[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

not wishing to throw cold water over those that got something from the documentary, but it seems to me it has reinforced beliefs already established in the viewers. I mean, these people changing their stories have been round the block, they will have been given advice on what to say to explain themselves. I personally don't subscribe to the notion that Jackson or those associated with him deserve any more time.



Jackson is long gone, and still people want to profit from association with him, from whatever angle one chooses. I also think that Jackson through his unique position is not even worth the time understanding or whatever, as it is a circumstance unlikely to ever happen again so there is really nothing to be gained from giving him further publicity/notoriety other than generating more cash for those associated with him.

Honestly I don't think you're right there bots, for example, my wife grew up a huge MJ fan and has always wanted to believe in his innocence but after watching this (alongside, I hasten to add, a lot of googling and fact checking that we always do while watching documentaries), just sighed and said sadly; " I think he probably did it, didn't he."

Also (and this may be a controversial thing to say) but the documentary *whether true or not* is a powerful and well constructed message to adult victims of childhood abuse that it's ALWAYS ok - and psychologically healthy - to come forward later in life even if it seems "far too late"...

But yeah. They know that legal action isn't possible due to him being dead. They know that MJ fans are aggressively passionate and that many people won't believe what they have to say. They have had death threats, threats against their families, and know they'll get more... And it's supposed to be feasible that they - and their very normal seeming wives with normal jobs - and several members of both of their families who all knew Michael - are doing this to share out the revenue from a HBO documentary? It simply doesn't make sense.

On the most basic level, the logical holes that one has to dig to believe that decades of abuse allegations against Jackson, including one where he paid off the accuser before court and one where witnesses were coached by the defense lawyers, are actually some sort of evil conspiracy against him for cash, are utterly huge. The far more simple and rational conclusion is that there is at least some truth to the claims.

Whether he deliberately picked kids to groom, or simply DID crave close friendships with children, is another matter. I tend to believe the latter. He was a very troubled and lonely man and the friendships were real; not a ruse for sexual gratification. However another uncomfortable truth is that mild sexual experimentation amongst pre-adolescents is a very common part of childhood friendships... And when you stick an adult with a "childlike mind and emotional state", but an adult body and adult sexual drive, into a "childlike friendship" then it's not just possible that sexual activity happened but verging on likely.

Especially when you consider the content of what ALL of his accusers are saying. He never physically penetrated them in any way (him and Wade briefly tried, once, when Wade was a teenager and "as tall as Jackson himself" not a little kid but didn't even succeed and stopped immediately). They all describe it as mainly watching each other / touching and rubbing each others genitals and nipples, going in showers together and eventually some oral sex. They also all say that Jackson never ejaculated during the contact and would "finish off himself" after.

Exactly what you would expect if someone with the mind of a child but the body of an adult started to experiment sexually.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Amy Jade

I don't stan him but I still don't think he abused any kids. I think the parents were just opertunists who knew he had money.

Well... Being blunt, his legal team spent several million dollars pushing that narrative in the press so it's unsurprising that a lot of people think that.

[Beso]

Hopefully he is drinking the devil's juice now.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Maxxie-D

To be honest, this is the sole reason why I am HESITANT to watch this documentary. Films and documentaries especially have the power to be emotionally suggestive and to fit a certain agenda. At the end of the day, I'm only human and I'm a sucker for my emotions and opinions to be easily persuaded through the medium of film.

It's probably a very well constructed and well edited film, which is the exact reason I don't want to watch it as it will probably influence my opinion through emotion over fact.

I compare these allegations with R Kelly, which I do believe those to be true, based on the fact that even his family and ex wife are speaking out against him, and there are a far greater number of allegations from different woman than there are with Michael Jackson.

MJ had two ex wives, surely either of them would speak out if they had any suspicions at all of any sinister behaviour, I mean they were married to him for gods sake!

Lisa Marie Presley said he was amazing in bed btw, don't exactly think he'd be amazing if he was really into shagging little boys.

