Leaving Neverland, HBO documentary on Michael Jackson's alleged child sexual assaults, review thread: Currently 94% on Rotten Tomatoes

Status
Not open for further replies.

Static_Void

Member
Oct 30, 2018
1,662
north of the Dreamlands
Finished the first part yesterday evening. That was a very disturbing watch...

Frankly, I just don’t understand the responses defending Jackson’s actions. Doesn’t anybody have any humanity left nowadays? And the lawsuit against HBO by the Jackson estate is so disgusting.

Also, all the hostility across the internet towards that doc and the victims definitely makes me believe social media was a huge mistake.
 

NarohDethan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,249
Can someone help me understand the "he didn't have a childhood" Peter Pan syndrome defense? What kind of wide-eyed child-at-heart would...
  • exhibit shrewd business savvy like buying The Beatles' catalog?
  • threaten people with litigation?
  • drink alcohol?
  • abuse prescription drugs?
  • collect/watch porn?
  • get extensive plastic surgery?
  • have their eyebrows, eyelids, and lips tattooed?
Michael Jackson was clearly a mentally developed adult. How the fuck could anyone even begin to justify a middle-aged man sleeping in the same bed as unrelated children?
They come with that excuse because he is rich and famous. Change the name MJ for a regular John Doe and nobody will show up to take a bullet for him.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,295
They're trying to arguing that someone with a 12 year old mentally would have no interest in sex and thus couldn't have abused those kids. This is ignoring the fact that 1. 12 year olds ARE interested in sex, puberty begins around this time or younger, and 2. Jackson HAS THREE KIDS so clearly he is interested in sex.
He never had sex with the women who gave birth to his kids. Debbie admitted that.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,323
Incredibly sad to hear these men talk about their experiences and awful to hear how MJ raped and molested these kids. Unbelievable.

The part that devastated me most is toward the end of Pt. 2 when Wade tells of how he came out about the abuse and his wife had to ask him if he knew how to appropriately love his daughter, Koa. My heart sank.
 

pixelation

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,391
Anyone knows of any video analysis done by a body language expert on MJ?, from when he claimed he wasn't guilty?
 

Air

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,210
He never had sex with the women who gave birth to his kids. Debbie admitted that.
Is there a link to this statement? I'm not finding anything. Closest is that they never shared a home. There are other reports of him and Lisa Presley being sexually active though (theres an interview with Lisa talking about this, and oddly Donald Trump confirming it)
 

hanmik

Editor/Writer at Joypad.dk
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
880
Can someone help me understand the "he didn't have a childhood" Peter Pan syndrome defense? What kind of wide-eyed child-at-heart would...
  • exhibit shrewd business savvy like buying The Beatles' catalog?
  • threaten people with litigation?
  • drink alcohol?
  • abuse prescription drugs?
  • collect/watch porn?
  • get extensive plastic surgery?
  • have their eyebrows, eyelids, and lips tattooed?
Michael Jackson was clearly a mentally developed adult. How the fuck could anyone even begin to justify a middle-aged man sleeping in the same bed as unrelated children?
His lawyers told that story
Michael Jackson's defense: "If it's a 35-year-old pedophile, then it's obvious why he's sleeping with little boys. But if it's Michael Jackson, it doesn't mean anything," says Anthony Pellicano. "You could say it's strange, it's inappropriate, it's weird. You can use all the adjectives you want to. But is it criminal? No. Is it immoral? No." Bert Fields, Jackson's lawyer, agrees. "Michael never had a childhood. He was on the stage from the time he was five, and while he's a highly intelligent person, he has a lot of childlike qualities. He really lives the life of a 12-year-old." Fields believes Michael's behavior is that of anynormal 11- or 12-year-old boy. "One of the things he has done—the things I did when I was 11 or 12, probably all of us did—was to have sleepovers. So he'll have kids stay over at his ranch or wherever he is. And almost always he has their parents along on all these things."

