Support NeoGAF

[DForce]

Another video from The Rageaholic


Some of the information has been posted in this thread, but he also brings out they edited a Michael Jackson's voice message.

Edited Clip:
Michael Jackson: "Best thing about Hawaii? Being with you."

Actual Clip:

Michael Jackson: "Best thing about Hawaii was spending time with Jimmy [Plaintiff], love [Plaintiffs] family and want to spend time with them."

UPDATE: They also edited out inconsistencies in the documentary in the UK version after Taj Jackson said that Dinner at MJ house after he testified in court.

This is in the video near the end.

 

[DForce]

The dude admitted he loved sleeping with boys. And then you have 6+ boys now who have admitted he either molested them or attempted to. This has nothing to do with "SJWs". Claiming it does is just a sad pathetic deflection so that you don't have to acknowledge the facts. It's fucking lazy, but predictable.

The problem is that they're unwilling to look up facts or even consider what the other side has to say.

I've browsed the Resetera thread, and whenever someone brings into question regarding their story or even point out inconsistencies, they're labeled things such as a "pedophile enabler" or just banned altogether.

Is this really the world we live in today?

This is like the prosecution giving their side of the story during a trail without the defense being allowed to speak.

 

[PhantomZone]

I don't believe what either of them are saying, not by a long shot.

Their stories have changed too much over the years to suit their 'narrative'.

 

[Teslerum]

Have any of these people that have come forward shown that they have spent thousands of dollars on psychologists due to the severe impact on their lives these incidences have caused them? If not than I assume they are bullshitting, have lived a happy healthy life and were not touched.

That.... is not a given. That line of thought os dangerous even.

A lot of people just keep it in due to feelings of shame. I’ve seen and dealt with people that broke when they were 60/70 years old, not even telling their spouses.

 

[Winter John]

The dude was fucking kids and there ain't no doubt about it. If your a fan of his you can still listen to and enjoy his music. You don't need to let anyone take it away from you, but the dude was fucking kids.

 

[DForce]

The dude was fucking kids and there ain't no doubt about it. If your a fan of his you can still listen to and enjoy his music. You don't need to let anyone take it away from you, but the dude was fucking kids.

If you can provide evidence that he was fucking kids, then I would like to see it. You can't so we have to come out with our own opinion of what happened. If these victims have been proven liars multiple times, then they lack credibility because they could very well be lying about what actually happened.

 

[Winter John]

If you can provide evidence that he was fucking kids, then I would like to see it. You can't so we have to come out with our own opinion of what happened. If these victims have been proven liars multiple times, then they lack credibility because they could very well be lying about what actually happened.

You can whine bout evidence all you like bud, but there ain't no guy on this planet who'd voluntarily give away millions of dollars if he was innocent.

 

[DForce]

You can whine bout evidence all you like bud, but there ain't no guy on this planet who'd voluntarily give away millions of dollars if he was innocent.

So your claim about "there's no doubt about it" is not based on proof, but alleged testimony.

there ain't no guy on this planet who'd voluntarily give away millions of dollars if he was innocent.

People keep bringing this up without realizing that the evidence from 1993 was used in the 2005 trail against Michael Jackson.

Paying $25 million dollar settlement did not keep Jordan Chandler from testifying in the criminal case against Michael Jackson, even in 2005.

The FBI found no evidence, and the accuser and their family were proven to be a liar.

If you want to walk around complaining about fans, then you should at least know the basics, bud.

 

[Winter John]

So your claim about "there's no doubt about it" is not based on proof, but alleged testimony.



People keep bringing this up without realizing that the evidence from 1993 was used in the 2005 trail against Michael Jackson.

Paying $25 million dollar settlement did not keep Jordan Chandler from testifying in the criminal case against Michael Jackson, even in 2005.

The FBI found no evidence, and the accuser and their family were proven to be a liar.

If you want to walk around complaining about fans, then you should at least know the basics, bud.

