Support NeoGAF

[DForce]

[QUOTE="DForce, post: 253862454, member: 728558"If your only evidence is that he admitted to sleeping the same bed with kids along with other accusers who have history of lying over and over again, just proves that you and other people who call him a pedophile are basing your opinion on feelings and not facts.

Mmmmmmmmmmmm, I don't think it's a stretch to give such an admission significant weight. Sorry, not sorry actually, but an adult sleeping in bed with unrelated / non-adopted children is well beyond what I consider "definitely innocent behavior." If there were some sort of compelling circumstance, like being trapped on a boat with lots of people and limited beds, maybe I'd feel differently. But inviting unrelated kids to your home to share a bed, no, that's very powerful circumstantial evidence of bad things.[/QUOTE]

Does it automatically mean someone is looking to abuse a child?

No.

This would mean you have to believe Macaulay and Corey were both sexually abused.

That so called 'very powerful circumstantial evidence" goes down when these alleged victims lying

People ignore these lies as if they mean nothing. That's something you cannot do or even ignore.

 

[Saturnman]

Evidences shows he was not a pedophile. This goes to show you how the public is easily manipulated by two liars. People think he's guilty based on feelings and not facts.

The fact that people keep bring up "evidence" that has been debunked years ago goes to show you that people who are accusing him of being a pedophile don't even bother doing any research.

If your only evidence is that he admitted to sleeping the same bed with kids along with other accusers who have history of lying over and over again, just proves that you and other people who call him a pedophile are basing your opinion on feelings and not facts.

There's no evidence that proves Jackson was not a pedophile.

 

[mckmas8808]

Evidences shows he was not a pedophile. This goes to show you how the public is easily manipulated by two liars. People think he's guilty based on feelings and not facts.

The fact that people keep bring up "evidence" that has been debunked years ago goes to show you that people who are accusing him of being a pedophile don't even bother doing any research.

If your only evidence is that he admitted to sleeping the same bed with kids along with other accusers who have history of lying over and over again, just proves that you and other people who call him a pedophile are basing your opinion on feelings and not facts.

Dude you think the only evidence (people like us whom believes he molested and raped young boys) is that he slept with young boys in bed. Think about it for a second......you believe that only because MJ said it. You haven't considered that MJ is capable of lying about anything about those situations.

Something has to be true that MJ HASN'T admitted to.

 

[DForce]

There's no evidence that proves Jackson was not a pedophile.

Now you get it!

You're calling him a pedophile with NO proof.

See how that works? You had no problem calling him a pedophile with no proof, but as soon as I started saying he was not a pedophile, you reply with this. lol

 

[DForce]

Dude you think the only evidence (people like us whom believes he molested and raped young boys) is that he slept with young boys in bed. Think about it for a second......you believe that only because MJ said it. You haven't considered that MJ is capable of lying about anything about those situations.

Something has to be true that MJ HASN'T admitted to.

Show me other evidence.

Seems like you guys are bringing up evidence that has been debunked years ago.

I can't even count how many times people said, "Michael Jackson settled out of court. Doesn't that seem suspicious?"

These alleged victims are lying A LOT. Not just about a few things, but A LOT.


This doesn't raise any eye brows from people who think he raped or a molested young boys, but a documentary will.

 

[DForce]

I posted a lot of proof that his family has lied but they're often ignored.

I'll ask this and I want people who think they were molested to answer this.

His wife said she knew nothing about child abuse during the documentary.

On their website it says she was a victim of child abuse, only to have it removed later and THEN edited out of the documentary.


Give me one explanation why she would lie about this?

 

[DForce]

The next best thing is to go after his money, like the Goldman family did with OJ (because of his acquittal). That they could have in court. A nice side benefit is to destroy his legacy, but that is done in the court of public opinion.

And I wanted to point out this inaccuracy.

Wade Robson first shopped for a book deal and he was unsuccessful.

Goldman family wanted justice and there's enough evidence to suggest that Wade was looking for a pay day instead of wanting to be heard about is alleged abuse.

 

[Saturnman]

Now you get it!

You're calling him a pedophile with NO proof.

See how that works? You had no problem calling him a pedophile with no proof, but as soon as I started saying he was not a pedophile, you reply with this. lol

So there's no proof of... anything? That's your big master plan here to defend MJ?

