• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Reeks

Self-requested ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,326
I was so damn wrong about MJ. Just watched the HBO doc. Not sure how anyone can watch that and still think he didn't abuse those boys is beyond me. Every aspect of the story is corroborated (the footage, the faxes, the photos of MJ in their house, the timing, the patterns of grooming, everything)... so this video is not in any way suprising. What the fuck type of 'smoking gun' do people need? Those 'guns' don't exist and it's not by accident. I'm ashamed I was in the camp of skepticism.

Damn heart breaking. It really shook me. The interview with Oprah hit home so hard. It's brought up a lot of shit from my own childhood/young adulthood in ways I never even considered possible.
 

ZeoVGM

Member
Oct 25, 2017
76,106
Providence, RI
Why are you calling someone out for calling someone out for defending a pedophile? Like why are you in here going so hard to defend people who are standing up for a pedophile?

He doesn't believe he's a pedophile. That's the point. That's why he was defending Jackson.

He was too brash about it, if I'm being honest. But he clearly doesn't believe that Jackson is a pedophile.

And I don't think it's right to tag someone in a thread the person isn't in with the clear intent of starting an argument in the hope that he gets banned over the course of it.
 

stupei

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,801
Miss me with your bullshit. Don't waste my time by quoting me, thanks.

You don't have the slightest clue of my opinion relating to Michael Jackson and the child abuse and molestation allegations against him.

Perhaps people would know your opinion if you were to offer it in a thread about said topic instead of making snarky hivemind comments that add literally nothing to a discussion except the chance to derail it.

He doesn't believe he's a pedophile. That's the point. That's why he was defending Jackson.

He was too brash about it, if I'm being honest. But he clearly doesn't believe that Jackson is a pedophile.

And I don't think it's right to tag someone in a thread the person isn't in with the clear intent of starting an argument in the hope that he gets banned over the course of it.

Someone who got the the thread about the documentary off to a very specific start by compiling a lengthy list to disparage one of Jackson's victims could be expected to have an opinion on this topic.

Yet somehow when it comes to the utterly indefensible things Jackson has very obviously done, a lot of people who have a lot of things to say about his victims and why they're bad people suddenly go silent.

It's so weird.
 

Alice

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
5,867
So was this actually Safechuck from the timeline, or did he do this shit with even MORE Kids?

This is so creepy.
 

AdversaryOne

Banned
Aug 31, 2018
193
"He lifted up his hat and I saw his natural hair"

No you didn't. Nobody has seen MJ's natural hair since he was a part of the Jackson Five.
 

Deleted member 283

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,288
That's it exactly, and I'm not getting baited.

He's on my ignore list now.
Well, since you're here, what are your opinions on these videos and how they coincide with the victims' testimony. You had lots and lots to say before the documentary came out. Why so silent? You have the right to do that of course, and you can call it bait or whatever as much as you like, but you realize that doesn't reflect well on you to do that? When you're silent says just as much as when you speak and if this is when you choose to remain silent, you can't blame people for drawing certain conclusions at that point.

Especially by referring to this as attempts to get you banned or whatever to begin with. Because why would it be ban-bait to say what you want to say but are holding back on to begin with? You certainly won't be banned for admitting that MJ is guilty or that you were wrong to defend him so much and you apologize for that, or anything like that, so those can't be the things you want to say. So what's that leave exactly? Not many options.

Of course, as they say, you nonetheless have the right to remain silent. But as they also say anything you've already said can and will be used against you and that combination ain't pretty for you, gotta say.

Of course, it's possible that this is all a misunderstanding, and I'm on completely the wrong track. But in that case, only you can clear that up and can only do so by speaking up and saying whatever it is you do want to say.

You can nonetheless choose to he silent and hide in the shadows and just scream about ban-bait or whatever of course, hut if that's your decision you give up the right to he upset at people drawing whatever conclusions they're going to draw because that's on you and you're deliberately, consciously making the choice to not correct the record and clarify whatever it is that you do or don't think, so while you can do that, you can't be upset at the conclusions people will draw for you suddenly being mum.

So yeah, when you post after post in the other thread trying to slander these victims in the name of "trying to correct the record" but can't even muster a simple, say "that's terrible" in a thread like this one, I'm going to draw certain conclusions. Perhaps those conclusions are incorrect. Perhaps. But if they are, the only one who can clear them up is you and you can't do that by remaining silent here.

So what I'm trying to say is it's completely up to you how you want to be perceived here. You certainly nonetheless can play this game, but just realize that's your choice and don't be upset when certain people draw their own conclusions from it since you're purposefully avoiding correcting the record in any way in that case, that's all.
 
Last edited:

Saya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,972
Jesus christ, this is horrible. Poor James.

