Leaving Neverland...

[Deleted member 457759]

I've defended Jackson for years and honestly after watching that last night I changed my mind.

That's some very convincing testimony, the kinds of details and patterns, I believe they're telling the truth.

 

[Phlog]

I've defended Jackson for years and honestly after watching that last night I changed my mind.

That's some very convincing testimony, the kinds of details and patterns, I believe they're telling the truth.

It's been proven they are liars. A judge said no one could trust them. Your being swayed by a piece of disgusting media.

These guys court cases were thrown out twice, the judge said no rational jurer could believe what they were saying.

Chandler was settled because MJ was in the dangerous tour at the time. They figured cancelling the tour to do the trial would have cost hundreds of millions, so they settled for 20mil. The grand jury declined to make it a criminal trial because there was no evidence.

Chandler's dad is on record in a post above admitting it's an extortion attempt.

They're inappeal at the moment and trying to paint Wade Robson as one of the biggest performers of all time which is bullshit. His career dried up. He was broke, wife threatening to leave him. He petitioned the Jackson estate to direct the cirque dear solet show in Vegas, he's on camera saying he was doing it, he was never offered the role. He was offered to be a dancer at most.

Right after he gets turned down for this show he 'remembered' the abuse. Another story of his was that he remembered all the time but didn't know it was wrong, after being a lead witness in the 03 trial. He said he wanted to help other abuse victims but he tried to do it all privately first. That was after he failed to get anyone to publish his book on it all.


Since the documentary was aired in the states it had so much soundly debunked that they had to cut 30min out of it before airing in UK. Wade was filmed burning shit mj gave to him, Julian's, a auction house has come out saying that shit wasnt from MJ because they sold all his stuff by auction years ago.

 

[aldeniro78]

He seems like a pretty normal guy

Sorry. Seemed.

 

[Deleted member 457759]

It's been proven they are liars. A judge said no one could trust them. Your being swayed by a piece of disgusting media.

What are the details of the judges decision? These guys admitted to lying about the case repeatedly so it's normal a judge would consider their evidence inadmissible. Especially given how wealthy the accused was. I dont think that a judge rejecting their testimony is a sign they're lying in this case.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I was correcting his statement on Razor not being a fan, nothing more.

Check the poll, I don't believe the dude molested those kids. Hell I have posts at the beginning of this thread or one of the others on the topic in defense of him.

Ah, thank you for clarification.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I've defended Jackson for years and honestly after watching that last night I changed my mind.

That's some very convincing testimony, the kinds of details and patterns, I believe they're telling the truth.

On what merits did you once believe Jackson was innocent?

 

[GearSolidMetal]

 

[GearSolidMetal]

 

[GearSolidMetal]

 

[bowened]

Have you seen Razorfist's three videos on Michael Jackson?

I used to be in the 'Meh, he probably did it' crowd. But that first video is well researched and very convincing.

The media has made b-b-b-BILLIONS over the past two and a half decades over destroying Jackson.

In the same way Tyson was the perfect 'mark' for a rape accusation, conviction, and civil settlement for tens of millions, Michael Jackson was the perfect 'mark' for phile accusations and civil settlement.

I’ll have to check this out. I’ve never paid much attention to the MJ case but I watched the new documentary and found the Robsons and Safechucks to be convincing. Counter arguments should be interesting given the documentary is entirely one sided.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I’ll have to check this out. I’ve never paid much attention to the MJ case but I watched the new documentary and found the Robsons and Safechucks to be convincing. Counter arguments should be interesting given the documentary is entirely one sided.

Part 1 - Posted June 2016

Part 2 - Posted Jan 2019 after the announcement of an HBO documentary with the 2 accusers.

Part 3 - Posted 3 days ago.

 

[minute bull]

Mental gymnastics would be justifying in your head that MJ can't be a because he didn't molest Culkin. Mental gymnastics is not saying that a man who sleeps alone in bed with children is much more likely to be a than a man who doesn't. That's a no shit sherlock type of statement. Not mental gymnastics.

That's not compelling, Clarence. My knee swells due to barometric pressure preceding a storm -- does that mean my knee stands a good chance at becoming Channel 7's meteorologist? THINK, MAN.

I am not interested in the bare minimum it takes to qualify for whatever criticism you levy. I don't want people to cite definitions for me, or generic statistics, or pose irrelevant questions that have sweet FA to do with this topic entirely. It proves nothing.