The dude was fucking kids and there ain't no way round it. He paid the kid millions to keep his ass out of court in '93 when any other guy on the planet accused of fucking kids would have said, fuck that noise we goin to court. He was payin parents to go on trips while he stayed home with their kids. No guy does that. Not unless he wants to fuck em. He had kids sleeping in his bed. No guy does that. Unless he wants to fuck em. As for evidence. You really think a record company are going to let their biggest star sit in a mansion filled with evidence of him fuckin kids? You think that all them people who depended on him were going to sit back while the FBI waltzed in and tried to take their bank away? MJ was talented and he made some great records but he was fuckin kids.

 

[kevm3]

Where was this dude's parents? How did him and Michael spend several nights together?

 

[DForce]

The dude was fucking kids and there ain't no way round it. He paid the kid millions to keep his ass out of court in '93 when any other guy on the planet accused of fucking kids would have said, fuck that noise we goin to court. He was payin parents to go on trips while he stayed home with their kids. No guy does that. Not unless he wants to fuck em. He had kids sleeping in his bed. No guy does that. Unless he wants to fuck em. As for evidence. You really think a record company are going to let their biggest star sit in a mansion filled with evidence of him fuckin kids? You think that all them people who depended on him were going to sit back while the FBI waltzed in and tried to take their bank away? MJ was talented and he made some great records but he was fuckin kids.

Funny how you just clearly ignored facts and continued to repeat the same lie again.

I repeat.

He paid millions, but the civil case was BROUGHT BEFORE the criminal case against Michael Jackson.

That means Jordan Chandler as ALLOWED to testify in the criminal case IF they brought criminal charges against Michael Jackson.

They found no evidence while doing a 10 year FBI investigation. Based on California Law, previous evidence was allowed in his 2005 trial.

He had kids sleeping in his bed. No guy does that. Unless he wants to fuck em. As for evidence.

Then why are so many people he slept in the same bed with testify that he did nothing to them? Based on this post, you're claiming that they're all lying.

Yet, the only accusers who said they were molested have all been proven liars.

He was payin parents to go on trips while he stayed home with their kids. No guy does that. Not unless he wants to fuck em.

You mean all those trips the parents claimed MJ sent away their parents..

Yes, you're going based off of their statements are PROOF.

Yes, there's other dates that these two accusers claim they were left alone, but EVIDENCE does not add up.

These are not small "mistakes" these are one of many false statements they have told.

There's no proof that they slept in the same bed, slept in the same room on all of these alleged dates. Yes, he admitted to sleeping in the same bed with children (which doesn't proof a molestation occurred) but that doesn't prove all of their alleged claims are facts. They lied about their story and one could say they may very well be lying about the abuse.

EDIT: You're free to have your own opinion, but to claim that there's no doubt that he molested these children is just rather stupid. No one here can say for sure they know what happened, but the fact these accusers have been caught in MANY lies should at leas raise some red flags.

 

[mckmas8808]

Here's another.

In Episode 2, Safechuck's and Wade's family were talking about their reaction to Michael Jackson's death.

Safechuck''s mother says she celebrated his death because he wouldn't be able to abuse any children anymore.

This happened in 2009.


James Safechuck himself said prior to this documentary that he didn't know he was abused until 2013.

This no doubt another lie.

I think you understood her incorrectly. I don't think the mother was speaking about how she felt in 2009, but more in the present after she found out her son was abused.

Reading about Leaving Neverland and how one of his now accusers under court denied any allegation, i am doubting the documentary.

At best though, it continues what we already know about MJ - A brilliant producer and songwriter with very strange mannerisms.

Which means there is still no conclusive evidence to what the claims are and have been for some years.

I wish stuff like LN would provide actual evidence to the accusation, but there isn't really.

As it stands, all such cinematic documents do is shifting the angle of what he is known for to a world of speculation and smoking guns.

I prefer to remember MJ in his music, and regarding outside of that, a human with very strange mannerisms.

The anti-MJ groups should focus their time on getting actual evidence instead of this stuff.