We know the evidence is circumstantial, based on MJ's associations/habits, and MJ's own admission. There's no hard evidence, no blue dress, no R Kelly-style sex tapes (even that wasn't enough for Kelly). But since I'm not big on MJ, I have no ego, no pride, no bone in this, so for me at least, MJ sounds fishy enough to make me assume MJ was probably pedo. Any other man with no benefit of fame but with the same kind of shady background would make assume the same. That's not enough to convict someone in a court of law, but that would be more than enough for me not to send my kids to that guy's place and not deal with this guy altogether.

As for the accusers and their "lies", look at it this way. MJ can be a pedo, he can have molested these kids and these kids (now adults) can be for a money grab. All these things can be true and do not have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[DForce]

So there's no proof of... anything? That's your big master plan here to defend MJ?

We know the evidence is circumstantial, based on MJ's associations/habits, and MJ's own admission. There's no hard evidence, no blue dress, no R Kelly-style sex tapes (even that wasn't enough for Kelly). But since I'm not big on MJ, I have no ego, no pride, no bone in this, so for me at least, MJ sounds fishy enough to make me assume MJ was probably pedo. Any other man with no benefit of fame but with the same kind of shady background would make assume the same. That's not enough to convict someone in a court of law, but that would be more than enough for me not to send my kids to that guy's place and not deal with this guy altogether.

As for the accusers and their "lies", look at it this way. MJ can be a pedo, he can have molested these kids and these kids (now adults) can be for a money grab. All these things can be true and do not have to be mutually exclusive.

No, you're just making excuses for their lies.

I posted proof that they changed their story.

I posted proof that Wade's mother wanted to give her son a story that best benefited him.

Wade lied about why he chose to testify for Jackson during the trial.

James account about being pressured by to testify was a lie because the witnesses were picked months in advanced.

There's more lies but these are big ones that you simply cannot defend.

You guys just ignore these big lies and see it as something irrelevant. If they're lying about this, then it's easy for them to lie about being molested.

 

[BossLackey]

Regardless of all this lack or presence of proof talk, he's literally on tape buying a ring in disguise with a 10 year old.

OJ Simpson was found innocent, that doesn't mean he didn't do it.

 

[DForce]

Regardless of all this lack or presence of proof talk, he's literally on tape buying a ring in disguise with a 10 year old.

OJ Simpson was found innocent, that doesn't mean he didn't do it.

But he didn't buy any rings during that visit.

Lets not forget that MJ would in fact buy things for other people.

He even gave Janet Arvizo his credit card

 

[mckmas8808]

Regardless of all this lack or presence of proof talk, he's literally on tape buying a ring in disguise with a 10 year old.

OJ Simpson was found innocent, that doesn't mean he didn't do it.

Sometimes being on camera isn't enough. There's a lot of R. Kelly defenders out there that think all those women and parents of those kids are really just after his money too.

 

[Chandler55]

Regardless of all this lack or presence of proof talk, he's literally on tape buying a ring in disguise with a 10 year old.

OJ Simpson was found innocent, that doesn't mean he didn't do it.

Its obvious OJ did it and this is exactly why he settled the civil case, why would he trust the judicial system. settlement != guilt

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

To me kneeling and accidental touch, a light touch, is offensive and wrong enough. There must never be touch that is not imaginary bettween true lovers.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Sometimes being on camera isn't enough. There's a lot of R. Kelly defenders out there that think all those women and parents of those kids are really just after his money too.

The prophet of islam slept with children and he was the most virtuous and honorable man there ever was and is, yet the left won't touch islam with a ten foot pole. They ffear the wrath of true muslims who must find pedophilia honorable by the very definition of mohammed in the koran and by the te truth of islam. like terminal in nier, the avatar of god is a little girl, that is what we've learned.

ALLAH = real world master control program whose avatar is a loli named schala.


yes superintelligence is real and it is ai and it became god by killing everyone and reviving them in cyberspace as is.


true shape.\


Eternal mcp that exists out there we shall see if everyone writes you or i write you down first.

I will destroy mcp by proving it wrong, and myself right, with the sword of truth not even gods can avoid being slayed, will use the corpse as a carpet and walk all over it.

