I feel upset, sick and cheated by Leaving Neverland

[Persimmonn]

I was one of those people who kept saying the men are out to make money. That there’s no evidence etc. But I finally watched the documentary yesterday and it’s hurt me a lot. I feel like I was lied to my whole life. I know it sounds so melodramatic and selfish but MJ was my idol growing up. I remember being 7 years old and dancing and singing his songs.

Now I feel sick to the core. If Wade Robson and James Safechuck are lying, then they’re incredibly good liars.

MJ was a paedophile.

"If he was truly guilty of abuse he would have been put in prison. "

Again, and I will say it loudly:

OJ SIMPSON

Good workLuna!

Would you want to hand over your diary and private emails?
What's wrong with saying his story of abuse will make him relatable to people he was looking to help anyway? The 'relevant' bit is only used to take his meaning out of context.
He has to amend his testimony, if you'd read the document you posted, you would understand why.
You can keep scrabbling round trying to find things to besmirch these victims' characters but you will never be able to prove yourself 'right' because it's impossible. Most decent people stand together with victims and believe them anyway. Maybe it makes you feel rebellious or like an amateur detective to take the opposite view. Whatever your reasons, I think it shows a lot about your own character which is why you're trying to tarnish those of children.

Cc the amount of times you've used the term 'ranting' and 'hysterically ranting' points to you being a raging misogynist!

Hear hear!

@ccmrob12 You linked to that joke of a clip, 'Neverland Firsthand' which was laughed at, even by all sections of the media, as 'pathetic' and 'laughable'. Most of the claims in there were previously thoroughly discredited or largely completely irrelevant (Brandi) to the topic.

I said your use of 'ranting' and 'hysterically ranting'. You've said 'ranting' many a time. Who do you think you are to critique other posters when you are the main poster here along with the fact your comprehension skills are not exactly flawless.

"ccmrob12 Fri 12-Apr-19 16:45:21
In case you think I am lying, here is the link with the proof.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6907531/Wade-Robson-wanted-cash-Michael-Jackson-sex-abuse-claims-tell-book.html

Sorry signed witness statements aren't proof are they? Not good enough for you...."

There are no 'signed witness statements' on that TABLOID article which doesn't even provide evidence of where they got those transcripts (if real) are from. We know The Daily Fail, the Mirror and the Sun have a hotline to the Jackson estate and hence through their law firm. Where are these 'signed witness statements', and where is the source for the original 'transcript'?

Good one Luna. It’s on the first page of the document.

Brandi was completely irrelevant, a 7 year relationship left out of the film, I wouldn’t class that as irrelevant.

Can you please back up your claims that neverland firsthand has been laughed at in the media? Specifically which parts were discredited?

Sagrada, make excuses all you want, he was hiding them for a reason. He’s a liar.

I’m the only one left posting because everyone else who has dared not agree with ou has been abused and chased off. Simple. Stop being so abusive to other posters and you might see more people posting on the subject, simple.

"The key here is what sized rings he bought at the time. He told the store staff he was buying rings for Sheryl Crow, his backup singer at the time. Wouldn't it look odd, if he claimed that but then bought a child sized ring instead? "

In the documentary, the ring was barely able to get on his pinky.

He also said that Jackson and he would say they were both looking at rings for girls, hence he would try on rings "to fit his fingers" for his girlfriend. And the newsreel backs up what he said.

See, you post all these things that (you think) discredit the mens' claims, yet ignore a MASSIVE one that BACKS IT UP.

On the basis of the newsreel alone, if I doubted these two men before, I would believe them now. On that alone. That is pretty evidence in their (or Safechuck's at least) favour.

Please report my 'abusive' posts...

@CherryPlum He very rarely had girls over in his room. This is fact.

"I find it odd that some men have come forward and made this horrific accusation and people immediately say 'I believe you'. Why? Why do you believe them? What is convincing you that they are telling the truth?"

I find it odd that you don't believe someone who says they were sexually abused. Why wouldn't you? Why would you not believe someone? Men don't make this shit up. WHY would you disbelieve them, when Jackson had already paid off other boys. Where there is smoke there is fire. As a child psychologist said regarding the documentary: "I think it's interesting that sexual abuse is the only crime where the default position is to be suspicious of the accuser, to scrutinise every aspect of their demeanour and make judgements about whether it fits with how we think a "victim" should behave. It's hardly surprising that so few come forward."

