If you see it like that, fine. I don't, but thanks for giving your insight
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Leaving Neverland, HBO documentary on Michael Jackson's alleged child sexual assaults, review thread: Currently 98% on Rotten Tomatoes (READ OP)
- Thread starter Brian McDoogle
- Start date
If you see it like that, fine. I don't, but thanks for giving your insight
No, don't go all "this is just a difference of opinion" bullshit on me. Don't try this shit. What else could you call these kinds of claims beyond character assassination? You youself keep banging this really "character matters to me!" bullshit. If you can't even be honest enough with everyone in this topic to admit that you want to hear her talk, because character assassination actually works with you, when you've already said it in other ways through your other posts, then don't post at all. You're disingenuous as all hell.
Why would I willingly argue with someone whose completely volatile? I've engaged with other posters in this thread and in the one that was locked, and if I feel that I can have a discussion of all of the information we have I will do so. I don't see any point arguing with you. You've made up your mind about the case and the docs, so what exactly would there be to gain?
Any person with the last name Jackson be it Taj or Brandi calling these accusers liars is trying to save face. There's a myriad possible reasons why Michael could have set up Brandi with wade from covering for the abuse to providing an alternative after he "dumped" the little boy but his relationship with her was clearly outside of the scope of the documentary. I think it's hilarious you manage to somehow construct this narrative where character matters when Michael has repeatedly, consistently, and with almost shameless openness show himself to be a disgusting character.
You're not having a discussion, you're "just asking questions." Don't try and turn this into me refusing to consider the point, you can't even defend your own rationale. Again -- If it's just my own stubborn vantage point that is making me see Brandi as wanting to do nothing more than drag Wade's name through the mud, tell me how you see it? You see it as speaking his character, what the fuck is she speaking of? What insight is his affairs in his 20's providing you about his molestation when he was 7?
You're not being honest in your posts. You're arguing in bad faith.
All Brandi wants to do, is "He's no angel." I'm tired of this shit.
You shouldn't assume what my thoughts are about MJ himself. As far as your other point, sure if you want to discount them that's fine. I just want as much information about all of this as possible
I'm not "just asking questions". I've see the Doc, I believe MJ emotionally and psychologically abused these children. In this conversation between you and I, you are the issue. The doc asks us to believe the claims made by Wade and Jimmy. Why should I believe someone who calls themselves a "Master Manipulator"? If she's right, and he cheated on her with Brittney Spears to be relevant, and tried to ease his way back into her personal life when MJ died, that tells me that the person is capable of saying whatever he wants or doing whatever he wants to be relevant. Maybe that's not the case in reality, but when I don't find his words reliable, this is good insight and I can readjust expectations.
Believe me or not. Accuse me of arguing in bad faith or whatever, but I've been open and honest about my feelings about all of this all through the last thread, yet you're the only person with the problem with me. Chill dude
He could've slept around with britney, Christina, Jlo, whomever. That doesnt change the fact that Michael molested him when he was a boy.
Whether this fact is a fact seems to be the crux of the issue, no? It's very difficult to avoid engaging with the overall credibility of an accuser when adjudicating whether to believe an allegation.
Wade is just more prolific. If you want to believe the Jackson's or by proxy, Ziegler, Safechuck: would not have been able to testify in 2005 because the judge had banned his testimony before the trial had started, Michael never called him to testify according to his lawyer, and apparently one of his family (could be cousin) called BS on his accusations (via twitter I think). You're going to have more for Wade just because he's been out in the open more, and seen with the Jackson family more.
Because they don't believe it as there has been allegations before, or they do believe it and it doesn't matter to them as many other artists have issues too.
Yeah. My point isn't that they're lying -- quite to the contrary, I agree that trying to use them as sources of evidence that the claims against MJ are trumped-up is deeply mistaken and does nothing to address the fact that there's a lot Jackson did sort of criminal penetration that should make it clear he's a predatory abusive figure. It also misses the point of anything that they have said about the matter, especially since at least Feldman has come out in support of the documentary.
