Love to be attacked by Jackson Stans for deflecting and then this is literally the very next post I encounter.
Drewton is not well.
This is what we're doing now? Implying that other posters are sick?
Love to be attacked by Jackson Stans for deflecting and then this is literally the very next post I encounter.
Drewton is not well.
This is what we're doing now? Implying that other posters are sick?
Love to be attacked by Jackson Stans for deflecting and then this is literally the very next post I encounter.
Drewton is not well.
Drewton seems to think that rapists rape literally every single person they see or is pretending to believe this to defend a pop star.
So I don't know.
I'm not arguing for anything I don't believe. You genuinely seem to have nothing constructive to add to this discussion and all you're doing is acting in bad faith making stuff up to personally attack me.He's arguing in bad faith about child molestation, saying he things he knows aren't true, to defend the honor of a dead pop star.
That's really fucked up.
How are people ignoring this shit? This whole thing is a fuckin' cash grab. MJ has been thru it all and under a microscope, he's innocent. Hell, he's the fuckin' victim. Jesus.
I'm not arguing for anything I don't believe. You genuinely seem to have nothing constructive to add to this discussion and all you're doing is making stuff up to personally attack me.
Sure, the pedophile is the victim.How are people ignoring this shit? This whole thing is a fuckin' cash grab. MJ has been thru it all and under a microscope, he's innocent. Hell, he's the fuckin' victim. Jesus.
I mean people over play the fan thing. I'm a pretty big fan but it doesn't take a fan to recognize what seems to be numerous holes and inconsistencies in these stories and have pause.As a fan I don't want any of this to be true.
Whatever the truth is, the fact that this all 100 percent possible, is so sad and disturbing.
MJ having a traumatic childhood is no absolution for this things to have supposedly happened.
It's painful to think as a fan, but imagine those who went through it.
lmfao. So every single person reviewing this doc is clearly wrong???How are people ignoring this shit? This whole thing is a fuckin' cash grab. MJ has been thru it all and under a microscope, he's innocent. Hell, he's the fuckin' victim. Jesus.
I just want to step in for a moment and point something out:
People who keep saying this? 80% of you wouldn't be saying this about a woman who said she slept in the same bed as kids.
It's coming from that same part of your lizard brain that society has trained to flinch any time you see a grown man alone with a little girl.
And you're going to deny it now that I have pointed it out, but there is a reason so many people keep phrasing it "a grown man" and so few "an adult".
MJ is not innocent. He set himself up for this with his lifestyle. And said lifestyle was completely improper. I don't know what it would have taken for him to make wiser choices, but what was done was done.How are people ignoring this shit? This whole thing is a fuckin' cash grab. MJ has been thru it all and under a microscope, he's innocent. Hell, he's the fuckin' victim. Jesus.
An actual trial > Documentarylmfao. So every single person reviewing this doc is clearly wrong???
What the fuck am I reading in here
lmfao. So every single person reviewing this doc is clearly wrong???
What the fuck am I reading in here
Michael's nephew Taj and Marlon were on Breakfast Club today talking about this documentary. Taj mentioned the FBI investigation that people here have brought up. Also he mentioned MJ owning half of Sony's publishing which I had no idea about.
4:40 is where you can start of you wanna hear the FBI part
He's repeating the same incorrect information.
The reason this is so frustrating is that you can ~literally~ go on the FBI website and read the entire case. All of the information is public now. There is nothing preventing anyone from going on there and seeing what their investigation was. Yet people, including his nephew, choose to continue to perpetuate bullshit.
Reviewing what exactly? Is there any new proof offered in this?lmfao. So every single person reviewing this doc is clearly wrong???
What the fuck am I reading in here
Exactly. Many people are completely ignoring this. It's the goddamned FBI. Believe a documentary if you want tho. I'm not even really a fan of MJ's music, mostly the justice system in this case.He's repeating the same incorrect information.