If the bare minimum is what you're fine with, go nuts. And if you want to give me the finger because there's nothing else you got to say? Let me help you:

(That finger is for me! ME! And it is victorious over me and my faulty logic!)

I don't know why you pretend that real proof isn't a necessary component to adequately assessing a situation. I don't know why you would think generic stats would sway anyone, let alone me.

...It says absolutely nothing about him

I'm not sure about your police work, detective. The bolded part was my entire point.

Watch his next question:

Ok new question, your family friends with MJ would you let your kid sleep over still and they all stay in the same room/same bed together?

Goalposts have moved but the logic is still lacking. He's asking the question; this is his logic. My answer would have nothing to do with whether anyone was guilty or innocent.

(This one's also for me...)

 

[Yari]

(open the twitter thread if you want to see 20+ posts about the guy)

Its really interesting how all these "victims" that come forward, turn out to be massive piece of shit, or have a history of some very questionable behaviour. Here is German victim Michael Jacobshagen who harassed girls, sold fake memorabilia and is just a straight up liar.

Ofcourse media in my country loves to run with any new story about new victims showing up.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/KFxhvlNicJsL/ Here he is pretty much admitting on video that Michael never attempted anything with him. You dont realize how sickening many of these accusations really are, they carry absolutely no ground at all.

 

[Phlog]

It seems that the accusers always have their shit proved to be false or spurious, conjecture at best yet they feel a little bigger by taking someone down with the herd.

Group unity through the destruction of an individual who is different, vulnerable.

 

[LC Shepard]

I voted NO, not because I know for a fact (who knows), but because there has been no compelling evidence he molested anyone. A "docummentary" by people who have provided conflicting statements and lied under oath, who then come crawling from under the woodwork once MJ is dead to get some money from his estate is rather shady.

I am subject to change my mind with some real evidence, not a bunch of contradictory he said/she said claims.

 

[IGotAHugePeckah]

My thoughts...

As a doc it doesn't work because it was clearly biased and one sided. But it was a compelling watch none the less.

It seems to me you can go whichever way you want on this. If you want to believe Michael did it, you can point to the multiple accusers and eye witnesses. Where there's that much smoke there's usually fire.

But Jackson fans can point to the fact that other kids he kept in his company have said nothing happened, and the fact that the main guy stood up for Jackson and claimed under oath nothing happened. Also the fact that these guys are now suing for mega millions isn't a great look.

Personally I don't know. If it was any other human being, I would be 100% convinced he was a phile. But Michael Jackson was such a weird human being I just don't know. He's more like an alien than a man.

Gun to my head, I say he abused some kids. But I can't be 100%.

 

[skysolo]

I think from 1969-1984 Michael Jackson is the greatest person to ever walk the earth.

I have no idea if he did or didn't do anything he was accused of.

But after hearing allegations about him, why would any parent allow their kids to spend the night with him? Or any grown man who isn't related to them by DNA?

 

[IGotAHugePeckah]

Also I find it EXTREMELY phony that now all of a sudden people are taking this hard stance on Michael Jackson.

Why? Because two men claim he molested them? Guess what, there were already two men (now adults) who claimed he molested them. Why are you suddenly now taking these "victims" seriously, but not the previous "victims"?

 

[Streeter]

I dont think MJ did everything he was said to of done. N I dont think he out right raped any of the kids. I do think inappropriate things did take place. A grown man doesnt sleep with little kids hes guilty on being really creepy alone.

That said the vast majority of folks suing is bs an they are just looking for handouts

 

[Yari]

I dont think MJ did everything he was said to of done. N I dont think he out right raped any of the kids. I do think inappropriate things did take place. A grown man doesnt sleep with little kids hes guilty on being really creepy alone.

That said the vast majority of folks suing is bs an they are just looking for handouts

This is probably the stance I'd find myself in. I do still think it is creepy, but it also makes me wonder why no actual victims have stepped up if things did take place. Actual meaning, people with valid stories, proper timelines, and not all of these shady fuckers that have been all over this for the last 10 years.

Also I find it EXTREMELY phony that now all of a sudden people are taking this hard stance on Michael Jackson.

Why? Because two men claim he molested them? Guess what, there were already two men (now adults) who claimed he molested them. Why are you suddenly now taking these "victims" seriously, but not the previous "victims"?

I think much of it is shock factor, and people don't care to do any research beyond these 4 hours of documentary. I remember people leaving the Sundance Festival viewing out of shock. I suppose a lot of people just straight out believe anything the media posts, not considering they are just looking for clickbait articles to make profit on.

Edit

Going for max shock value