The anti-MJ groups? What about the pro-MJ groups that only want to call him "weird" without describing what "weird" means?

 

[yeahokaywhatever]

I don't believe what either of them are saying, not by a long shot.

Their stories have changed too much over the years to suit their 'narrative'.

Funny thing is that my girl wanted to watch this. She unfortunately was abused when she was younger and didn't believe those two in their testimonies. Sure, everyone expresses themselves differently but she was calling bullshit on it. They seemed to look back on their alleged tragedies with some rose colored glasses. Disturbing.

 

[mckmas8808]

The dude admitted he loved sleeping with boys. And then you have 6+ boys now who have admitted he either molested them or attempted to. This has nothing to do with "SJWs". Claiming it does is just a sad pathetic deflection so that you don't have to acknowledge the facts. It's fucking lazy, but predictable.

You sure it's 6+ boys? I thought it was 5.

Funny thing is that my girl wanted to watch this. She unfortunately was abused when she was younger and didn't believe those two in their testimonies. Sure, everyone expresses themselves differently but she was calling bullshit on it. They seemed to look back on their alleged tragedies with some rose colored glasses. Disturbing.

This isn't true at all. They looked at their good times with MJ with rose colored glasses. It was a nuanced interview and thoughts on MJ. They didn't just make him into a monster. They both (along with the family) constantly mentioned how great of a guy MJ was.

 

[Redneckerz]

The anti-MJ groups? What about the pro-MJ groups that only want to call him "weird" without describing what "weird" means?

Do you really want a description for that? Alright:

Jackson toying around with boys in or near his bed and inviting him to his playpark is weird.

 

[mckmas8808]

Do you really want a description for that? Alright:

Jackson toying around with boys in or near his bed and inviting him to his playpark is weird.

That's a quick and direct answer. Thanks. And most people (if you take away MJ's great singing, dancing, and stardom) would feel "uncomfortable" with any man in his mid-30s during these "weird" things around kids. Doesn't make him an automatic pedo and rapist, but if there's smoke I'm going to believe there's fire right around the corner.

Especially if that person chooses to pay $25 million to make it go away in 1993, but STILL couldn't stop the so-called "weird" behavior.

 

[Redneckerz]

That's a quick and direct answer. Thanks.

You're welcome. That's all that's established anyways. Its weird. The documentary does not shift that onus from weird to confirmed behavior.

Doesn't make him an automatic pedo and rapist, but if there's smoke I'm going to believe there's fire right around the corner.

I don't. I would want to see concrete evidence. This documentary does not give that.

Especially if that person chooses to pay $25 million to make it go away in 1993, but STILL couldn't stop the so-called "weird" behavior.

I can see the insiiuating tone you are making here.

Eventually another trial came and he got accquited. That's the factual side of things.

 

[mckmas8808]

I can see the insiiuating tone you are making here.

Eventually another trial came and he got accquited. That's the factual side of things.

But then even after THAT trial he continued the same behavior. If someone was completely innocent of said behavior, I'd think he would have separated himself from it more. At the end of the day I can't say I'm 100% sure he molested and raped kids, but I'm about 90% there (for what that's worth).

 

[Redneckerz]

But then even after THAT trial he continued the same behavior.

Yes. So? Where do you want to go with that? You mean the 2005 one?

If someone was completely innocent of said behavior, I'd think he would have separated himself from it more.

Its Michael Jackson. I know that's a corny answer but it sums it up perfectly. Its MJ.

At the end of the day I can't say I'm 100% sure he molested and raped kids, but I'm about 90% there (for what that's worth).

You would think that documentary would tell the world something new, but nah. So the facts remain. Accquited for prior suspicions, and yes, what is confirmed is definitely oddball behavior.

 

[DForce]

I think you understood her incorrectly. I don't think the mother was speaking about how she felt in 2009, but more in the present after she found out her son was abused.

She's talking about what happened that day.

She says, "I danced when I heard that he died. I was laying in bed, the news came on, I got out of bed."