The reason this is so frustrating is that you can ~literally~ go on the FBI website and read the entire case. All of the information is public now. There is nothing preventing anyone from going on there and seeing what their investigation was. Yet people, including his nephew, choose to continue to perpetuate bullshit.
Exactly. Many people are completely ignoring this. It's the goddamned FBI. Believe a documentary if you want tho. I'm not even really a fan of MJ's music, mostly the justice system in this case.
I think what they were saying is that you can go through the information that the FBI found as it's all public and searchable at this time. A bit flippant, but the point stands. The information is there.I... think you misread this post....
Michael Jackson was not investigated by the FBI for ten years but people have intentionally spread the lie that he was.
I think what they were saying is that you can go through the information that the FBI found as it's all public and searchable at this time. A bit flippant, but the point stands. The information is there.
Yes? That's the whole point of this thread! Did you actually read Wesley Morris' piece?Reviewing what exactly? Is there any new proof offered in this?
Me reading this thread because man are people getting way too heated at those who are calmly stating their POV ( and using facts too!)
And people bringing up R Kelly? Come on . I don't see celeb worship I see a bunch of people who have seen yeaaaars of questionable attacks on a controversial figure that were eventually disproven. One doc doesn't erase the entire road leading up to it . Of course if the truth is the worst case scenario then MJ will be rightly condemned but man some people really wanna see the man burn
I can do this better--I'm going to bring us all together:
Janet Jackson is perfection.
Discuss.
This entire conversation is about this one sentence which you are completely ignoring to try to talk about other things.
"Having proof of what you accuse someone of is sort of the cornerstone of the criminal justice system."
People's opinions aren't the criminal justice system.
Okay.
Do you get it now.
From everything I've gathered this is two individuals who have testified under oath saying the opposite of what they are claiming now. I haven't seen the doc but this isn't something you can just wave away. Nothing in that write-up tells me that there's any more proof being offered than previously.Yes? That's the whole point of this thread! Did you actually read Wesley Morris' piece?
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/arts/television/michael-jackson-leaving-neverland.html
If you choose to watch this documentary and come away with it feeling like these two victims would go through all this drama and trauma and admit this to their families just to make a buck or something that cynicism is on you.
Wesley Morris from the Washington post says:I'm curious if this documentary will spend any time trying to patch up Wade's shit credibility, or just sweep it under the rug. I'm afraid what we're going to get instead is a documentary 100% interested in convincing you based on emotion.
I'll be watching this Sunday.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/arts/television/michael-jackson-leaving-neverland.htmlThe movie presents Jackson almost entirely from the two families' points of view, in photographs, answering machine messages and a montage of lovey-dovey faxes he sent to his "little one," which is what James remembers Jackson calling him. He even remembers the lullaby Jackson built around the phrase. The movie recreates for us the haze Jackson cast over them. Its only moments of disputation arrive in the form of television, from, say, Jackson's defense lawyers during the 2004-5 trial, and, in 1993, from Jackson himself, in a recorded statement against molestation charges brought by the father of Jordan Chandler. (It was nationally broadcast, as news.)
huffpost.com/us/entry/us_610258Could you give me a few sources for that, because I can't find a single one.
Sneddon was later caught seemingly trying to plant fingerprint evidence against Jackson, allowing accuser Gavin Arvizo to handle adult magazines during the grand jury hearings, then bagging them up and sending them away for fingerprint analysis.
Right on the money:I'm curious if this documentary will spend any time trying to patch up Wade's shit credibility, or just sweep it under the rug. I'm afraid what we're going to get instead is a documentary 100% interested in convincing you based on emotion.
I'll be watching this Sunday.