Pellicano readily admits that Jackson has shared his bed many times with little boys over the years. "If you hide something like that, then people are going to be even more suspicious, and my view of this whole thing is just to tell the truth. He did sleep in beds with little boys. There's no question about it. He's got a gigantic bed." Pellicano isn't bothered by admitting that Jackson slept with Jamie at Jamie's house at least 30 days in a row, either. "They invited Michael to stay there. Michael didn't crash their house. He didn't say, 'I want to stay here.' They wanted him to stay there."
According to Pellicano, there was no cause for alarm in Jackson's having a friend like Jamie. "If Michael has no sexual preference one way or another, male or female, to my knowledge, and the parents of the children are allowing this, you have to look at it in the context—especially at the ranch. They go out and they play and they go on the rides and they have water fights and do all this stuff. And then they kind of like crash. Now, Michael is always fully dressed." Even at Jamie's house? "When [Jamie] went to bed, he had pajamas on, and sweats, and Michael had sweats and pajamas on. Michael goes to bed with his haton. I'm serious." Adds Pellicano, "It would make you nuts if you didn't know Michael. It would make you crazy. Not only that—I thought to myself—if a mother or a father doesn't want this to happen, it's not going to happen
Read it all and much more here
https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/1994/01/orth199401
 
Last edited:

Downhome

Member
Oct 27, 2017
865
Oh yeah??
Is there a new interview?
https://chicago.suntimes.com/entertainment/corey-feldman-dramatically-pulls-back-support-michael-jackson-leaving-neverland/

Corey Feldman is dramatically pulling back his support for embattled friend Michael Jackson in light of “horrendous” child sexual abuse allegations.

The former child star, 47, told HLN on Wednesday that he can “no longer” speak in support of Jackson after he watched and processed “Leaving Neverland,” the bombshell HBO documentary that aired Sunday night.

“I don’t want to be perceived as I’m here to defend Michael Jackson, because I can no longer do that. I can not in good consciousness defend anyone who’s being accused of such horrendous crimes,” Feldman said. “I’m also not here to judge him, because again, he did not do those things to me and that was not my experience.”

Feldman said on Twitter later that the HLN discussion was “the hardest interview” he had ever done.
 

MikeMyers

Member
Oct 25, 2017
909
US/UK
Lisa Marie was pretty hot back then.

Looking it up she had two kids before she married MJ. Wonder what their experiences were like at Neverland Ranch.
 

Air

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,210
Conveniently right after the first ever allegations became public though.

They probably did, but it was a PR move by MJ I'm sure.
Maybe, but i believe there are reports from Quincy Jones talking about him being with a lot of women, and Paris saying he had a middle eastern GF before he died. Its cool of none of that is convincing, but im just trying to lay all of what i know out there.

That said, Lisa and Mj divorced because she didnt want to have his kids. She defended him against the accusations but thought it would be a custody nightmare if they ever split. Apprently he really wanted to have kids with her, but went to debbie rowe because she wanted to do him a favor

Edit: if remember right, Lisa and MJ married low-key. It wasn't a big deal until she showed up in his music video
 

Lifendz

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,313
I recommend today's "The Daily" podcast by the NY Times. Today's guest was Wesley Morris and he spoke about the documentary and Michael's impact on music. I never really thought about it, but escaping MJ's music and his influence on music is going to be nigh on impossible. Hell, they played a variety of today's popular artists as a backdrop of sorts during the segment where they discussed his influence and it almost sounded like Michael was still alive and wrote the songs being played. I just never picked up on it before. This is really not something any of us can put away and never deal with...which might be a good thing. Hell, I was just at the grocery store buying dinner when I found myself singing along to the background song before I realized it was a Michael Jackson song...and all of this came right back into the forefront of my mind.
 