This was after James, Wade and his sister were talking about their reaction when they heard the news.

 

[mckmas8808]

She's talking about what happened that day.

She says, "I danced when I heard that he died. I was laying in bed, the news came on, I got out of bed."

This was after James, Wade and his sister were talking about their reaction when they heard the news.

I remember that part. But I think it was a weird edit, but I don't think the "she was happy he was dead" was talking about the 2009 event.

 

[DForce]

I remember that part. But I think it was a weird edit, but I don't think the "she was happy he was dead" was talking about the 2009 event.

It was. She was specifically talking about the news and there's no other way around it. Like, what other news could she be hearing?

They edited out many inconsistencies, edited Jackson's voice messages, and possibly his birthday video (that's what I heard but I cannot confirm it).


James Safechuck claims Michael Jackson's lawyers were threatening him to testify in court. How can this even be possible when the judge already ruled which witnesses were going to appear 7-8 months before this even happened?

This is not from me, this was from the private investigator.

If this doesn't raise any red flags that these two may in fact be lying, then that's really odd.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

The problem is that they're unwilling to look up facts or even consider what the other side has to say.

I've browsed the Resetera thread, and whenever someone brings into question regarding their story or even point out inconsistencies, they're labeled things such as a "pedophile enabler" or just banned altogether.

Is this really the world we live in today?

This is like the prosecution giving their side of the story during a trail without the defense being allowed to speak.

What you wrote where about Era is true and valid, and is a shame, but changes nothing about what was said in the post you replied to.

I would even argue that many Jackson supporters are willingly blind to the obvious weirdness of an adult man sleeping in same bed as kids who aren’t his own.

I’ve heard it argued that Jackson just genuinely cared about this kids, that they were “at risk” in some way and he was basically running some sort of outreach program. I don’t even know if that’s true or not, but I do know that Jerry Sandusky’s cover was the same kind of setup. I imagine it’s muxh easier to maintain access to potential targets of inappropriate behavior under the guise of “famous person loves helping kids.”

That’s really here nor there, I guess.

I just feel like where there’s smoke, there’s fire, in the majority of cases. Maybe just a slight majority, overall, but a majority none the less.

People seem really quick go bend rules for Jackson that they won’t for Cosby, Weinstein, etc and that is also odd to me.

I feel like I’m still waiting for an honest answer to my question early in the thread:

What kind of evidence could a lone kid, in the 90s, who was by himself, produce? What reasonable expectation of producable evidence should be levied against those kids?

 

[DForce]

What you wrote where about Era is true and valid, and is a shame, but changes nothing about what was said in the post you replied to.

I would even argue that many Jackson supporters are willingly blind to the obvious weirdness of an adult man sleeping in same bed as kids who aren’t his own.

I’ve heard it argued that Jackson just genuinely cared about this kids, that they were “at risk” in some way and he was basically running some sort of outreach program. I don’t even know if that’s true or not, but I do know that Jerry Sandusky’s cover was the same kind of setup. I imagine it’s muxh easier to maintain access to potential targets of inappropriate behavior under the guise of “famous person loves helping kids.”

That’s really here nor there, I guess.

I just feel like where there’s smoke, there’s fire, in the majority of cases. Maybe just a slight majority, overall, but a majority none the less.

People seem really quick go bend rules for Jackson that they won’t for Cosby, Weinstein, etc and that is also odd to me.

I look every case before coming to a conclusion.

I actually like R. Kelly's music way more than Michael Jackson and I didn't hesitate to say R. Kelly was into underage girls and a predator. He was record on camera having sex with this girl and he married Aaliyah. Those are two undeniable pieces of evidence.


Michael Jackson?

Since there is no proof that he molested these children, you have to go after the credibility of these accusers and the witnesses who claimed to have seen these molestation take place.

So I look at it like this.

Is it weird that he slept in the same bed as these children?

Yes.

Does this in fact prove he molested children? No.

Now I look at the people whom he allegedly slept in the same bed with.

