lot of soul searching and guilt...

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Ok seeing as I have already stayed my experiences earlier in the thread goldheart, and you just ignored me..

The MJ case is so much like my experience.


1..young, impressionable moving to a new house with my family next door to our cousins..instantly looking up to my stronger older by 2 and a half years cousin...

2..he pitches a tent in his back garden in the summer and obvioysly I'm up for camping..

3..normal jokey nights to begin with, then a little experimenting..


4..the doing it because you looked up to him..it felt ok, didn't it...at the time.


5..just guilt for years really, guilt for it feeling ok.

6..ah **** this, am no having this **** anymorem

I'm not an idiot I understand all that but it doesn't fit with James & Wade's stories

I'm not going to believe 2 well known pathological liars ! , its as simply as that . plus if they've lived under oath what makes you think suddenly they're telling the truth??? I can't understand that.

[joeysteele]

Some of us, and I'd hope most of the population.
Just like to balance things and fully explore all and particularly both sides.

I have one of the most suspicious minds imaginable, however that works both ways too.
I am suspicious of both accusers and accused.

Words are easy to say and anything can be said either way too.
However when it happens that for near decades someone has said and sworn one thing.
Then changes their minds years after that sends my suspicious bells ringing.

These 2 were around at the Chandler issue and the other charges brought against MJ.

They saw no one go to prison.
So saw they could speak out.
To do so when who they are accusing is dead and adding a claim for money.
That has really fired up my suspicious mind, to the point I don't trust them and don't believe their testimony can be trusted.

It is serious to abuse children, it's one of the worst crimes.
It also is equally serious to accuse someone of it too.

To do so.
After never doing so all the time the person was alive to put their side, is worrying.

I know, and have come across groomed and sexually abused individuals.
Of all of them,.I have yet to find one who even wanted to keep anything that reminded them of their abuser, never mind doing so.

I weigh all up.
I would be the first to say MJ was really strange.
Even that I consider it inappropriate to share a bed with children.

However, that in itself does NOT prove he molested them.
All the investigations in the rooms they were in,the thorough checks done, all produced no evidence of sexual abuse.

So that's why I do not believe these 2 now and stay with the not guilty verdicts on all charges at his trial.
Where he, Michael Jackson defended himself and was submitted to cross examination as to his defence.

Something these 2 are never likely to have to do despite their changed minds and their accusations now.

I for one, just like to explore all sides and hear what all involved say, in any of these cases.
As to accusers and the one/s accused.

We've heard here and elsewhere, this is why sexual abuse cases fail because the accusers are not believed.

On the other side, the point is as I've come across, so many cases are rooted in false accusations at times too.
Which often can have equally devastating effects on the accused, even at times too after acquittal.

[GoldHeart]

Didn't Wade's wife claim she didn't have any knowledge of sexual abuse yet they've both set up a charity page to help victims as she's a survivor of abuse . Yet said she had no experience of abuse .

The charity page asking for donations sounds like a scam

[user104658]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Some of us, and I'd hope most of the population.
Just like to balance things and fully explore all and particularly both sides.

I have one of the most suspicious minds imaginable, however that works both ways too.
I am suspicious of both accusers and accused.

Words are easy to say and anything can be said either way too.
However when it happens that for near decades someone has said and sworn one thing.
Then changes their minds years after that sends my suspicious bells ringing.

These 2 were around at the Chandler issue and the other charges brought against MJ.

They saw no one go to prison.
So saw they could speak out.
To do so when who they are accusing is dead and adding a claim for money.
That has really fired up my suspicious mind, to the point I don't trust them and don't believe their testimony can be trusted.

It is serious to abuse children, it's one of the worst crimes.
It also is equally serious to accuse someone of it too.

To do so.
After never doing so all the time the person was alive to put their side, is worrying.

I know, and have come across groomed and sexually abused individuals.
Of all of them,.I have yet to find one who even wanted to keep anything that reminded them of their abuser, never mind doing so.

I weigh all up.
I would be the first to say MJ was really strange.
Even that I consider it inappropriate to share a bed with children.

However, that in itself does NOT prove he molested them.
All the investigations in the rooms they were in,the thorough checks done, all produced no evidence of sexual abuse.

So that's why I do not believe these 2 now and stay with the not guilty verdicts on all charges at his trial.
Where he, Michael Jackson defended himself and was submitted to cross examination as to his defence.

Something these 2 are never likely to have to do despite their changed minds and their accusations now.

I for one, just like to explore all sides and hear what all involved say, in any of these cases.
As to accusers and the one/s accused.

We've heard here and elsewhere, this is why sexual abuse cases fail because the accusers are not believed.

On the other side, the point is as I've come across, so many cases are rooted in false accusations at times too.
Which often can have equally devastating effects on the accused, even at times too after acquittal.

That's fair enough Joey but if you truly had a suspicious mind surely the most you could say is "Maybe he did it, maybe he didn't, we may never know"... but thus far you have been adamant that he definitely did not do it so I'd suggest your suspicious mind in this case, for whatever reason, only appears to work one way.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I'm not an idiot I understand all that but it doesn't fit with James & Wade's stories

I'm not going to believe 2 well known pathological liars ! , its as simply as that . plus if they've lived under oath what makes you think suddenly they're telling the truth??? I can't understand that.

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

Didn't Wade's wife claim she didn't have any knowledge of sexual abuse yet they've both set up a charity page to help victims as she's a survivor of abuse . Yet said she had no experience of abuse .

The charity page asking for donations sounds like a scam

They're "pathological" liars and the charity is probably "a scam"? Your reaching is getting more and more desperate, here, surely. Do you even actually know what the term "pathological liar" means?