Surfinn

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,637
USA
I recommend today's "The Daily" podcast by the NY Times. Today's guest was Wesley Morris and he spoke about the documentary and Michael's impact on music. I never really thought about it, but escaping MJ's music and his influence on music is going to be nigh on impossible. Hell, they played a variety of today's popular artists as a backdrop of sorts during the segment where they discussed his influence and it almost sounded like Michael was still alive and wrote the songs being played. I just never picked up on it before. This is really not something any of us can put away and never deal with...which might be a good thing. Hell, I was just at the grocery store buying dinner when I found myself singing along to the background song before I realized it was a Michael Jackson song...and all of this came right back into the forefront of my mind.
I was also a a store yesterday and a MJ song started playing. I don't think I can ever separate his abuse from his music. It's just constantly at the forefront now. Where it should be.
 

Meowster

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,571
Missouri
Basically every male pop star since him has been trying to be him (look at Justin Timberlake, for example, who has made an entire career off of it) or recapture that magic. His musical legacy is everywhere and will probably remain intact even if his personal one is destroyed and they stop playing his music. I don’t think there has ever been a living individual as famous worldwide as he was (probably Elvis was the closest as it can get in his heyday but even then, still no - The Beatles as a group are probably the only ones that truly come close). I wonder what all this will mean for the music industry going forward.
 

deepFlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,079
Haven’t watched the documentary, have kept up with every page of the thread. Appreciated seeing the discussion as it continued as I feel bad for being even slightly conflicted about the specific claims.

It’s been frustrating to see new people come into the thread with the same arguments again and again, refusing to acknowledge that they were already discussed and dealt with (usually due to being inaccurate or misrepresenting reality - like with the supposed 10-12 years of FBI investigation), or actually address how the very obvious issues are already beyond defending.

But what really gets me is anyone who demands “proof” before they can even question if he’s completely innocent, when like... so, I’m lucky enough to have never had this sort of thing happen to/around me, so maybe I’m wrong. But I’m going to guess that proving this kind of accusation in court does not necessarily require absolute physical evidence/documentation of the crime, right? It would be ridiculous to require a kid to have extensive proof/documentation, right? So why is some kind of miraculous definitive physical evidence the bar that needs to be passed before you even think he might have done something?
 

Adonis

Alt-Account
Banned
Jan 27, 2019
42
Hearing that one of the kids dads killed himself the day his brother left to join him in America was heart breaking
 

Green Yoshi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,950
Cologne (Germany)
I recommend today's "The Daily" podcast by the NY Times. Today's guest was Wesley Morris and he spoke about the documentary and Michael's impact on music. I never really thought about it, but escaping MJ's music and his influence on music is going to be nigh on impossible. Hell, they played a variety of today's popular artists as a backdrop of sorts during the segment where they discussed his influence and it almost sounded like Michael was still alive and wrote the songs being played. I just never picked up on it before. This is really not something any of us can put away and never deal with...which might be a good thing. Hell, I was just at the grocery store buying dinner when I found myself singing along to the background song before I realized it was a Michael Jackson song...and all of this came right back into the forefront of my mind.
Many artists were ethically highly questionable people, committed crimes and terrorized their environment. If an ethically impeccable artist's life were made a prerequisite for the public availability of works of art, the museums of the world would have to be emptied as far as possible.

And the music is not to blame. On the other hand, you have to consider the people who have been seriously harmed by artists and for whom their music can mean a retraumatization. A certain consideration for these people is therefore of course not only justifiable, but even necessary.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,295
Hearing that one of the kids dads killed himself the day his brother left to join him in America was heart breaking
Hearing his mom say, "I feel like maybe I was partially responsible (for Wade getting raped by Michael Jackson from age 7 to 14)" was even more heartbreaking considering what she did to the family to enable that to occur. Wade's wife cutting her out of their lives was justified.
 

Lifendz

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,313
Many artists were ethically highly questionable people, committed crimes and terrorized their environment. If an ethically impeccable artist's life were made a prerequisite for the public availability of works of art, the museums of the world would have to be emptied as far as possible.
I understand what you're saying about artists creating great works but being flawed people, but I can't separate the artist from the work in this case. We're talking about someone who manipulated and abused children and their families, and he seemed rather calculated about it, which makes him even more of a monster. For me, it rises above cases where I separate the artist from the work. And even though the music is not to blame, it's so intertwined with the despicable behavior, I don't know if I'll ever be able to listen to his music and not think about what he did.
 