The larger issue with Leaving Neverland, though, is that for something that calls itself a "documentary," it is woefully one-sided — and in some cases, conveniently selective about the information it chooses to include about its two subjects. Legally, Reed and HBO have no obligation to include a denial by Jackson's estate — you cannot defame a dead man, as it were. (A clip of Jackson's 1992 video denial is included in the film.) For a documentary to be a true work of journalism, however, it is incumbent upon the filmmaker to solicit comments from the opposing side — in this case Jackson's estate, his family, etc. — which the estate insists Reed did not do. (On Feb. 21, the estate filed a lawsuit against HBO over Leaving Neverland.) The director has said that he did interview former detectives and prosecutors from the two principal investigations into Jackson, but the only opposing commentary in the film comes courtesy of YouTube videos, featuring wild-eyed fans berating Robson for going public with his claims. And Neverland all but ignores Robson and Safechuck's lawsuits against the Jackson estate — both of which were dismissed and are currently under appeal. Though Robson's suit is mentioned in the film, neither he nor Safechuck are questioned about the ongoing litigation or their motives for pursuing it.
It is worth noting, though, that Leaving Neverland director Dan Reed never sought comment from the Jackson estate on the devastating claims made by the film's two subjects, Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who both allege that Jackson sexually abused them as children. Reed says the film's narrow scope—a tightly framed look at the lives of two boys and their families as they are seduced into Jackson's bizarre, rarefied, possibly predatory orbit—was a creative decision.
That one-sidedness has less to do with the absence of Jackson's family than with the film's lack of candor regarding complicating information about Robson, Safechuck, and two of Jackson's previous accusers. Viewers inclined to regard the allegations against Jackson with skepticism will find these holes leave room for their misgivings to grow. In glossing over, and sometimes entirely excluding, elements of the factual record, the documentary hobbles its chances to convince skeptics that these men are telling the truth. This misstep—one that presumably stems from a desire to protect Robson and Safechuck—actually does a grave disservice to both men, whose stories I believe.
Finding a lot of evidence "which directly corroborated Wade and James's story" but not include any of it in a friggin' documentary is a bullshit move, but whatever.Reed says he approached Leaving Neverland with "all the scepticism and rigour that I would approach a story about a terrorist attack". He went deep into the archives of various criminal investigations, interviewed detectives, and read files and statements, "a lot of which directly corroborated Wade and James's story. I didn't include that material in the film, because I felt the family accounts had a power all of their own."
In Leaving Neverland, Reed gives space solely to Robson, Safechuck and their families. Over the course of three hours and 10 minutes, he lets them tell their story in their own time, and in as much detail as they need.
Except you're twisting the truth as well. If you look at the documents you can see the investigation took place in '93, '95, '03 and '04. With seperate cases pertaining to '92 and '97.It's not. The article headline is wrong. The FBI, per their own website provided support for the case in 1994 and then provided support for the case in 2004. Someone read that and it turned into the FBI was investigating him for 10 years.
https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael Jackson
Except you're twisting the truth as well. If you look at the documents you can see the investigation took place in '93, '95, '03 and '04. With seperate cases pertaining to '92 and '97.
So congrats, not a 10 year ongoing investigation but one that stretched about 10 years. That still left him clear of any wrongdoing.
Loose Change must be telling the truth then about 9/11 being an inside job. /slmfao. So every single person reviewing this doc is clearly wrong???
What the fuck am I reading in here
The unflinching MJ support might be the grossest thing in this community, and that's saying something.
Any new evidence brought forward? No. Story from these accusers widly discredited by experts and judges in the past? Yes.
I'm not saying Michael Jackson wasn't weird and eccentric, I'm just saying I'm not convinced he was a pedophile.
Why wait for the 10 year anniversary of his death to release an HBO documentary about this? Nobody waited for the 10 year anniversary of Jimmy Saville's death to out him as a pedophile. And unlike this case there was alot of smoke and evidence to prove it.
Any new evidence brought forward? No. Story from these accusers widly discredited by experts and judges in the past? Yes.
I'm not saying Michael Jackson wasn't weird and eccentric, I'm just saying I'm not convinced he was a pedophile.
Why wait for the 10 year anniversary of his death to release an HBO documentary about this? Nobody waited for the 10 year anniversary of Jimmy Saville's death to out him as a pedophile. And unlike this case there was alot of smoke and evidence to prove it.