Jump to content
JONEZY

Leaving Neverland, Michael Jackson Documentary, HBO

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Crazyman said:

As you said, though, it's a personal judgement at this point. It blows my mind that a documentary coming out a decade after the man himself died is causing people to change their opinion (and playing of) his working when he was alive and faced multiple allegations. If people sincerely wanted to discredit his work because of allegations of this they probably should've before 2019. 

I think the difference now is you hear the accounts in the accusers own words. It sits with you. It was one thing to see it in a headline or a brief interview, it’s another to sit there for four hours and hear every detail. Ignorance can be convenient. I don’t think I would eat any form of meat if I had to watch the animals get slaughtered beforehand.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of smoke. I don't know what to think of this situation - Michael was a very troubled and damaged man. I'd like to believe he was a man-child who did a lot of good in this world through his extensive philanthropy. If these allegations are true though, they ruin his legend for me. 

One thing that always confused me with MJ is that if he's a child molester - with his power, connections, and money - shouldn't he have a veritable laundry list of victims like Cosby? So far there have been 5 boys that have alleged abuse. So if MJ has been abusing since his early 20's, was he abusing ~2 boys a decade? Aren't pedophiles generally prolific abusers?

MJ is guilty of making a lot of bad decisions (sleeping with boys far younger than him for one) but was he a child molester? Who knows. Is there a smoking gun here like there is with R Kelly?

@EvanG - Re: the kid (Safechuck) who didn't testify in 2005 - Scott Ross talks about it briefly :

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
56 minutes ago, downzy said:

I think the difference now is you hear the accounts in the accusers own words. It sits with you. It was one thing to see it in a headline or a brief interview, it’s another to sit there for four hours and hear every detail. Ignorance can be convenient. I don’t think I would eat any form of meat if I had to watch the animals get slaughtered beforehand.  

I could certainly see why that could change things but I doubt I'd become a vegetarian even if I watched animals getting slaughtered. :lol:

Edit: I've noticed that it's hard to get accurate facts on what was and wasn't found during the raids on Neverland. There have been articles mentioning some fucked up things being found and articles saying that nothing of note was found. Not that they would, but it would be nice if the county DA/FBI ever confirmed or denied any of the rumors. 

Edited by Crazyman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot about this entirely (she later retracted her statements and alleged her husband forced her to make them)

 

 

Had never seen this. The lacivious material isn’t as unnerving to me as the house itself is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Angelica said:

Forgot about this entirely (she later retracted her statements and alleged her husband forced her to make them)

 

 

Had never seen this. The lacivious material isn’t as unnerving to me as the house itself is. 

How do MJ supporters explain the child porn and animal torture porn stuff? 

#WakeTheFuckUp

Edited by Oldest Goat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, action said:

One very important element of proof in this case, the best one if you ask me, is the house search that the authorities did in MJ's ranch.

What better proof could you possibly get?

criminals, wether they are murderers, thieves or pedo's, make mistakes. they leave traces of their crimes, however small they may be.

The ouctome of this search, all the items they have found, need to be reviewed in full by anyone who pretends to have an opinion on MJ's case. Yes, watch the docu, but also watch what the authorities have found during their search.

Bear in mind, all what they had found, has been put forward in court, all of it. And nothing has been legally found to be child porn. No underwear has been found, nothing that can remotely point to child abuse. I find this very strange. Another thing that I "just have to accept", I guess.

See more in detail about his house search, here:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/no-child-porn-found-at-neverland-thenor-now-the_us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8

 

 

1 hour ago, Angelica said:

 

Sure looks like there was indeed child porn. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the trial there were all these Neverland people also, housekeepers, cleaners and so forth, who saw lurid stuff, Jackson with his hands down Culkin's pants, oral sex acts on Jordan Chandler, etc., and testified. Most of them were dismissed as unreliable witnesses and pecuniary chancers, exacting revenge for unlawful dismissal, but you've to wonder if some of them were speaking the truth now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

well, as everyone who has watched this movie can attest: disturbing and disgusting facts were described.

what me and my wife both agreed on was, why would you lie on something like that?

I can see why many people left the first viewing of this movie.

as for my stance on MJ's guilt. I have my doubts, yes. I feel like defending him is taking a risk (but so it claiming he is guilty). I'm not sure I'm willing to take risks like that, in the name of someone who ultimately, is a complete stranger to me.

I still think that the debate should consider every piece of evidence, à charge and à décharge, but I don't like being the one standing on the platform anymore. It will leave me open for insults and questioning of my motives, hidden and open, as has already happened on here, and I'm not having any of it anymore. it's for someone else to speak in his defence from now on.

Edited by action
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just see a couple of people who made their whole life revolve around micheal jackson until it stopped and then became very spiteful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

How do MJ supporters explain the child porn and animal torture porn stuff? 

#WakeTheFuckUp

There was no child porn. Even the prosecution admitted that nothing they found in the raid was illegal. If he was in possession of child pornography, he would've been up on charges for it.

God, some people.....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Towelie said:

There was no child porn. Even the prosecution admitted that nothing they found in the raid was illegal. If he was in possession of child pornography, he would've been up on charges for it.

God, some people.....

I really don't understand why some people think that stuff like this is true. Use your brain lol. Although maybe that is a bit too much to ask. 