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
12,196
Edit: if remember right, Lisa and MJ married low-key. It wasn't a big deal until she showed up in his music video

No it was a giant pr effort at the time and very weird. She was beautiful and certainly understood fame and pressure but it was bizarre and the opposite of low key.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,295
No it was a giant pr effort at the time and very weird. She was beautiful and certainly understood fame and pressure but it was bizarre and the opposite of low key.
Especially that stupidly staged kiss at the MTV music awards.

Michael before awkwardly kissing Priscilla: "And they said it would never last."
Narrator: "It didn't."
 

TrAcEr_x90

Member
Oct 27, 2017
247
I know it's the worst kind of attention possible, but I was watching the Oprah after show for a bit last night (it's up on YouTube for now, worried it'll get taken down soon if it hasn't already) and

it blows my fucking mind how Michael Jackson still gets all this world stopping attention even 10 years after his fucking death.

My thoughts on watching about half of Oprah's special so far last night:

Jimmy looks especially broken, it's really sad to see. Wade must be further along in the healing process, as has been pointed out already.

I find it inappropriate that there's basically joking around and laughter through some of this. And what's with the smiles I'm seeing from some people speaking? I find it weird. I forget who the guy was, I think he was a doctor, but he's basically got a grin on his face while he's talking and personally I find it a bit creepy :/ And why is Oprah joking around and getting laughs from the audience when she's talking about MJ giving Jimmy attention "anyone would want" like him saying the best part of his Hawaii trip was being with him? Rubs me the wrong way.

I'm glad she's trying to raise awareness though, it's very commendable.
To be honest I think it is quite the opposite. Wade is able to hide the process of working through it alot better.
 

Air

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,210
No it was a giant pr effort at the time and very weird. She was beautiful and certainly understood fame and pressure but it was bizarre and the opposite of low key.
I could have sworn I read that their wedding was private.

Yeah, they did have a small private ceremony: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lisa-marie-presley-michael-jackson_us_574603b8e4b055bb11710d34

I could have worded that better. Perhaps I should have said that they probably didn't see it as a big deal due to them having a private ceremony. Of course, the daughter of Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson getting wed was a big deal, but it was made public much later (https://www.brides.com/story/michael-jackson-and-lisa-marie-presley-wedding).

I think the bizzare part from the audience is how sudden it seemed, but they apparently knew each other for many years, and even tried working it out for almost half a decade after the divorce
 

dyreschlock

Member
Oct 27, 2017
596
Takayama, Gifu, Japan
The second part of this documentary is starting to get to me now. Especially the parts where they have children, and they show photos and their wives talk about how Wade and Jimmy were with their children. How broken they looked.

And then Wade says something like, "My children is about the same age I was when I first met Michael. And I think about him with my children... How I would never want that to happen to them. How I would defend them against someone like Michael. And if something ever happened like that to them... That I would kill that person."

"But then I think back to what happened with me and Michael... and I don't have those same thoughts at all. Only love... Why is that different?"

I think that idea is rather powerful.
____

Also, the previous documentary, "Living with Michael Jackson" is required viewing as well. You're actually able to see how Michael lived. The constant overwhelming crowds of fans, and his complete sense of detachment from anything resembling normal life.

Man.. that scene where he goes "shopping", and goes into the fancy classical art store... He's just pointing around, "I want that, and that. Ohh, that's beautiful. I want that. I like the blue ones. Both of those." The interviewer is stunned, "Do you know how much this stuff is?" He looks at the tag, "These are both $270,000." Michael nonchalantly spends more than $10 million on vases and art in the span of 5-10 minutes.

But finally, it's him being interviewing with Gavin. And Gavin puts his head on Michael's shoulder. They're holding hands. And talking about love.