Last edited:
So I had to stop looking in on this thread because it was pretty gross seeing some of the twisting people were doing to defend MJ.
But I'm curious as to what the MJ defenders thought about him sending a film crew to video Safechuck... just cuz. What's the rationale there?
But I'm curious as to what the MJ defenders thought about him sending a film crew to video Safechuck... just cuz. What's the rationale there?
Well, the thing that really rubs me the wrong way with this line of thinking is that being abused as a child can kinda obviously lead to someone not being a well-adjusted and behaving adult. At one point Safechuck's(?) wife talks about his self-destructive behavior that seemed to be leading to the end of their marriage, which isn't that surprising considering. Wade's behavior could just as easily be a result of his own inability to cope with the abuse. Or he could just as well be an asshole who happened to also be abused. I don't think anyone can come to a satisfactory conclusion if they try to nitpick his life like that.
An audition of sorts to see how well they could move to possibly be featured on stage or in one of his videos? Guess you'd have to ask those who really did the filming what the understanding was.
There's a reason why MJ settled in 93. Jordan Chandler correctly described Michael's penis. The defense got wind of it and didn't want to take the risk on a criminal trial so they settled. Jordan also unfortunately did not want to testify.
Documentary on the 93 Case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyMKdS29Lbw
One of the Lead Investigators of the 93 case.
http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/052505pltmotchandler.pdf Pg 4-5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSLywe5k12I
Members of Jackson's defense at a 2010 panel discussing why Jackson settled.
https://www.mjfacts.com/300lb-gorilla/
Documentary on the 93 Case: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyMKdS29Lbw
One of the Lead Investigators of the 93 case.
http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/052505pltmotchandler.pdf Pg 4-5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSLywe5k12I
Members of Jackson's defense at a 2010 panel discussing why Jackson settled.
https://www.mjfacts.com/300lb-gorilla/
Last edited:
"Are we sure he didn't accidentally fall on them over and over again? It's dark"
How we know Michael knew he was underage? We need footage of him showing the camera his ID and Social Security Number!
They could have footage of it with Jackson looming at the camera saying "I am Michael Jackson and I am doing all of this" with his mom, dad, his victim's parents, five lawyers, and a notary public all witnessing and signing documentation saying its MJ doing those things, and his fans still would find excuses.
I feel such empathy for James Safechuck, especially after viewing the Oprah special. I really hope things get better for him. Wade as well, but James I felt is still in such a pained place. How anyone can see these men talk and think they're lying is beyond me.
That's still more generous than my expectation of "I'm going to need to see that again...for, uh, research purposes. Yeah"
Yeah, but this is sort of begging the question, no? How is one ever to cast legitimate doubt on the credibility of allegations if discrediting behavior on accusers' parts can instantly be dismissed as a byproduct of abuse?
This reminds me of that Chappelle skit with R Kelly pee tape where the girl is holding her ID while being peed on lol.
I remember when most/practically all people knew the guy was guilty and, at best, treated him as a nasty little joke especially after the second trial. That said, I've always felt that there was a large contingent of people, maybe even a silent majority, that wanted to still like the guy or at the very least be able to listen to Thriller guilt free, so when he finally kicked the bucket people just sort of got in line with the MJ Defense Force. Always rabid, his loony fans jumped at the chance to weaponize that the old attitude about never speaking ill of the dead as well as the man's own troubled childhood.
It helps that there are multiple accusers that seem to corroborate each other which has been enough for most celebrities. I don't know of anything any of them have done to deserve a high level of skepticism (I'm not familiar with people's complaints about Wade). To me it's just more of a sticky subject when it comes to child abuse specifically because of just how much that can affect a person and how they act into adulthood
"They tricked poor innocent Michael into doing to that, so they could get money out of him later on. He didn'teven know what he was doing"
This is one of the more repulsive aspects of the defense. I can only imagine how shit it must feel to have your childhood abuse hand-waved because you weren't ready to come to terms with it when every else wanted you to.