If the director had seen this footage, I'm sure he would've included it in the documentary.

I actually went to a MJ concert back in the early '90s and it horrifies me what he was doing to little kids at or around the same time.
 

seat

Banned
Mar 14, 2018
756
How can something like this surface and fans still defend MJ? If you still think Jackson wasn't a pedophile, you are delusional. Full stop.
 

Saya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,972
Things just kinda get lost to time. Even these news stories glossed over the fact he was shopping for rings with a 12 year old. It was more about MJ using a disguise than anything.

This and there must be so much footage of MJ from that period of time. He was the most famous person in the world back then. There must be tons of footage to look through and maybe a lot of it is only available on videotapes.
 

Speedlynx

Member
Nov 22, 2017
827
Out of curiosity how did this vid suddenly resurface? Seems like something that should've been in the doc.
 

lint2015

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,809
He disguised himself as a child rapist so people wouldn't realise that underneath the disguise was an actual child rapist.
 

El Bombastico

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
36,032
He disguised himself as a child rapist so people wouldn't realise that underneath the disguise was an actual child rapist.

That's the big fuckin' joke. He made himself so outrages and "eccentric" that he knew people wouldn't believe him to be something as mundane as a pedophile.

Its horrifying how well it worked, and continues to work.
 

TinfoilHatsROn

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,119
I know you like to pretend to be an ally but you sus as fuck for continually going to bat for ya boy.
Brah. That literally describes 90 percent of the 'allies' here.

"Fuck pedos but woah was MJ really a pedo? Isn't it possible that those two victims are just LYING WHORES? Think about it man. Follow the money."
Threads like this always leave me confused. I'm not even a Michael Jackson fan but I still don't think anything is clear cut 100% with his situation since in my mind Safechuck could have just easily bought the rings that he showed in Neverland himself knowing MJ did take him ring shopping back in the day. I feel like my mentality is always too skeptical with stuff like this. Not to say I think MJ is completely innocent because the stuff he himself has said he did was definitely messed up but I still can't bring myself to 100% believe he molested children even though in the documentary both people looked very genuine and I see no reason as to why they would make anything up. I guess ultimately it doesn't matter what I think since MJ is dead now but it is frustrating that it seems like everyone else can be so convinced but for some reason, I can't get there one way or the other myself.
Just fucking disgusting.

But hey throw up a hashtag about MeToo and wipe your hands clean, am I right?
 

honest_ry

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
4,288
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?

Fuck the art.

Im not gonna sit and listen to music when I know the person abused kids. I would feel like im enabling it.
 

Fendajaz

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
2,123
I just don't get how if he committed these acts (I haven't seen the doco yet) he didn't try anything with McCauley and Feldman. They still defend him to this day.
 

Tribal_Cult

Banned
Nov 1, 2017
3,548
At this point people who believe he was innocent are more ridiculous than people who believe he's still alive.
 

Wackamole

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,932
To the defenders who say "yeah but they changed their story": That happens a LOT with abused children. A lot don't even tell the truth untill they are adults and even THEN a lot don't say anything. Especially with men. This is very normal stuff for people who work with abused people on a daily basis. These kids try to protect that person who was mostly very kind to them. Sometimes it's their hero, or a family member and they were afraid what would happen if they told the truth and were often threatened with some horrific outcome if they did tell the truth.

Please, he's just a guy who could sing well. That's not more important than the lives of other people. People can be both a genius and a monster.

Him committing the acts doesn't mean he did it with every single child he knew.
Those were famous kids. Kids he could identify with. No abuser abuses every person. They pick and choose. But he could have abused them as well.
 
Last edited:

Saya

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,972
I just don't get how if he committed these acts (I haven't seen the doco yet) he didn't try anything with McCauley and Feldman. They still defend him to this day.

Hmm, it kind of make sense to me. Those actors were too high profile for him to do anything and their parents were much more protective of them because perhaps they were more familiar with the celebrity world. And I think MJ knew he needed a few young boys as 'friends' to keep up appearances in the media and hide the abuse he committed with others.
 

Tribal_Cult

Banned
Nov 1, 2017
3,548
I just don't get how if he committed these acts (I haven't seen the doco yet) he didn't try anything with McCauley and Feldman. They still defend him to this day.

I personally believe he did it to Macaulay at least and he's a huge factor on how he turned out like that with the drug problems and his career falling apart. Recently it seems like he got back on track, but he's probably still not in the place to come in the open about it. When he finally does, if he ever wants, I hope it can be put to rest. It seems so obvious to me, but maybe I'm wrong.
What's Culkin most recent stance on Michael from? The 2003 trial?
 