After the interview, it's Gavin that starts the 2005 Trial.
____

I feel like calling Michael a freak, crazy, or nuts or even just calling him a monster is somewhat disingenuous and doesn't begin to describe him or his life. Those words don't have enough depth.
 

Shy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,818
Reading the responses to Louis tweet I wonder if that people deep inside know they are defending a child predator or really are that away from reality
Most reasonable person in the doc was Wade's older brother. We all agree on that right?
Yep, he seemed like a top man.
His wife brings the rage pretty well. I'm totally with her, I wouldn't let her take care of her grandson either.
And she's absolutely correct. She should never allow the mum near her kid, ever again.
This is like the 5th or 6th person I've asked in this thread who dodged the question. I'm sensing a pattern
Yes, that those people also have a child like innocence. So they don't understand the question. 😏
Some of the 'he's innocent' people who seem to keep wandering in here seem to forget Jimmy Saville sexually assaulted hundreds of people over the course of 30-40 years and it was swept under the carpet until he died. Monsters are remarkably good at hiding in plain sight.
Don't ever forget. But to this day still think he cunt is innocent.
Hearing that one of the kids dads killed himself the day his brother left to join him in America was heart breaking
It was. Poor man's his entire family, just fucking abandoned him like he was nothing.
Hearing his mom say, "I feel like maybe I was partially responsible (for Wade getting raped by Michael Jackson from age 7 to 14)" was even more heartbreaking considering what she did to the family to enable that to occur. Wade's wife cutting her out of their lives was justified.
He was. Both of their mothers deserve to be alone for the rest if their lives.
To be honest I think it is quite the opposite. Wade is able to hide the process of working through it alot better.
Something that everyone seems to be ignoring.
Man.. that scene where he goes "shopping", and goes into the fancy classical art store... He's just pointing around, "I want that, and that. Ohh, that's beautiful. I want that. I like the blue ones. Both of those." The interviewer is stunned, "Do you know how much this stuff is?" He looks at the tag, "These are both $270,000." Michael nonchalantly spends more than $10 million on vases and art in the span of 5-10 minutes.
I know this is a jokey aside in a serious thread. But i remember that part, and think all that shit he was buying was so tacky.
 

Blunoise

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,154
Atlanta, GA
User Banned (3 Days): Drive-By Trolling in a Sensitive Thread
I have a simple quick question. I hope I don’t get banned here because I know how this forum views a difference of opinions even if we have freedom of speech But is it fair to to accuse some one who is dead that has no rights to defend, im just curious on that? Is it possible still to say guilty of crime.That’s all I wanted to know
 

El Bombastico

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
8,052
Yep, he seemed like a top man.

And she's absolutely correct. She should never allow the mum near her kid, ever again.

Yes, that those people also have a child like innocence. So they don't understand the question. 😏

Don't ever forget. But to this day still think he cunt is innocent.

It was. Poor man's his entire family, just fucking abandoned him like he was nothing.

He was. Both of their mothers deserve to be alone for the rest if their lives.

Something that everyone seems to be ignoring.

I know this is a jokey aside in a serious thread. But i remember that part, and think all that shit he was buying was so tacky.
And the fact that by that time he was already in serious debt. I remember that it got so bad near the end of his life the when he wanted an iPhone, he had to get it under his bodyguard's name because his own credit was so shit the phone provider wouldn't approve it.
 

Shy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,818
I have a simple quick question. I hope I don’t get banned here because I know how this forum views a difference of opinions even if we have freedom of speech But is it fair to to accuse some one who is dead that has no rights to defend, im just curious on that? Is it possible still to say guilty of crime.That’s all I wanted to know
Yes, yes it. Just look at Jimmy Saville.

And it happens all the time in criminal cases. So what's your point ?
And the fact that by that time he was already in serious debt. I remember that it got so bad near the end of his life the when he wanted an iPhone, he had to get it under his bodyguard's name because his own credit was so shit the phone provider wouldn't approve it.
It because he an innocent child. So he didn't know how money works.
 