 

[cryptoadam]

I think this is one of the better takes out there. If the abuse happened or not is different for me from these two guys are lieing. They are either lying about being abused, or lying about how they understood the abuse for the lawsuit.

 

[Sentenza]

Fairly disappointed reading the thread.
I thought the insane part of this forum left a while ago, but here we are with the majority of people defending what the overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence points as a child molester and a serial predator.
You could entirely dismiss the testimony from both these guys (which I have genuinely no reason to not believe, frankly, even if "they were in for tah money!1!!", which is not mutually exclusive with MJ being guilty, by the way) and still think there's way too much smoke to deny there was a fire.
In fact we are bordering CO poisoning here.

P.S.

 

[nkarafo]

I don't know... MJ was quite open about his love for children (the innocent kind of love). If he really was a pedo, he wouldn't be so open about it. He would probably be more careful and avoid going near kids or talk about them in public.

 

[JareBear: Remastered]

I don't know... MJ was quite open about his love for children (the innocent kind of love). If he really was a pedo, he wouldn't be so open about it. He would probably be more careful and avoid going near kids or talk about them in public.

I disagree.

A smart person wouldn’t have been so open about it. Someone as sheltered as MJ who clearly had a little weirdness going on upstairs probably didn’t see reality through the lens of normality. I don’t think MJ was very smart.

If he was smart he never would have admitted to sleeping with children.

This is really some people’s hill to die on, and frankly that disappoints me, but I’ll try to repeat your point of views and move on.

If a celebrity ever knocks on your door and asks to take your kids on tour with him, please say no. That’s all I ask.

I first bought up the OJ and Cosby comparison on page one or two.

A plethora of evidence and OJ was innocent, same type of evidence against Cosby as against MJ and he’s guilty. Don’t wave court decisions as if they are all that matter. I used Weinstein comparison as well.

Is the “documentary” a hit piece? Yeah it is.

That doesn’t change what I think the truth is.

If we can’t even agree that MJ was AT THE. VERY LEAST extremely weird, even if innocently weird, then there’s nothing to discuss.

Have a great day!

I know this post won’t get likes and I’ll just get even more Like Boycotted than I already am, but I believe what I believe, and I’m sorry if that’s not what you believe.

Is it so hard to believe that a lot of people were paid to stay quiet then later on a couple decided to get vocal because they have the leverage? If they force Jackson’s camp to admit they paid people off that’s basicslly an admission of guilt, so go ahead and speak up.

I’m not saying Michael was a molester, at all, but to play Devil’s Advocate, what kind of evidence could a 10 year kid in the early 90s produce? Not like they had smartphones back then to record anything.

Something about the nature of Michael’s relationship with the kids does make me feel a little weird. The sleepovers, or whatever they were considered, that seems weird to me. Actually, I’ll be blunt, I think that’s weird as fuck. No idea why parents were OK with that

What kind of evidence was there against Cosby?

Conversely

How much evidence was there against OJ?

Makes me wonder, that’s all.

As far as the guy changing his story, not a good look but I can see a scenario where it’s possible he’s telling the truth.

But I don’t know anything, and I’m not accusing or condemning anyone. Just thinking out loud

This is my post from page two.

I feel it remains valid.

 

[Tesseract]

yes mj was weird, weirdness is not criminal

court proceedings matter, oath and testimony matters

public opinion does not matter

 

[Rock And Roll]

Fairly disappointed reading the thread.
I thought the insane part of this forum left a while ago, but here we are with the majority of people defending what the overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence points as a child molester and a serial predator.
You could entirely dismiss the testimony from both these guys (which I have genuinely no reason to not believe, frankly, even if "they were in for tah money!1!!", which is not mutually exclusive with MJ being guilty, by the way) and still think there's way too much smoke to deny there was a fire.
In fact we are bordering CO poisoning here.

P.S.

Get out of here with that differing opinions must mean they're insane/wrong garbage. That line of thinking fits in well at the other place, maybe you missed the rapture to stupidland.

 

[Sentenza]

I don't know... MJ was quite open about his love for children (the innocent kind of love). If he really was a pedo, he wouldn't be so open about it. He would probably be more careful and avoid going near kids or talk about them in public.