Group 1: The accusers

Group 2: People who have slept in the same bed as him but stated that he did not molest him.

Looking at these two groups, we can at least say he wasn't looking to molest children that he slept in the same bed with. What's also factor that Michael Jackson didn't always sleep int he same bed as these children, but in the same room, which is as big as a duplex apartment.

All of the accusers in the past wanted a quick payout and tried to sell their story to the tabloids instead of going straight to the authorities (for the most part). Not only that, they were proven liars and tried to get money from other people.

This in fact really suspicious. If they would rather get a quick payout instead of going through a criminal investigation, then people eyebrows should go up.

I'll just say this.

I'll consider both sides before giving my opinion. The more lies these accusers tell, then the harder it's going to be for me to believe their story.

 

[Chandler55]

What kind of evidence could a lone kid, in the 90s, who was by himself, produce? What reasonable expectation of producable evidence should be levied against those kids?

The victims of Cosby/Nasser/RKelly/Sandusky/Weinstein dont have evidence themselves either. Nasser/Rkelly/Sandusky had child porn on their computers, Cosby admitted to using a sleeping pill on women, and Weinstein confessed to groping on a NYPD sting.

 

[Winter John]

Funny how you just clearly ignored facts and continued to repeat the same lie again.

I repeat.

He paid millions, but the civil case was BROUGHT BEFORE the criminal case against Michael Jackson.

That means Jordan Chandler as ALLOWED to testify in the criminal case IF they brought criminal charges against Michael Jackson.

They found no evidence while doing a 10 year FBI investigation. Based on California Law, previous evidence was allowed in his 2005 trial.



Then why are so many people he slept in the same bed with testify that he did nothing to them? Based on this post, you're claiming that they're all lying.

Yet, the only accusers who said they were molested have all been proven liars.



You mean all those trips the parents claimed MJ sent away their parents..

Yes, you're going based off of their statements are PROOF.

Yes, there's other dates that these two accusers claim they were left alone, but EVIDENCE does not add up.

These are not small "mistakes" these are one of many false statements they have told.

There's no proof that they slept in the same bed, slept in the same room on all of these alleged dates. Yes, he admitted to sleeping in the same bed with children (which doesn't proof a molestation occurred) but that doesn't prove all of their alleged claims are facts. They lied about their story and one could say they may very well be lying about the abuse.

EDIT: You're free to have your own opinion, but to claim that there's no doubt that he molested these children is just rather stupid. No one here can say for sure they know what happened, but the fact these accusers have been caught in MANY lies should at leas raise some red flags.

Thanks for giving me permission to have my own opinion. That's mighty big of ya. I'll say it again cos you ain't getting it. Michael Jackson paid the parents of kids so he could get them in the sack. No normal guy would even think of doing that shit. The dude was a pedophile.

One day your going to look back at dumb shit like this - "Yes, he admitted to sleeping in the same bed with children (which doesn't proof a molestation occurred)" and your goin to wonder what the fuck you were thinking. Again, no normal guy would pay to have children sleep in his bed, but I'll tell you who would though - a rich pedophile.

 

[DForce]

I feel like I’m still waiting for an honest answer to my question early in the thread:

What kind of evidence could a lone kid, in the 90s, who was by himself, produce? What reasonable expectation of producable evidence should be levied against those kids?

People who asking for proof knows there's no proof.

They're asking for it to show people that you cannot claim that it's a fact that he molested these two people based on accusations alone.

Anyone can make up a story, and that's what people have to realize.

Knowing these factors, you have to look at what you can disprove and it's claims regarding their story. They told a lot and it puts doubts in people's minds.

 

[DForce]

Thanks for giving me permission to have my own opinion. That's mighty big of ya. I'll say it again cos you ain't getting it. Michael Jackson paid the parents of kids so he could get them in the sack. No normal guy would even think of doing that shit. The dude was a pedophile.