Ignatz Mouse

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,666
I have a simple quick question. I hope I don’t get banned here because I know how this forum views a difference of opinions even if we have freedom of speech But is it fair to to accuse some one who is dead that has no rights to defend, im just curious on that? Is it possible still to say guilty of crime.That’s all I wanted to know
Do you think he abused children?
 
Dec 2, 2017
5,051
I have a simple quick question. I hope I don’t get banned here because I know how this forum views a difference of opinions even if we have freedom of speech But is it fair to to accuse some one who is dead that has no rights to defend, im just curious on that? Is it possible still to say guilty of crime.That’s all I wanted to know
It is fair yeah. As pointed out, look at saville.
 

Static_Void

Member
Oct 30, 2018
1,662
north of the Dreamlands
The second part of this documentary is starting to get to me now. Especially the parts where they have children, and they show photos and their wives talk about how Wade and Jimmy were with their children. How broken they looked.

And then Wade says something like, "My children is about the same age I was when I first met Michael. And I think about him with my children... How I would never want that to happen to them. How I would defend them against someone like Michael. And if something ever happened like that to them... That I would kill that person."

"But then I think back to what happened with me and Michael... and I don't have those same thoughts at all. Only love... Why is that different?"

I think that idea is rather powerful.
____

Also, the previous documentary, "Living with Michael Jackson" is required viewing as well. You're actually able to see how Michael lived. The constant overwhelming crowds of fans, and his complete sense of detachment from anything resembling normal life.

Man.. that scene where he goes "shopping", and goes into the fancy classical art store... He's just pointing around, "I want that, and that. Ohh, that's beautiful. I want that. I like the blue ones. Both of those." The interviewer is stunned, "Do you know how much this stuff is?" He looks at the tag, "These are both $270,000." Michael nonchalantly spends more than $10 million on vases and art in the span of 5-10 minutes.

But finally, it's him being interviewing with Gavin. And Gavin puts his head on Michael's shoulder. They're holding hands. And talking about love.

After the interview, it's Gavin that starts the 2005 Trial.
__
I feel like calling Michael a freak, crazy, or nuts or even just calling him a monster is somewhat disingenuous and doesn't begin to describe him or his life. Those words don't have enough depth.
Just finished watching part 2. They didn’t went into it in depth, but a thing that is really getting to me is the hateful reaction of some Jackson’s fans towards the victims. When Wade’s wife, Amanda, said that they receives threats and that it makes her scared for her family it really made me sad.

There is nothing that can justify such hateful behavior. What a bunch of garbage people.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
Brian McDoogle
Oct 25, 2017
5,123
I have a simple quick question. I hope I don’t get banned here because I know how this forum views a difference of opinions even if we have freedom of speech But is it fair to to accuse some one who is dead that has no rights to defend, im just curious on that? Is it possible still to say guilty of crime.That’s all I wanted to know
Not to be mean, but you've been on this site since it's inception with over 1000 posts, so you should know by now that you don't get banned around here for just having a difference of opinion. Moreover, freedom of speech doesn't apply to private platforms, which is why you nor I or no one can say truly hateful things here or on twitter because they're private platforms and are not protected by "freedom of speech" as intended; freedom of speech applies to the relationship between you and the government.

So, to get to your question, what's fair is up for you to decide. And, while the dead are protected from criminal prosecution in this country, they aren't protected from the court of public opinion.
 

17 Seconds

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
3,589
I kept waiting for either of the mothers to show some kind of emotion or guilt. never happened. they both just seemed happy to be on tv.
 

Solo

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
6,435
I kept waiting for either of the mothers to show some kind of emotion or guilt. never happened. they both just seemed happy to be on tv.
Is that really surprising? Michael molested their kids but they were both totally complicit in allowing it happen, and I believe the chief reason for that was that both were starstruck and saw fortune in glory in MJ.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.