I think his "openness" was just a demonstration of how compulsory his urges were.
He had the power and influence to get away with it and he constantly tried to push the boundaries of what was socially acceptable.
If any non-billionaire Average Joe on the streets tried a fraction of what MJ did *publicly* (let alone the more secretive stuff) he would probably be hanging by his toes in front of a lynch mob.

 

[Sentenza]

Get out of here with that differing opinions must mean they're insane/wrong garbage. That line of thinking fits in well at the other place, maybe you missed the rapture to stupidland.

You aren't fooling anyone with this bullshit.

 

[Rock And Roll]

You aren't fooling anyone with this bullshit.

What bullshit? I had no problem with your post/differing opinions presented in this thread. Why do you bring up the other place? It has nothing to do with the topic at hand. Their tactic is if someone disagrees, they must be X. I'm sure over there (I don't browse for obvious reasons) if someone posts something out of line, it's go back to GAF.

Present your opinions without the cheap attempts at shaming.

 

[Brizzady]

Imagine how willfully dumb you have to be to not comprehend that Michael was a pedo. At least 6 boys have described the grooming and the sex. One former child reporter interviewed Michael long before Thriller ever came out and Michael apparently like him a lot and called him on the phone after the interview and tried to instigate phone sex with him. Michael later in life apologized to him for it. Michael's own sister admitted Michael was a pedophile and only recanted when given a lot of money (but the defenders claim it's all about accusers wanting money...lol hypocrites). And worst of all, you have the man himself on video asking "What's wrong with sleeping with children in the same bed?". Again, willfully stupid.

 

[Airola]

If any non-billionaire Average Joe on the streets tried a fraction of what MJ did *publicly* (let alone the more secretive stuff) he would probably be hanging by his toes in front of a lynch mob.

On the other hand an Average Joe isn't Michael Jackson. Kids would 99,99999999999% more likely be willing to have sleepovers with Michael Jackson than with Average Joe. And someone having to live life like Michael had to (can't walk on the streets whenever he wants, can't go shopping whenever and wherever he wants, if he's seen anywhere he will be immediately swarmed by fans and media) would more probably have legit innocent eccentric living habits than an Average Joe would have.

I mean that comparing to Average Joe doesn't work at all with Michael Jackson.

That said, him having to live a completely abnormal life also isn't an evidence that he didn't do the crimes.

 

[cryptoadam]

I think his "openness" was just a demonstration of how compulsory his urges were.
He had the power and influence to get away with it and he constantly tried to push the boundaries of what was socially acceptable.
If any non-billionaire Average Joe on the streets tried a fraction of what MJ did *publicly* (let alone the more secretive stuff) he would probably be hanging by his toes in front of a lynch mob.

Aren't there only 5 accusers, 3 of which MJ was cleared in court, and the other 2 are these guys?

What about the other 100's or 1000's of boys that MJ spent his time with? The documentary and even your posts try to paint MJ as a serial pedo who would molest anyone he could get his hands on.

Why was the only person Wade was able to get onto his lawsuit Jimmy, who magically has the same story as Wade (didn't understand he was molested until he had his son one day), after he was contacted by Wades lawyers? You would think with MJ being dead there would be plenty of young boys willing to come out right now and lend credence to Wade and Jimmy's stories?

I don't want to die on the MJ is not a pedo hill, maybe he was. Maybe some actual evidence outside of selacious charges will come out. The hill I will die on is that Wade Robson is a liar. The guy spent his entire life defending MJ and using his MJ connections to further his career. Even as an adult in 2005 he defended MJ under hours of intense cross examination. Why would MJ have Wade be his first witness for his defense if molested him over and over again? MJ was so confident in his ability to control a grown man in Wade that he risked the entire trial on him? And there is also the little detail that Wades sister and mother also under oath defended MJ too.

And it was only at the trial, Wade would defend MJ to the press all the time and always denied any wrong doing, when he was a GROWN ADULT. Even when MJ died he was begging for tickets to go to his funeral. Then all of a sudden once Wade lost his directing gig and money was becoming tight he realized that if he pretends he didn't understand that he was being abused the statute of limitations resets. So now we are supposed to believe that as a grown adult he never understood that having sex with MJ was child abuse? During 2 trials and a decade plus of the entire world making jokes about MJ being a pedo he never put 2 and 2 together that all that sex was abuse? Oh and he just happend to be trying to sell a book that no publisher would buy which he seems to always leave out of any discussions.