Mington

Banned for use of alt account
Banned
Dec 22, 2018
1,429
Always thought MJ was fucked up, weird, but never thought he was a paedophile.

The new evidence is daming though.

What's the general consensus on it?
 

Mington

Banned for use of alt account
Banned
Dec 22, 2018
1,429
Make no mistake, the man knew exactly what he was doing, he totally knew right from wrong. The consensus is that he was king of pedophiles. Fuck him.

Yea
Make no mistake, the man knew exactly what he was doing, he totally knew right from wrong. The consensus is that he was king of pedophiles. Fuck him.

Yea I mean if you're innocent you don't pay 15m to settle out of court.
 

Deleted member 35598

User requested account closure
Banned
Dec 7, 2017
6,350
Spain
Are we serious here ? There is a footage of MJ with that kid in a shop and that confirms the allegations ? I don't see anything damming in that footage. So each time you're hanging with a kid that is not yours, you're a sexual predators... Not saying that the allegations are untrue - I don't know - but this is by no means a smocking gun...

The only problem I have is : where the hell are the parents ?
 

FarronFox

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,429
Melbourne, Australia
What's Culkin most recent stance on Michael from? The 2003 trial?

He appeared on Michael Rosenbaum's podcast in January this year and chatted about Michael.

If you want a quick excerpt one of the many pieces on what he said it can be found here: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/16/entertainment/macaulay-culkin-michael-jackson/index.html or just listen to it all on the website itself here: https://insideofyoupodcast.com/episodes/macaulay-culkin

https://mjandboys.wordpress.com/2016/04/24/michael-jackson-macaulay-culkin/

He abused him, and dumped him at 14 years old like he did with damn near all his victims.

Not exactly considering he is the godfather of Michael's kids (you can see some recent photos/videos of Macaulay with Paris here):

https://www./tvshowbiz/article-5304831/Macaulay-Culkin-protective-Paris-Jackson.html
https://people.com/movies/paris-jackson-macaulay-culkin-38-birthday/
https://www.eonline.com/photos/2179...-macaulay-culkin-s-adorable-friendship/782363
 
Last edited:

The BLJ

Member
Feb 2, 2019
698
France
Are we serious here ? There is a footage of MJ with that kid in a shop and that confirms the allegations ? I don't see anything damming in that footage. So each time you're hanging with a kid that is not yours, you're a sexual predators... Not saying that the allegations are untrue - I don't know - but this is by no means a smocking gun...

The only problem I have is : where the hell are the parents ?
I mean... If every aspect of the guys' testimonies gets confirmed, even stuff like Michael buying rings for one of the guys to have a mock marriage with him... And the only thing left to have concrete proof for is that MJ had sex with them...

This is less a case of "there's no smoke without fire" and more a case of "we have every piece of the puzzle except one and the only piece that would fit has 'child molestation' on it".
 

rude

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,812
Why does this entire interview ring so true when supposedly her "ex-husband coached her to say this"

 

Laserdisk

Banned
May 11, 2018
8,942
UK
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.

giphy.gif
 

gofreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,734
Hmm, it kind of make sense to me. Those actors were too high profile for him to do anything and their parents were much more protective of them because perhaps they were more familiar with the celebrity world. And I think MJ knew he needed a few young boys as 'friends' to keep up appearances in the media and hide the abuse he committed with others.

Yeah, he probably was using them as signals to other boys and their parents that it was fine to hang out with him. Social credit if you like. 'Look, all these high profile kids all hang out with me!' I'd say more than one parent was ok with their kids hanging out with him because famous kids were doing the same, and 'of course it must be safe if those kids are there'. My two cents.
 

Kyuuji

The Favonius Fox
Member
Nov 8, 2017
32,047
To the people who don't believe it yet because they think this wasn't denied to begin with, don't try.
Life without an ultimate judge is a depressing idea
Since you're in here posting like this, have you changed your position from feeling the documentary was unnecessary because Michael was dead and pointing out that the victims 'changed their story' :

I find it kind of weird that these two reasonable adult dudes that have developed rationality for a long time have only solved the puzzle for themselves in realizing they were molested just recently

Anyway the man is dead. The documentary was unnescesary to begin with. Not sure what anyone was able to gain from this.
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,159
China
For those that can empathize, this is awful to take in. MJ knew what he was doing using his fame for power. Looking back at it... I just wonder how much of his circle actually knew and allowed him to take it to the grave.

One people got on the MJ gravy train they were not going to rock the boat. Take solice in the fact that that exact thinking was what lead to his death.
 
Oct 27, 2017
5,345
Buying a ring for a kid? I mean I've been a kid and that's one of the least exciting things you could receive a la a gift. Give me a transformers toy or something instead.

Why did you have to be so weird Michael.