One day your going to look back at dumb shit like this - "Yes, he admitted to sleeping in the same bed with children (which doesn't proof a molestation occurred)" and your goin to wonder what the fuck you were thinking. Again, no normal guy would pay to have children sleep in his bed, but I'll tell you who would though - a rich pedophile.

Let me see you prove that he was with the evidence that he has right now.

OH, you, can't. You're going based off statements alone. You're even pretending evidence that has been debunked years ago, which proves you didn't bother doing research.

If you're going to come with me claiming things are facts at least do a bit of research.

 

[DForce]

This is the problem with people believing in stories of alleged victims without looking at the other side of the story.

Again, no normal guy would pay to have children sleep in his bed, but I'll tell you who would though - a rich pedophile.

This guy claims that's what he exactly did because James Safecuck said so.


If you claim MJ abused you just to have sex with you and your dates and time are lies, then you're likely liking that the abuse even happened on this date.

It's embarrassing that people don't even research these things before debating with people on this topic.

 

[DForce]

But but.. James said he spent Thanksgiving with Michael November 27th 1987.

Did he teleport?

 

[mckmas8808]

But but.. James said he spent Thanksgiving with Michael November 27th 1987.

Did he teleport?

To be fair Thanksgiving was on November 26th of 1987.

 

[DForce]

To be fair Thanksgiving was on November 26th of 1987.

And it takes around 15 hours to fly. That means he needed a full day worth of flight time to go back, have Dinner with the Safechucks and then go back to Australia.

That's over 30 hours. This time frame makes no sense.

 

[DForce]

Michael Jackson's niece claims she was dating Wade Robson for 7 years and that Michael Jackson set them both up.


Wade Robson allegedly cheated on his niece for Britney Spears apparently, based on her own words.

She is not mentioned in the documentary and Wade makes it appear that he felt hurt because he was getting older and MJ was going after a younger kid.

 

[mckmas8808]

And it takes around 15 hours to fly. That means he needed a full day worth of flight time to go back, have Dinner with the Safechucks and then go back to Australia.

That's over 30 hours. This time frame makes no sense.

Thanksgiving was the next day "AFTER" the concert, not before though.

 

[DForce]

Thanksgiving was the next day "AFTER" the concert, not before though.

November 26th is the date for Thanksgiving in Encino, California.

That would mean it's November 27th in Australia.

These are pictures from dates accounted for, but this picture right here shows he was also in Australia on the 27th (Which is the 26th in America).

Dates are

November 13, 1987
November 20, 1987
November 21, 1987
November 27, 1987
November 28, 1987

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_(tour)

 

[mckmas8808]

November 26th is the date for Thanksgiving in Encino, California.

That would mean it's November 27th in Australia.

These are pictures from dates accounted for, but this picture right here shows he was also in Australia on the 27th (Which is the 26th in America).

Just $33 to see MJ? WHOA! Hmmm....yeah looks like those dates do work out the way you see them.

 

[Winter John]

Let me see you prove that he was with the evidence that he has right now.

OH, you, can't. You're going based off statements alone. You're even pretending evidence that has been debunked years ago, which proves you didn't bother doing research.

If you're going to come with me claiming things are facts at least do a bit of research.

The dude himself admitted to sleeping with kids -

"It's not sexual, we're going to sleep. I tuck them in... It's very charming, it's very sweet." You can keep blatting on about research and evidence, but the man himself said he was sleeping with them. Your "evidence" by the way boils down to nothing but he said, she said. You don't have any evidence the dude wasn't fucking kids. I got no doubts he was because, again, no normal guy would sleep with other people's kids.

 

[Saruhashi]

The dude himself admitted to sleeping with kids -

"It's not sexual, we're going to sleep. I tuck them in... It's very charming, it's very sweet." You can keep blatting on about research and evidence, but the man himself said he was sleeping with them. Your "evidence" by the way boils down to nothing but he said, she said. You don't have any evidence the dude wasn't fucking kids. I got no doubts he was because, again, no normal guy would sleep with other people's kids.