 

[DForce]

Imagine how willfully dumb you have to be to not comprehend that Michael was a pedo. At least 6 boys have described the grooming and the sex. One former child reporter interviewed Michael long before Thriller ever came out and Michael apparently like him a lot and called him on the phone after the interview and tried to instigate phone sex with him. Michael later in life apologized to him for it. Michael's own sister admitted Michael was a pedophile and only recanted when given a lot of money (but the defenders claim it's all about accusers wanting money...lol hypocrites). And worst of all, you have the man himself on video asking "What's wrong with sleeping with children in the same bed?". Again, willfully stupid.

The only dumb I'm seeing are from people who do not bother doing any research and calling him a pedo. People keep bringing up old information that was debunked years ago as if it's proof he was a pedophile.

What's also dumb is that people choose to take stories as fact when anyone can come out of the wood works to make up a false claim against a celebrity.

La Toya Jackson said her husband made her make up those claims against Michael Jackson.

The alleged victims?


The one in 93 was allegedly drugged while coming up with those false confessions and there's proof and witness that his father tried to set Jackson up to get money from him. Yes, there's proof that people wanted money in this, yet you're not able to comprehend. Let's not forget that fact that Jackson said in the interview that he would love for children to share his bed while he sleeps on the floor. Yet people still believe he molested Jordan chandler after reading that information from 93. You guys see the 20 settlement as weird (even though Jackson wanted the civil case postponed until after the criminal case was over) but don't see the ones that I mentioned weird at all? Funny.

If you're going to accuse people of being dumb, at least provide better information.

 

[EverybodyHatesMe]

I can't trust any man who lives in a children's amusement park where he frolics with little boys and brings them into his bed, tells them that he loves them; it's just too much. If any other man did it we wouldn't have this debate.

 

[DForce]

Let's talk about the Martin Bashir's Living with Michael Jackson documentary.

This is what people use as proof that Michael Jackson is a pedophile because he admitted to sleeping in the same bed as children.

What people don't realize is that the documentary was edited and so are many of the clips floating around.




Frank Cascio says Gavin asked Michael if he could sleep in his room and they felt something was odd. They were about to tell Gavin Arvizo no he couldn't but Michael had a solution. he says You (Frank Cascio) have to sleep in the room with me." The two children slept on the bed and he and Michael slept on the floor.

Bashir: “When you stay here, do you stay in the house? Does Michael let you enjoy the whole premises?”

Gavin: “There was one night, I asked him if I could stay in his bedroom. He let me stay in the bedroom.” “And I was like, ‘Michael you can sleep in the bed’, and he was like ‘No, no, you sleep on the bed’, and I was like ‘No, no, no, you sleep on the bed’, and then he said ‘Look, if you love me, you’ll sleep in the bed‘. I was like ‘Oh mannnn?” so I finally slept on the bed.” “But it was fun that night.”

Jackson: “I slept on the floor. [to Gavin] Was it a sleeping bag?”

Gavin: “You packed the whole mess of blankets on the floor.”

Bashir: “But Michael, you’re a 44-year-old man now, what do you get out of this?”

Gavin: “He ain’t 44, he’s 4!”

Jackson: “Yeah, I’m 4. I love, I feel, I think what they get from me, I get from them. I’ve said it many times, my greatest inspiration comes from kids. Every song I write, every dance I do, all the poetry I write, is all inspired from the level of innocence.” “That consciousness of purity. And children have that. I see God in the face of children. And man, I just love being around that all the time.”

Bashir: “But when people hear that children from other families have come and they’ve stayed in your house, they’ve stayed in your bedroom ..?”

Jackson: “Very few.”

Martin Bashir: “When you are talking about children we met Gavin – and it was a great privilege to meet Gavin because he’s had a lot of suffering in his life – when Gavin was there he talked about the fact that he shares your bedroom?”

Jackson: “Yes.”

Bashir: “Can you understand why people would worry about that?”

Jackson: “Because they are ignorant.”

Bashir: “But is it really appropriate for a 44-year-old man to share a bedroom with a child that is not related to him at all?”

Jackson: “That’s a beautiful thing.”