For someone to sweep everything you went through aside because someone else didn't come out sooner is just disgusting and shows clearly how little these people consider or care about abuse victims.
Overlooking the trauma and internal conflct of a man purely to attack another, all in service of protecting the legacy of a dead child abuser.
No idea, as I said when this was first announced having the entire historical discussion to hand would have been useful, instead of being dumped with a thread that's DoA because the discussion moved to subsiduary threads due to the main one being locked.
Now those threads have more of the discussion than this one, the main one. Bizarre handling all round.
Here are the mod posts:
OP
OP
It is still available here. It wasn't wiped, but it got away from the documentary itself and into a meta commentary for this site and people saying that gaming side is moderated more softly and differently than off topic, with users sniping at one another in that bread and the DMC5 gaming thread. The staff post in the op explains this.
You can read that thread to get impressions of the documentary as it was unfolding.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/le...y-94-on-rotten-tomatoes.102529/#post-18399514
The only reason this began was because they locked the DMC5 thread for a period of time so the conversation continued in the main one. The DMC5 thread was locked because a poorly-reasoned post (these aren't MJ's dances, they're someone who stole MJ's dances was the nonsense reason), the reports calling that out were dismissed and it stayed locked before reopening for those very reasons a short while later.
So the only reason the conversation was so split at the time was because of the poor handling of locking/unlocking topics. Which can now be extended to most threads on this topic looking at what we're left with.
Last edited:
Al Jean expanded on why they pulled the Michael Jackson Simpson's episode, saying that his discomfort came from him feeling as though the Simpson's episode could have been used as part of Michael's grooming process.
Source
Gosh, the amount of crazy MJ fans I've run into who don't understand how grooming or trauma processing works is just...mind boggling.
"They lied in court!"
Yeah, because they hadn't yet processed the trauma and were groomed to do so
"They defended him so many times before!"
Yeah, because they hadn't yet processed the trauma and were groomed to do so
"They're suing for money!"
As if their right, as they were raped by a monster and want to set the record straight
"fAcTs dOnT LiE pEoPlE dO"
Oh, like the people behind a multi-million dollar estate trying to salvage their reputation from being built on the back of a pedophile?
Disgusting. Some people just love songs so much they're giving a pass to a serial child rapist.
"They lied in court!"
Yeah, because they hadn't yet processed the trauma and were groomed to do so
"They defended him so many times before!"
Yeah, because they hadn't yet processed the trauma and were groomed to do so
"They're suing for money!"
As if their right, as they were raped by a monster and want to set the record straight
"fAcTs dOnT LiE pEoPlE dO"
Oh, like the people behind a multi-million dollar estate trying to salvage their reputation from being built on the back of a pedophile?
Disgusting. Some people just love songs so much they're giving a pass to a serial child rapist.
Last edited:
Watched this yesterday and I can't believe anyone can still defend Michael Jackson. You can nitpick timelines and statements and shit, but everything the victims and family say make complete sense psychologically. Rewatching some of the footage from back then was really disgusting, like it was so fucking obvious, but that we somehow were all in on it and let him do what he wanted. It was a less cynical pre-9/11, pre-social media time where stars were gods. It's like many of us needed some years to get out of that spell and see what really was going on. Truly chilling. Fuck Michael Jackson.
Also, reading some comments about separating the art from the artist etc. Fuck that shit. I can't do it.
Making artistry and stardom so fucking important is what led to this in the first place.
Also, reading some comments about separating the art from the artist etc. Fuck that shit. I can't do it.
Making artistry and stardom so fucking important is what led to this in the first place.
I wonder why no defenders (submitting defense dissertations in previous threads) returned to defend the fact that MJ owned technically legal child porn made by convicted sexual abusers, for sexual abusers, or the fact that he owned a photo of a boy in a pulled down bikini.