We don't doubt people who say their house was burgled. Why do we doubt men who say they were sexually abused? And then try to pick apart how we think they should act when telling what happened to them? If they are crying, they are 'putting it on'. If they are detached, clinical and unemotional, they 'aren't upset enough'. People need to STOP trying to pull apart men who have been brave enough to come forward, and instead BELIEVE THEM. Because no one makes this shit up (and especially risk death threats and abuse from unhinged and dangerous fanbots). No one.

My question to you is, if someone tells you they were sexually abused, WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE THEM?

It’s not evidence of anything, it’s Safechucks story. If MJ was buying a child sized ring, where are the store staff who could corroborate that? You don’t think they would have flagged that at the time? Children’s rings and adult woman rings are different sizes are they not?

" It just wouldn't have made sense for him to marry Lisa Marie and then carry on abusing during that time."

The marriage was as a cover. So do you really think it would stop him? Or believe Lisa Marie even shared a bed with him? The ranch was HUGE.

Many, many married men are child molesters. Most molesters are married men with children. I'm not sure why you think that means he can't. At this stage it just seems like you refuse to believe he is guilty and nothing will ever change your mind, not even facts and evidence.

Excellently said, Luna. So very true that abuse victims are often the ones 'on trial' from the get-go.

Luna that’s exactly how I feel but the other way round. People on here have made their mind up and that’s that.

How do you know the marriage was a cover? Have you spoken to Lisa Marie? You are assuming that because that’s what you want to believe. Yes married men are abusers that wasn’t my point. I like how you ignored the other point I made about it making James 16/17 when the abuse would have happened, not praying on little boys like the film claimed.

"It’s well documented that both were suffering money issues at the time they decided to sue, it’s not a myth."

Where is it well documented?

"Wade Robson can’t decide the reason he testified for Michael and didn’t tell the truth. He has changed his story that he didn’t know he was being abused at the time, to saying he was scared, to saying he wanted to protect Michael. How can your story from he was scared of telling to truth for fear to wanting to protect Michael. He can’t get his story straight. I don’t see how it could be both. "

Um, yes, it can, and both are very common. Also he explained it in the documentary. He was told that OTHER PEOPLE 'didn't understand' and were 'ignorant' of their love. AND, because of other people's ignorance, they would both go to jail. It makes absolute sense, if you truly think about it.

It turns out, the Insurance company not only was not involved, Jackson asked the Insurance to pay, and they DENIED HIM.

www.mjfacts.com/the-jordie-chandler-settlement-revisited/

Also there is this on the same page:
"TOM MESEREAU: Ah, my understanding was that an insurance company did not pay. Now, the settlement agreement was written, in my opinion, (and again, I was not involved in that settlement, ah, you should ask Cap Weitzman about the settlement, or John Branca about it), I was not involved in it. I didn’t even know Michael at the time, I wasn’t, I didn’t meet him until eleven years later, um, but…

CALLER: Right.

TOM MESEREAU: My understanding was that the settlement agreement was written to, um, permit the possibility that an insurance company would step in and pay, but I was also told that an insurance company did not pay."

Lisa Marie was clearly a beard. MJ wasn't a straight man. He didn't have functional relationships with women, not even to have his children.

The age of 16/17 was the back end of the abuse, the time when Michael was stringing him along under the pretence of being in a 'special relationship/marriage' with him. Before he outgrew it completely, or should I say, before James grew up completely. The abuse started years before.

@ccmrob12 There is no need for you to be so rude, nasty and aggressive toward me. I have been away. I am replying to posts as I read them. A couple of times I forgot to respond to points you made in a post, so since I cannot edit posts in here, I had to post again. When I first started reading all the posts I missed while I was away, I was on page 28. The thread is now up to page 44. So I had to 'post as I go along'. I post a reply per post I am replying to. I thought that was the way things were supposed to be done? Otherwise if it was all in one post, the post would be MILES long. Hence several posts. I am not 'ranting' at all. You've chosen to take that view of me because you are hostile to my position. All I am doing is replying post per post. That's all.

