• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.

Footage of Michael Jackson ring shopping with a young boy resurfaces

Nov 20, 2017
2,552
#1
Mod Edit:
Official Staff Communication
This topic is especially hard to adjudicate given the long and tortured history of the cases, the outcome of previous trials, and the fact that Michael Jackson is deceased. That said, we've been actioning members who attacked the accusers as liars etc. A number of posts are still being reviewed to ensure consistency.

For future Michael Jackson threads please observe these rules of engagement:
  • You are free to presume MJ's guilt and address him accordingly.
  • You can reference inconsistencies in testimony and past acquittals.
  • You cannot label the accusers as liars or frauds or similar.
  • If you can't observe these rules or can't accept them, do not participate. Metacommentary derails will be banned.


H/t ONTD:


Footage of Michael Jackson in a disguise shopping for rings with a young boy at Zales jewlery store in Simi Valley, California has been uncovered. Star Magazine thought the ring was because Michael was planning to marry back up singer, Sheryl Crow. Michael and Sheryl never dated or got married. The young boy seems to be James Safechuck, who lived in Simi Valley, California. In the Leaving Neverland documentary, James also talked about how he would go ring shopping with Michael and Michael would sometimes wear disguises and they would pretend they were shopping for girls when it was really for James. James also showed rings Michael gave him, including one that was used for a mock wedding ceremony between them.

Here is another news report where someone who worked at Zales talks about how the police were called because Michael seemed very nervous and kept adjusting his mustache and was in a disguise, so they thought he was a robber. The whole time the 12 year old boy was talking for the both of them because Michael didn't want to talk because his voice would be recognized. The police let Michael go when they realized who he was and he gave the security guard at Zales an autograph.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
10,114
#11
What I saw : An adult man with no security guards, in disguise, buying jewelry for a small boy he would later sleep in the same bed as.

What that thread saw : Smooth criminal dope dance moves
 
Oct 25, 2017
267
#16
Well, that backs up the shopping for a ring part of the story. You can see it with your own two eyes.

His defenders will still say he's totally innocent tho.
 
Oct 25, 2017
267
#39
At this point, there could be literal footage of Michael Jackson fucking kids and the stans would find a way to deny the obvious.
"He was just filming an instructional video teaching people what NOT to do with kids. What an innocent, sweet man."
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,053
Dunedin, New Zealand
#40
So, I love Michael Jackson's music. I grew up on it and it was a big part of my life as a kid and teenager. Obviously, there is renewed interest and new (to me, at least) evidence of, at best, inappropriate behavior by Jackson. It's wildly disappointing for me that this is the case, but it's hard to not seriously question what was going on between Jackson and the kids in his life.

I find with other actors, artists, etc., when relatively bad things surface about them, I more or less cut them out of my rotation of music/movies/etc, because I don't want to support that person. In MJ's case, well, he's dead. Listening to his music doesn't provide him any monetary advantage.

So, what do you all personally believe in regards to a "separating art from the artist" approach to a dead artist?
 

Cas

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,908
#44
Ew, the kid (now adult) still has the rings too. That's a pretty bad look. I love Michael's music and all, but the man was very likely a child abuser.
 
Oct 28, 2017
1,189
#45
Watching the smooth criminal footage in the news clip wasn’t the same at all. All I see is a child molester up there in that white suit. I’m done.
 

CDX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
671
#48
The young boy seems to be James Safechuck,
I'm not sure I'm prepared enough to watch the YouTube videos of little Jimmy buying those rings with Micheal.


When James brings up the rings in the documentary, seeing the struggle and the reactions on his face, and his trembling hands as a grown adult was honestly one of the most harrowing parts of the documentary for me.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,649
#50
So, I love Michael Jackson's music. I grew up on it and it was a big part of my life as a kid and teenager. Obviously, there is renewed interest and new (to me, at least) evidence of, at best, inappropriate behavior by Jackson. It's wildly disappointing for me that this is the case, but it's hard to not seriously question what was going on between Jackson and the kids in his life.

I find with other actors, artists, etc., when relatively bad things surface about them, I more or less cut them out of my rotation of music/movies/etc, because I don't want to support that person. In MJ's case, well, he's dead. Listening to his music doesn't provide him any monetary advantage.

So, what do you all personally believe in regards to a "separating art from the artist" approach to a dead artist?
Consume whatever entertainment you want as long as it's legal. MJ dead so can't use any money. Any cash you're throwing at the estate can be for his kids and any successful civil suits against the estate.