https://www.hbo.com/documentaries/leaving-neverland
It says there that both parts will be available to stream today
-
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.
Leaving Neverland, HBO documentary on Michael Jackson's alleged child sexual assaults, review thread: Currently 94% on Rotten Tomatoes
- Thread starter Brian McDoogle
- Start date
- Status
It says there that both parts will be available to stream today
But.... that's not what you originally said. You said we should believe the children who are accusing him and I stated they have been proven in a court of law to be wrong. Now you are stating that because MJ said he shared a bed with children it proves he was guilty. This statement was in the context of Gavin Arvizo, which is the same fucking case that went to trial and he was proven innocent for. So what the hell are you talking about?
This documentary takes a biased stance and presents no new evidence.
Courts don't prove anything.
Says someone who has watched none of it.
Expect to see some "there it is, without a doubt!" Posts after this finishes from the posters who want so badly for Michael Jackson to have sexually abused children.
I'm pretty sure there's been at least two attempts by them with it being thrown out.
No problem. And your apologies are certainly accepted. I knew pretty fast that you were genuine.
I also know that things can get heated. I am a victim of that to. I had to restrain myself or I would have wrote much worse things at you.
You come from a good place and that's very important to me.
So no hard feelings from an old twat to another (I hope I win, I am 41, lol).
And if I am sometimes not clear, don't be afraid to ask.
Holy shit. Yeah I'm done with you. What a fucking joke this thread is.
And yet in the same psot you say the following.
But a biased for profit documentary is somehow proof for you.
Didn't want to jump into this mess, but this statement makes anything you have said or will say in this thread invalid.
That first conclusion doesn't seem as clear cut looking at the conversations in this thread, that's probably why the conversation is still going.
So courts proved R Kelly did nothing wrong? They proved OJ is innocent? Do you comprehend what courts actually do?
No, the thing you and other defenders keep willfully ignoring is proof enough for me - a man who admits to sleeping with boys. Parents who admit to being bought. And men who admit to being molested by that very same man who gave gifts to parents in exchange for access to their boys, who I'll remind you admitted on film enjoyed sleeping with them. But go ahead and keep ignoring the obvious.
I'm actually surprised that people on this forum don't think an adult having innapropriate relationships with children is abuse. Like, it's clear cut
Last edited:
All of what you said is either exaggerated by poor journalism or incorrect as others have pointed out in this thread. Your argument in itself is invalid by what you previously stated.
Watching it now, this is going to be hard to get. through as I hate " one sided" criminal documentaries , they usually just serve to piss off the people on both sides of the accused. I'm talking docs on a controversial subject where the guilt/innocence isn't wholly clear before anyone jumps down my throat over " both sidesing" , etc. Gotten borderline hostile in here
Brett Barnes, as mentioned above in threatening to sue HBO for this documentary suggesting that Jackson molested him.
Also.
I said it's convenient that people suddenly find law enforcement to be infallible in this isolated incident. Nice spin though.
Watching it right now first red flag for me is how he gets involved with these children in the first place. If anyone did that shit in 2019 they would be penalized heavily for it instantly. Why in the fuck is he so compelled to make friends with children that are imitators of his craft? And I don't mean "friends" as in hey I met and hanged out with Micahel Jackson one time, but regular close friendship.
He definitely groomed these kids into being his best friend at it's very best. That in of itself is disturbing and I don't want to hear any bullshit excuses saying, "Michael didn't have a childhood." so when does that lead into this kind of behavior, exactly?
What you think "share" means? Does it means that when my mom said share, your He-man toy with my brother. She meant, that he gets a arm and a leg and I get arm and a leg. Or did she mean, my brother gets to play with the toy alone.
My mom shared her bed with her parents, she didn't sleep in the bed with them, but it is still sharing.
1st comment said it best. I agree 100%. I just have one question for the people claiming he was an innocent Peter Pan pure soul made of Jesus light. What was he doing with porn mags at Neverland?
Jesus Christ the parents. How could they be so blind? Jimmy's mom even admits something felt off but kept allowing it to happen because of all the nice things Michael was paying for. Complicit.
This was a very similar theme in the R Kelly documentary. Parents who were almost willingly turning a blind eye.
So, I'm about 30 minutes behind. Where is the anger from these parents? Jimmy's mom is regaling about his time with Michael and is almost, dare I say giddy.
It's very odd. Jimmy describing these terrible acts, and then they cut to his mom who's just laughing it up. "Oh, that Michael. What a card!"
Wouldn't you be furious throughout the entire interview if what you're claiming happened to your kid actually happened?
It's very odd. Jimmy describing these terrible acts, and then they cut to his mom who's just laughing it up. "Oh, that Michael. What a card!"
Wouldn't you be furious throughout the entire interview if what you're claiming happened to your kid actually happened?
- Status