His cock would be numb from.painkillers....pop a vaigra and poke away at something that doesn't turn you on and I think we could all be magic in bed...

I doubt she would know anyway what good or bad is when you look at her own upbringing.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

I am sure the money they will reap from this will dry those 'tears' very quickly

I feel sure you are right.
Maybe not from this documentary perhaps but they'll know now, coming out with this in this way.
There'll be clamouring likely for more from them.
Magazines, other outlets too.

At a probable lucrative financial gain for them.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I feel sure you are right.

Maybe not from this documentary perhaps but they'll know now, coming out with this in this way.

There'll be clamouring likely for more from them.

Magazines, other outlets too.



At a probable lucrative financial gain for them.

Again Joey, if this is the motivation of James Safechuck then he should be making a fortune in Hollywood. You would honestly have to believe that he's an A-grade method actor. Also do you genuinely believe that several members of their family are in it - saying things that they know will make them internationally hated and branded liars - for a small slice of interview money?

I understand that people really want to believe the best of Michael Jackson but I think doing so involves convincing oneself of things that are just not realistic, and automatically disbelieving adults with childhood abuse stories because they "waited so long" to say anything is really a dangerous mindset. MANY childhood abuse survivors don't say anything until adulthood, and the late 20's / early 30's (exactly the age these men have hit) are bang on the usual time that people start to process and understand childhood abuse that happened to them.

[Ramsay]

If he wasn't so good at music he wouldn't have so many people defending him

[arista]

Its on Ch4HD tomorrow Weds 9PM - 10:50PM Part 1
then Thursday 9PM - 11PM Part 2

[What People Are Saying About HBO's Michael Jackson Documentary 'Leaving Neverland'
The reaction has been mixed.]
https://www.cosmopolitan.com/enterta...hbo-reactions/

[arista]

Debate now on ITV1HD "This Morning"
on "should his music be banned " like Radio 2 have

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Ramsay

If he wasn't so good at music he wouldn't have so many people defending him

Ive seen people on Facebook saying him being a filthy pervert should be forgiven because he made good music !! WTAF ?

[Ramsay]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Ive seen people on Facebook saying him being a filthy pervert should be forgiven because he made good music !! WTAF ?

Madness, imagine he was just some average dude that worked in a shop having kids over for "sleepovers"..Pleaaaase

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Ramsay

Madness, imagine he was just some average dude that worked in a shop having kids over for "sleepovers"..Pleaaaase

The parents need to take some blame too, would any parent let their child sleep at a grown mans house and let them sleep over ? makes you wonder if he didn't pay the parents to allow it

[Ramsay]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

The parents need to take some blame too, would any parent let their child sleep at a grown mans house and let them sleep over ? makes you wonder if he didn't pay the parents to allow it

Absolutely, I can't wrap my head around it

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by iRyan

I’m saying that the only reason people are questioning the victims and the evidence presented is because Michael Jackson was a superstar and a deity in the eyes of his fans. If the person in question was not Michael Jackson, nobody would be running to defend him when the signs of his child abuse are so blatantly clear.

That's a lot of assumptions you're making about a lot of people.
Assuming why they think the way they do and even predicting what they may think if some hypothetical scenario that hasn't happened might happen.

But you do you.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

The parents need to take some blame too, would any parent let their child sleep at a grown mans house and let them sleep over ? makes you wonder if he didn't pay the parents to allow it

Well, haven't two of the dads killed themselves?

[Tom4784]

I'm of the mind that, at this point, we probably won't ever know one way or the other. I just hope the accusers can find some peace in all of it.