Edited by Jw224

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regrading MJ being removed from radio and such, according to UCR thats exactly what happened to Jerry Lee Lewis in 1958 in response to his 13 year old wife:

When Lewis and his entourage arrived at London’s Heathrow Airport, one of the first American stars to make the journey, many of them expected great things. Elvis Presley had recently joined the army, so the way was clear for Lewis to claim the rock ’n’ roll crown. All those hopes were smashed when British journalist Ray Berry, who was patrolling the airport, asked a simple question of Myra: “Who are you?” Since she hadn’t been given any advice about how to treat reporters, she replied honestly, saying she was the wife of Jerry Lee Lewis.

Within days the British tour had been canceled, and within weeks the rising rock star would be appearing for $250 in bars and clubs instead of the $10,000 big shows he’d been playing before the scandal. Radio stations stopped playing his songs, former friends abandoned him and Myra later said she’d never shaken off the “Jerry Lee Lewis’s child bride” prefix to her name.

https://ultimateclassicrock.com/jerry-lee-lewis-married-cousin/

I guess 2019, social media and millennials arent radically changing everything. This is how the Golden Generation rolled too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, RONIN said:

 

@EvanG - Re: the kid (Safechuck) who didn't testify in 2005 - Scott Ross talks about it briefly :

Ok, so either Safechuck was lying his pants off, or he really didn't want to testify and have anything to do with it anymore as he claimed, but the MJ camp was still reaching out to him to testify (maybe in the media if court was ruled out).

I've heard people say that Safechuck's mom's reaction to Jackson's death (dancing and being happy he couldn't hurt anyone anymore) didn't make sense because Safechuck didn't open up to his parents about the abuse until years later, so she couldn't have known at the time. But according to Safechuck he told his parents that Jackson was an evil person and that is why he didn't want to testify in 2005, and from that his mom must have gathered that something happened and that the accusations are true, even if he didn't go into details.

Unless there is some video footage, we will never know what happened behind those closed bedroom doors.

 

Edited by EvanG
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, EvanG said:

Ok, so either Safechuck was lying his pants off, or he really didn't want to testify and have anything to do with it anymore as he claimed, but the MJ camp was still reaching out to him to testify (maybe in the media if court was ruled out).

I've heard people say that Safechuck's mom's reaction to Jackson's death (dancing and being happy he couldn't hurt anyone anymore) didn't make sense because Safechuck didn't open up to his parents about the abuse until years later, so she couldn't have known at the time. But according to Safechuck he told his parents that Jackson was an evil person and that is why he didn't want to testify in 2005, and from that his mom must have gathered that something happened and that the accusations are true, even if he didn't go into details.

Unless there is some video footage, we will never know what happened behind those closed bedroom doors.

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Len Cnut said:

:lol:

It's a bummer either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the docu paints jackson as a snake in the grass, covering up his tracks and knowing damn well he did criminal things.

It makes no sense to me then, that MJ "confessed" to the interviewer, in the living with michael jackson docu, that he "slept with children in his bed".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, action said:

the docu paints jackson as a snake in the grass, covering up his tracks and knowing damn well he did criminal things.

It makes no sense to me then, that MJ "confessed" to the interviewer, in the living with michael jackson docu, that he "slept with children in his bed".

Perfect alibi isn't it, I mean what pedos gonna admit that?  But it plays into the man-child with absolutely no sexual motive whatsoever, this one off special human being who is all about caring and love and heartfelt empathy for children...who also happens to be a one-off special talent as well, so the picture is even more well rounded, if he's unique in his talent then perhaps he's equally unique in his character.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, alfierose said:

Oprah interview in full for those outside of the US

She's looking oddly Jackoesque in that pic.  Paint her face white and she's kinda of a heavy set version of him :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just for reference sake about people not acting to protect children, there was a pedo-ring uncovered in a city near mine. Alleged to have run from the 1950s-1999. The ring included child welfare, police, lawyers, priests, a judge (iirc?), a bishop, and other professionals.

A 53 million dollar inquiry on behalf of 50 living victims, found wrong doing on the parts of many institutions to either promote or passively allow the abuse:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/cornwall-moves-on-after-child-sex-abuse-scandal-1.826785

Financial settlements paid out by the Province for victims in 2010:

https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/cornwall-sex-abuse-victims-given-large-settlements-1.521190

To the best of my knowledge none of the few people charged faced any serious consequences, despite the authorities finding the allegations to be true. And no-one ever talks about any of it anymore.

Edited by soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Is it possible that he didn't know what he was doing is wrong? That he thought sex between a man and a boy is not wrong? He knew society considered it wrong and therefore he trained them to never talk about it, but that to him it really was nothing but love and something beautiful and everyone else was ignorant? He was still hanging out with that Wade guy when he was in his 20's... I don't know if it's normal for molesters who know what they have done is wrong, to still hang out with their victims. 

Edited by EvanG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Had never seen this. The lacivious material isn’t as unnerving to me as the house itself is. 

Thats a fuckin' pedos lair if ever I've seen one.  It looks like that bit in Psycho when Lila Loomis goes into Normans bedroom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Towelie said:

There was no child porn. Even the prosecution admitted that nothing they found in the raid was illegal. If he was in possession of child pornography, he would've been up on charges for it.

God, some people.....

On the flipside though it don't have to be illegal necessarily to be incriminating in regards to the allegations though does it?  Say for example I'm up for rape, the police raid my gaff and find like, I dunno, a fuckin' VHS with rape scenes off of hollywood films recorded on it, legal stuff, the Thelma and Louise scene, the bit in that Jodie Foster movie...tryna think of another movie with rape in it, I Spit on Your Grave, all these scenes on like a compilation tape, none of its fuckin' illegal, they're all legal movies you can pop into any shop and buy...wouldn't reflect well on me though would it? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×