As someone in the "I don't know what the hell is going on" camp it seems like the point that is being put to you is that the accusations to not add-up.
The accusers have their narrative and problems with that narrative are being pointed out.

You aren't addressing that. Your rebuttal is just saying "he admits to X therefore he is guilty of Y".
I am on your side in terms of feeling that something is seriously fucked up with MJ and so much of everything really does not sit right with me at all.

On the other hand it feels like you are not willing to accept that maybe some stuff presented in the documentary is just outright false?
So I'm on their side in terms of them being able to show that the details of some of these allegations are partially false or are outright lies.

Something was not right with MJ. I do not feel like the guy was acting appropriately regarding kids and feel unsurprising that these allegations keep coming up.
However, something is also not right with these specific allegations and this whole documentary. If some of the accusers are outright lying then it really casts a shadow over everything, in my mind.

It seems like a situation where I am not sure why people are SO invested in being "right" when it looks like there is no way anyone can know anything with a good degree of accuracy.

 

[Winter John]

As someone in the "I don't know what the hell is going on" camp it seems like the point that is being put to you is that the accusations to not add-up.
The accusers have their narrative and problems with that narrative are being pointed out.

You aren't addressing that. Your rebuttal is just saying "he admits to X therefore he is guilty of Y".
I am on your side in terms of feeling that something is seriously fucked up with MJ and so much of everything really does not sit right with me at all.

On the other hand it feels like you are not willing to accept that maybe some stuff presented in the documentary is just outright false?
So I'm on their side in terms of them being able to show that the details of some of these allegations are partially false or are outright lies.

Something was not right with MJ. I do not feel like the guy was acting appropriately regarding kids and feel unsurprising that these allegations keep coming up.
However, something is also not right with these specific allegations and this whole documentary. If some of the accusers are outright lying then it really casts a shadow over everything, in my mind.

It seems like a situation where I am not sure why people are SO invested in being "right" when it looks like there is no way anyone can know anything with a good degree of accuracy.

I ain't watched the documentary. I don't see any point in it.

 

[Saruhashi]

I ain't watched the documentary. I don't see any point in it.

Honestly, yeah, I don't think any good can come of it.

Definitely something was up with MJ. I mean, as you say, who the fuck is sleeping with sleeping with kids like that? It's weird and inappropriate.
Also at some point you have to wonder what the fuck the parents were thinking too.

The documentary and the objections to it just raises questions. I for sure don't like feeling like I am being lied to.

You just end up in this "no man's land" where I think the guy was fucked up but the content of the documentary seems like lies and that in turn casts doubt on the nature of just how fucked up he was.

Nobody wants to defend a monster but at the same time nobody wants to be duped by a liar.

 

[mckmas8808]

As someone in the "I don't know what the hell is going on" camp it seems like the point that is being put to you is that the accusations to not add-up.
The accusers have their narrative and problems with that narrative are being pointed out.

You aren't addressing that. Your rebuttal is just saying "he admits to X therefore he is guilty of Y".
I am on your side in terms of feeling that something is seriously fucked up with MJ and so much of everything really does not sit right with me at all.

On the other hand it feels like you are not willing to accept that maybe some stuff presented in the documentary is just outright false?
So I'm on their side in terms of them being able to show that the details of some of these allegations are partially false or are outright lies.

Something was not right with MJ. I do not feel like the guy was acting appropriately regarding kids and feel unsurprising that these allegations keep coming up.
However, something is also not right with these specific allegations and this whole documentary. If some of the accusers are outright lying then it really casts a shadow over everything, in my mind.

It seems like a situation where I am not sure why people are SO invested in being "right" when it looks like there is no way anyone can know anything with a good degree of accuracy.

Question......what if someone honestly just misremembers a smaller detail within the larger story? Do we just throw out everything if a date or two was off? Do we act as if all 5 boys are completely lying?

 

[Winter John]

Honestly, yeah, I don't think any good can come of it.

Definitely something was up with MJ. I mean, as you say, who the fuck is sleeping with sleeping with kids like that? It's weird and inappropriate.
Also at some point you have to wonder what the fuck the parents were thinking too.