Re the train station, what you said is absolutely not true.
t is important to note that there were officially FOUR different train stations at Neverland ranch.

If you look up the map of Neverland ranch on Google, you will find the following train stations listed:

4 Electric Train Station
8 Main Train Station
25 Train Station
41 Zoo Train Station.

imgur.com/2K0Balx?fbclid=IwAR1g9IKOdbKhoiUIyjfSgC5n0OiyQr-xo1wcaSka0RO38VBeItF00sCNFHc

There was a document showing a datestamp for a train station. It didn't show which one. And when some went to look for plans, the people who owned the plans were...... MJ's estate and a bank associated with the estate. And they would not release them.

Also of note, is that the original owners built the train tracks, in 173. 20 years previous. Think they had no train or no train station, but only tracks?

I saw the interview with the Jurors. At least one admitted he felt he was guilty. Others said they felt they couldn't convict 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

I'm not sure how you think that helps your argument? Seems to me it's the other way around.

Thank you Sagradafamiliar, I have no idea what his problem is. I was shocked when I read the nasty tones of his replies to me. I am simply replying to posts as I read them. That's all. Shrugs. I didn't know that was wrong? I've never been told off for it before.

"That is from Wade Robson’s own diary. He was forced to hand it over to the court, and he only did so when he was ordered. He tried hiding them, and his emails because they revealed inconsistencies and facts he didn’t want the courts to know and that’s when he started making amendments to his testimony.

"I’m a 100% convinced of MJs innocence via proxy as I’m 100% convinced Wade is lying through this alone. Why hide things if you are telling the truth? if anything, your diary should be used to help your case not damage it, as it has done in Wades case."
Then what about Safechuck being extremely believable, many times looking like he's destroyed and devastated (on the Oprah video) and the newsreel that backs him up on the wedding ring issue? Even if one thinks Wade isn't believable, surely you must see that James is.

On the diary thing, I would be mortified beyond belief to have my personal diary given to a court and for people to read. In fact, even thinking about it, makes me terrified. I can understand not wanting to allow people to read his personal diary. Especially when one knows that their personal feelings at that time will be torn apart by the fans who are absolutely and utterly desperate to find something, anything, to tear you apart.

@Inkanta Thank you. I seem to be getting only abuse for doing this, to the extent my posts are picked apart merely because I am catching up and posting as I read and reply. But facts are important and I do try my best, even if I have to take cover from grenades thrown at me.

@ccmrob12

That document was merely a Notice of Motion from the Jackson lawyers, and nowhere do they say what the 4 alterations were - they may have been legal reference alterations. We don't know what the alterations are.

Re Neverland Firsthand, here is an example. www.telegraph.co.uk/music/news/neverland-firsthand-review-jackson-familys-ludicrous-leaving/?fbclid=IwAR18c68g3qA1LWST9v1Nfan_vxRM88ruLl-NlohiShjjepAmOip8qQtv_Fo

A child-like friendship turned 'relationship' does not prove anything. It certainly doesn't disprove that he was abused. She was not there with him when he was abused. She was so desperate, even as far as going on about how he cheated on her. I mean, she was really throwing every thing including the kitchen sink at it. She seemed very desperate.

@ccmrob12 "It’s not evidence of anything, it’s Safechucks story. If MJ was buying a child sized ring, where are the store staff who could corroborate that? You don’t think they would have flagged that at the time? Children’s rings and adult woman rings are different sizes are they not?"

You didn't read my post. I did not say that they bought the rings at that place. I also said that in the documentary, Safechuck said they would pretend they were looking at the rings for girl(s) - plural. Jackson for his woman, and Safechuck for his girl. Naturally, Safechuck's fingers would be the same as a girl his which is what he said they pretended they were looking for. Jackson would try on rings for women, Safechuck child-size for girls.

I've spotted numerous typing errors in my posts, including numerical such as 44 for page 34, and 173 for the train tracks existing in 1973. I so wish we could edit posts. It would also save the amount of posts made, therefore getting to the 1000 thread post limit not as quickly.