All I hear are crickets now.
All I hear are crickets now.
Discovered that one of my colleagues is a staunch MJ defender this morning, he controls the playlist that is playing in our office and a few MJ tracks came on this morning a few people complained and he kicked off saying they were all naive and being taken in by the media and those "two boys"
I've since had the playlist control taken away from him and MJ banned from the office.
I've since had the playlist control taken away from him and MJ banned from the office.
The word "fact" is a bit disingenuous. It is a claim. The reality is, none of these will likely ever be "fact". It's even been stated in this thread and the other that in many cases of sexual assault and cases of discrimination, circumstantial and not-necessarily-corborated evidence is many times all we will ever have.
So... He could've slept around with whomever.. but that doesn't inherently disprove or discredit his claim. Yes, I agree. But in no way is much of what we have out of all of this fact. They're allegations (compelling) that we will probably never have a smoking gun on.
Louis Vuitton removing the Michael Jackson inspired pieces from their new collection:
https://www.theguardian.com/fashion...-pieces-removed-from-louis-vuitton-collection
https://www.theguardian.com/fashion...-pieces-removed-from-louis-vuitton-collection
I caught up on the documentary today. I don't really know how you can watch them telling those stories and believe they are lying but it seems pretty obvious to say a man who spent much of his adult life befriending young boys and regularly slept in the same bed as them is anything but innocent. I have always presumed his guilt but there was one thing I never realised and that's how manipulative he was, something this documentary really showed. Truly horrific.
One thing that really pissed me off about the mother of Safechuck is at one point she was recounting one of the situations where Jackson had taken advantage of them and she even let out a little chuckle. I couldn't believe it. Both families were clearly neglectful in protecting their children but Robson's mother came across far more regretful and ashamed for what happened.
One thing that really pissed me off about the mother of Safechuck is at one point she was recounting one of the situations where Jackson had taken advantage of them and she even let out a little chuckle. I couldn't believe it. Both families were clearly neglectful in protecting their children but Robson's mother came across far more regretful and ashamed for what happened.
Posts like these are ignored by the defenders. As are posts that talk about why his bedroom would have an alarm system when he is sleeping alone with kids. etc etc.
Just finished part one. I had to look away from the tv for most of it cos it was so disturbing. It's weird cos if was pretty clear when Jacko was alive this stuff was going on. I remember when earth song Came out I was 11 and folks were talking about "that paedo that sucked off his monkeys new song" it was accepted that he was a paedophile.
It still makes for probably the most uncomfortable viewing I have watched. It made me think about my own kids and how I'd react if their idle started giving them attention like this....I realised I would def not be acting like those parents did but just considering it made my skin crawl.
It still makes for probably the most uncomfortable viewing I have watched. It made me think about my own kids and how I'd react if their idle started giving them attention like this....I realised I would def not be acting like those parents did but just considering it made my skin crawl.
That was exactly the came conclusion that Wade and James came too as well. That's why they came forward.
Though i hear that the real reason was for money. 😏
My goodness what an insightful look into the sick world of a pedophile. It really shows the two faces of someone who genuinely loved children but simultaneously fell for his sexual urge and abused them like hell.
It really shocked me how sneakily he continuously drove the parents away from their children. From further away hotel rooms with perfidious excuses (no nearest suite available) to driving home about the parents being bad for the kids.
I recommend it especially for parents to see this documentary.
It really shocked me how sneakily he continuously drove the parents away from their children. From further away hotel rooms with perfidious excuses (no nearest suite available) to driving home about the parents being bad for the kids.
I recommend it especially for parents to see this documentary.
Yeah. I want to watch part 1 again, so i can get angry at the parents. But i don't think i can listen to those poor men's stories again.
Also, if you haven't watched the Oprah special. Please do.
So dismiss everything that doesn't match the narrative? Thanks for clearing that up.