The documentary and the objections to it just raises questions. I for sure don't like feeling like I am being lied to.

You just end up in this "no man's land" where I think the guy was fucked up but the content of the documentary seems like lies and that in turn casts doubt on the nature of just how fucked up he was.

Nobody wants to defend a monster but at the same time nobody wants to be duped by a liar.

When all's said and done I don't really give a shit. I liked his early stuff but he lost me after Thriller when he started in on all that save the world shit. To me, all arguments end at the point where the man himself admitted he slept with kids. I keep saying this but no normal guy would even think of doing that, so that's what it boils down to. Anyway, I guess we all can't agree on it but we can at least laugh about it

 

[Saruhashi]

Question......what if someone honestly just misremembers a smaller detail within the larger story? Do we just throw out everything if a date or two was off? Do we act as if all 5 boys are completely lying?

Definitely not.

 

[WingM@n]

I got a 2 week ban at resetera for pointing out that Dan Reed edited the film after the US airing. He deleted some scènes that could be proven false.
Glad neogaf still has freedom of speech.

I watched LN, while I found it well produced, I'm convinced those two guys are frauds.

 

[WingM@n]

Dan Reed made some crazy edits to audio and video. Watch this. De Tweet bekijken van @jmoffettmjm:
People should investigate first before saying MJ is guilty..

 

[mckmas8808]

Dan Reed made some crazy edits to audio and video. Watch this. De Tweet bekijken van @jmoffettmjm:
People should investigate first before saying MJ is guilty..

This isn't really that bad of an edit. This is a pro-MJ crazy dude.

 

[WingM@n]

This isn't really that bad of an edit. This is a pro-MJ crazy dude.

This pro MJ crazy dude at least got his facts right.

 

[DForce]

The dude himself admitted to sleeping with kids -

"It's not sexual, we're going to sleep. I tuck them in... It's very charming, it's very sweet." You can keep blatting on about research and evidence, but the man himself said he was sleeping with them. Your "evidence" by the way boils down to nothing but he said, she said. You don't have any evidence the dude wasn't fucking kids. I got no doubts he was because, again, no normal guy would sleep with other people's kids.

He slept in the same bed with Corey Feldman, Macaulay Culkin and Brett Barnes slept int he same bed as MJ and they claim he didn't molest them.

Only people who accused him of molestation are known liars.

First accuser couldn't describe his genitalia and there were alleged witnesses who claim they admitted to them that he lied. His father started bringing allegations against MJ when he wouldn't fun his movie and allegedly tried to drug him to make up a false accusations against MJ.


I'm waiting for proof, not assumptions.

 

[DForce]

This documentary goes into some of the allegations of Michael Jackson.



The video mostly talks about the Jordan Chandler and Gavin Avizo allegations.

Gavin Avizo case took place in 2005, in which Wade Robson testified. It's believed that the Avizo's started to become more disruptive around Michael Jackson and he no longer wanted his family to stay at his house.

- Gavin Avizo made a dying wish to see Michael Jackson and through entertainment industry channels, Michael Jackson was contacted.

- 2 Years before meeting Michael Jackson, Janet Arvizo sued JCPenny, claiming she was sexually assaulted by a security guard. Gavin and Janet both admitted under oath that they lied and her injuries came from her husband.

- Avizo's claim they were held as prisoners at Michael Jackson's home. But proof shows that Janet had access to MJ's credit card and while Michel Jackson was away, she was out shopping and getting herself pedicures on these alleged dates.

- One of the Avizo kids called Jay Leno in a possible attempt to get money from him. Jay Leno could hear a woman talking in the background and he felt the boy was being coached on what to say.

 

[DForce]

This isn't really that bad of an edit. This is a pro-MJ crazy dude.

It goes with their narrative that Michel Jackson and James Safechuck were in love with each other. I'm sure many people listened to it and were disturbed by the phone call without knowing the context of the full audio.