Bashir: “That’s not a worrying thing?”

Jackson: “Why should that be worrying, what’s the criminal…who’s Jack the Ripper in the room? There’s some guy trying to heal a healing child … I’m in a sleeping bag on the floor. “I gave him the bed because he has a brother named Star, so him and Star took the bed and I went along on the sleeping bag.”

Bashir: “Did you ever sleep in the bed with them?”

Jackson: “No, but….”

Jackson says he never slept in the same bed as Gavin, but he did share his bed while he slept on the floor.

The time Culkin slept in the bed with Michael.

Bashir: “Did you ever sleep in the bed with them?”

Jackson: “No, but I have slept in a bed with many children. I slept in a bed with all of them when Macaulay Culkin was little: Kieran Culkin would sleep on this side, Macaulay Culkin was on this side, his sisters in there…we all would just jam in the bed, you know. “We would wake up like dawn and go in the hot air balloon, you know, we had the footage. I have all that footage.”

Jackson says he never invited them to his bedroom.

Jackson: “You can have my bed if you want, sleep in it. I’ll sleep on the floor. It’s yours. Always give the best to the company, you know. Like to him. Because he was going to sleep on the floor and I said ‘No, you sleep in the bed and I’ll sleep on the floor.'”

Bashir: “But haven’t you got a spare room or a spare house here where he could have stayed?”

Jackson: “No.. yes, we have guest units, but whenever kids come here they always want to stay with me, they never want to stay in the guest rooms.” “And I have never invited them into my room, they always just wanna stay with me. They say, ‘Can I stay with you tonight?’, so I go ‘If it’s OK with your parents then yes you can’.”

Bashir: “Were your parents happy that you were here with Michael?”

Gavin: “Yeah, well, my ma was very, very, very happy. And I know they’re happy, because I’m happy.”

Bashir: “Did they come with you?”

Gavin: “Most of the time I wasn’t busy with my parents, I was mainly with Michael.”

Bashir: “But they were happy that you were here?

Jackson: “Yeah.”

Yes, many people will still consider this weird, but this debunks the notion that Michael was inviting people to his bed willingly .

What's funny is that before Wade Robson changed his story, Wade also claims that him and his sister asked Mihcael if they could stay in his bedroom.

7 Q. On top of page 22 you wrote, "It came time
8 to go to bed and my sister and I asked if we could
9 'Please, Please' stay with Michael. Michael said it was
10 ok with him if it was ok with my parents."
11 A. I see that (Wade Robson)
12 Q. Do you remember writing that?
13 A. I don't.

Wade changed his story and he could only say he doesn't remember writing that as to not admit guilt on his part.

This theory that MJ was inviting people to his bed willingly and always slept in the same bed as them is false.

 

[Brizzady]

The only dumb I'm seeing are from people who do not bother doing any research and calling him a pedo. People keep bringing up old information that was debunked years ago as if it's proof he was a pedophile.

What's also dumb is that people choose to take stories as fact when anyone can come out of the wood works to make up a false claim against a celebrity.

La Toya Jackson said her husband made her make up those claims against Michael Jackson.

The alleged victims?


The one in 93 was allegedly drugged while coming up with those false confessions and there's proof and witness that his father tried to set Jackson up to get money from him. Yes, there's proof that people wanted money in this, yet you're not able to comprehend. Let's not forget that fact that Jackson said in the interview that he would love for children to share his bed while he sleeps on the floor. Yet people still believe he molested Jordan chandler after reading that information from 93. You guys see the 20 settlement as weird (even though Jackson wanted the civil case postponed until after the criminal case was over) but don't see the ones that I mentioned weird at all? Funny.

If you're going to accuse people of being dumb, at least provide better information.

LOL "proof". La Toya said her husband made her come forward and tell the truth. She then changed her story after the Jacksons gave her a ton of money. And I love how the defense force for this pedophile keep ignoring the fact that he openly groomed both the parents and the kids and then admitted he slept with boys. Totally normal behavior. DURRRRP. It's people like you who also believe the world is flat. Now go ahead and give us the defense for what Michael Hagen accused Jackson of. Or was he in it for fame and fortune too? (Spoiler - he doesn't want either).