[user104658]

Well, Wade Robson's mother at least seems to quite deeply blame herself. Also his older brother (who is 9 years older so was in his late teens when Wade started hanging around with MJ, and clearly thought the whole thing was weird) expresses towards the end that he's struggling to get his head around forgiving the mother for letting it happen. The other mum doesn't seem to blame herself as much, just acknowledges that it's crazy how taken in the whole family was. TBH it's pretty clear that both were swept up in the excitement of having a big celebrity so closely involved with their family and didn't so much turn a blind eye on purpose, but definitely let their guard down in a way that CLEARLY no one would with any other random adult coming into their lives.

Although "Abducted In Plain Sight" suggests that it happens with randoms too . There are actually quite a few bizarre parallels with that documentary e.g. how they felt about him, wanting to protect him, that they loved him and lied for him etc... all very similar to the girl in that case. And she also didn't recognise it as abuse until adulthood, while there's no question of the man's guilt in that case. It's proof in itself that these things (them protecting Jackson and lying for him) are not actually unusual at all in grooming cases.

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Well, haven't two of the dads killed themselves?

Indeed, although Wade Robson's dad had a history of mental health problems and killed himself before the abuse allegation. That said, reading between the lines, I feel like the dad had a major problem with Wade (and his mother and sister) being so deeply involved with Jackson right from the start and that probably played at least a partial role in their marital problems.

[chuff me dizzy]

If Jackson wasn't a pop icon would the parents have let their kids sleep in the same bed as him ?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

If Jackson wasn't a pop icon would the parents have let their kids sleep in the same bed as him ?

of course they wouldn't and it's totally crazy for people to say there's any other reason an adult would want to sleep with strangers kids other than he's a paedo .................imo

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

of course they wouldn't and it's totally crazy for people to say there's any other reason an adult would want to sleep with strangers kids other than he's a paedo .................imo

Totally agree ,why would a man build a funfair in his garden if not to get kids to want to keep coming back to his house ....
reminds me of a dirty old man asking kids if they want to go see his puppies

Years ago they was a documentary on MJ and his strange sleeping habits, but can I hellaslike find it

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by iRyan

The director confirmed they did not receive or seek any financial compensation for their participation in this film.

They will earn loads in interviews etc.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

If Jackson wasn't a pop icon would the parents have let their kids sleep in the same bed as him ?

If he wasn't a pop icon Chuff none of this would be happening as there would be no money or fame to gain . he was an eccentric ,but imo he wasn't a peado ,he just liked kids but its like you can't touch kids today as you're labelled a peado, other children stayed there and they have not accused him of anything ,but the two who now claim to have been abused by him defended him in court ,he wasn't a child either he was 20,and now 10 years after his death they start talking,so imo once a liar always a liar,so I need truthful proof.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

If he wasn't a pop icon Chuff none of this would be happening as there would be no money or fame to gain . he was an eccentric ,but imo he wasn't a peado ,he just liked kids but its like you can't touch kids today as you're labelled a peado, other children stayed there and they have not accused him of anything ,but the two who now claim to have been abused by him defended him in court ,he wasn't a child either he was 20,and now 10 years after his death they start talking,so imo once a liar always a liar,so I need truthful proof.

That logic is totally flawed, though... "he didn't abuse ALL the kids who went to his house, therefore he didn't abuse any of them".

Alsobthe reasons they've defended him in the past are well laid out and explained in The documentary and fall well within normal for abuse victims. You might not "get it" but that doesn't really change anything.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

If he wasn't a pop icon Chuff none of this would be happening as there would be no money or fame to gain . he was an eccentric ,but imo he wasn't a peado ,he just liked kids but its like you can't touch kids today as you're labelled a peado, other children stayed there and they have not accused him of anything ,but the two who now claim to have been abused by him defended him in court ,he wasn't a child either he was 20,and now 10 years after his death they start talking,so imo once a liar always a liar,so I need truthful proof.

He just liked sleeping in bed with strangers kids ..........sure Jan

[Beso]

What's telling for me is how robson said when he got older he felt Michael was turning to new kids, making them his favourites... robson would then do what was asked of him thinking it would make him Michaels favourite again..... sounds like grooming to me.