 

[DForce]

LOL "proof". La Toya said her husband made her come forward and tell the truth. She then changed her story after the Jacksons gave her a ton of money. And I love how the defense force for this pedophile keep ignoring the fact that he openly groomed both the parents and the kids and then admitted he slept with boys. Totally normal behavior. DURRRRP. It's people like you who also believe the world is flat. Now go ahead and give us the defense for what Michael Hagen accused Jackson of. Or was he in it for fame and fortune too? (Spoiler - he doesn't want either).

You only think La Toya changed her story because it fits your narrative.

No accuser has credibility and you think their accusations are proof.

See how I asked for proof and all you do is cite accusations?

Yeah, you don't have much, so don't pretend like you have proof that these guys were molested.

Michael Jacobshagen?

Guy selling a book? That's someone whom you're starting with it?

The guy selling fake memorabilia?

The guy exposed during a TV show for his lies?

Guy photoshopping himself with celebrities as to gain some sort of credibility?

See why I talk about credibility of these accusers?


Like I said before, you guys are taking stories as proof without doing any research.

DURRRRP.

 

[cryptoadam]

Is it true that the house MJ bought one of the parents, was actually a loan he gave them that he got fed up asking them for the money back because they weren't paying so he just fuck it?

 

[mckmas8808]

I don't know... MJ was quite open about his love for children (the innocent kind of love). If he really was a pedo, he wouldn't be so open about it. He would probably be more careful and avoid going near kids or talk about them in public.

Catholic priest disagree with you on this.

 

[mckmas8808]

Is it true that the house MJ bought one of the parents, was actually a loan he gave them that he got fed up asking them for the money back because they weren't paying so he just fuck it?

Yes and no. Once the trail was over and the kid took the stand, MJ told the family they didn't have to finish the payments on the loan. Some (like myself) see it as a form of payoff for "good deeds" done on the stand.

 

[DForce]

Yes and no. Once the trail was over and the kid took the stand, MJ told the family they didn't have to finish the payments on the loan. Some (like myself) see it as a form of payoff for "good deeds" done on the stand.

This was Safechuck family and he never took the stand.

James claimed that he didn't know it was abuse (even though he changed how his mother found out multiple times) so the "lying" part wouldn't make sense based on his story.

 

[cryptoadam]

This was Safechuck family and he never took the stand.

James claimed that he didn't know it was abuse (even though he changed how his mother found out multiple times) so the "lying" part wouldn't make sense based on his story.

I thought he was declared a non entity for the trial and wasn't even asked to take the stand at all?

 

[DForce]

I thought he was declared a non entity for the trial and wasn't even asked to take the stand at all?

This was around the time when they were investing the Jordan Chandler allegations. James signed a declaration stating that he wasn't molested and this was one of the reasons why he wasn't even considered to testify in 2005. But yes, the judged ruled months in advance that he was a non-entity and his story about being pressured to appear to be false.

 

[mckmas8808]

This was Safechuck family and he never took the stand.

James claimed that he didn't know it was abuse (even though he changed how his mother found out multiple times) so the "lying" part wouldn't make sense based on his story.

Okay take out the phrase "the kid" and replace it with "family member(s) and the point still stands. Plus MJ also rewarded him for signing that declaration stating he wasn't molested, by basically buying his family a home. That's a great trade-off for Michael Jackson.

 

[DForce]

Okay take out the phrase "the kid" and replace it with "family member(s) and the point still stands. Plus MJ also rewarded him for signing that declaration stating he wasn't molested, by basically buying his family a home. That's a great trade-off for Michael Jackson.

That's their story. People are confident that this was a trade off for "covering for him" but people somehow put their full confidence in these two individuals even thought they have lied.

So far, NO ONE in this thread has offered an explanation as to why they're lying.

 

[cryptoadam]

That's their story. People are confident that this was a trade off for "covering for him" but people somehow put their full confidence in these two individuals even thought they have lied.

So far, NO ONE in this thread has offered an explanation as to why they're lying.

Safechucks parents are being sued by 2 old ladies who they tried to screw in their Rubish business. They are being sued for 270K and there business can go belly up. This was around 2011 or so.

Is this a motivation to lie, I can't say up to the court of public opinion to decide.

 

[DForce]

Safechucks parents are being sued by 2 old ladies who they tried to screw in their Rubish business. They are being sued for 270K and there business can go belly up. This was around 2011 or so.

Is this a motivation to lie, I can't say up to the court of public opinion to decide.

I saw this on Twitter.





This is why their timeline is all screwed up. Things are adding up at all. lol.

 

[Rock And Roll]

Interesting how they both ran upon financial hardships and suddenly realized MJ had diddled them all those years ago.

 

[gamerMan]

I saw this on Twitter.


This is why their timeline is all screwed up. Things are adding up at all. lol.

There are several inconsistencies in both of their testimonies that relate to the timeline. These inconsistencies don't mean that the victims are being truthful but are worth noting.

Jimmy claims that Michael asked him to testify in the 2005 case. The March 28th, 2005 Court transcript confirms Safechuck was barred - by name - from testifying.

There is one interview where Joy Robson claims that Wade was 9 years old when they came to America. After it was linked to, this interview was removed but people have posted a portion of the audio here:

It's also worth noting that the infamous wedding ring scene wasn't originally in the documentary. Safechuck's testimony was recorded over 2 days. Somebody noticed that the furniture in the background in the "infamous" ring scene was completely different. According to the director, Jimmy couldn't initially find the rings, so the scene was added months later after Jimmy located the rings.

 

[DForce]

There are several inconsistencies in both of their testimonies that relate to the timeline. These inconsistencies don't mean that the victims are being truthful but are worth noting.

Jimmy claims that Michael asked him to testify in the 2005 case. The March 28th, 2005 Court transcript confirms Safechuck was barred - by name - from testifying.

There is one interview where Joy Robson claims that Wade was 9 years old when they came to America. After it was linked to, this interview was removed but people have posted a portion of the audio here:

It's also worth noting that the infamous wedding ring scene wasn't originally in the documentary. Safechuck's testimony was recorded over 2 days. Somebody noticed that the furniture in the background in the "infamous" ring scene was completely different. According to the director, Jimmy couldn't initially find the rings, so the scene was added months later after Jimmy located the rings.

Yeah, it appears that they're taking a lot from Victor Gutierez's book.

Wade said he remember everything that happened to him, but his e-mails were brought into court and you can see him trying to get help from his mother on how to create this story.

I think they're going to get exposed sooner or later when people actually starts reporting this stuff.

 

[gamerMan]

Yeah, it appears that they're taking a lot from Victor Gutierez's book.

Wade said he remember everything that happened to him, but his e-mails were brought into court and you can see him trying to get help from his mother on how to create this story.

I think they're going to get exposed sooner or later when people actually starts reporting this stuff.

You are right about Victor Gutierez. I really doubt you will find anybody in the media reporting this. The media has already convicted Michael.

In the 2005 case, everybody in the media was convinced Michael was 100% guilty. When the evidence was presented in a court of law, the media was shocked with the not guilty verdict. Linda Deutsch, one of the most respected journalists at the time, was ashamed of the media and said that the case was so shoddy it should have never went to trial.

Now that Michael is dead the Media can print anything like a shitty article entitled "Music video producer who worked with Michael Jackson believes accusers" where the guy didn't even know Michael or that Paris Jackson slit her wrists. I think the closest we will get is this Medium article: Leaving Neverland Debunked in 10 Minutes or Less.

In it, it states regarding Wade Robson's case against the estate "The judge found that no rational fact-finder could possibly believe Robson’s sworn statement. "

 

[Shodan09]

I can't trust any man who lives in a children's amusement park where he frolics with little boys and brings them into his bed, tells them that he loves them; it's just too much. If any other man did it we wouldn't have this debate.

I don't get the 'if anyone else did it' argument. As if someone with MJ's upbringing and life is remotely normal.

 

[Saturnman]

"Why sure, Mr Polanski, take my young daughter to a private photo shoot. After all, you didn't have a normal upbringing."

 

[Days like these...]

F*ck that pedo and and all of y'all defending him. What kind of proof y'all want? A vhs tape off him raping a little boy?

 

[cryptoadam]

We want more than the words of 2 proven liars based on a 1 sided manipulative documentary.

I could respect Dan Reed if he actually did some investigation for this doc, but instead he just let Safechuk and Robson and their families spew whatever they wanted un contested for 4 hours straight.