Do you believe the Michael Jackson allegations part 2

[AutumnLover1990]

New thread 😀

But that’s all trickled through the media and what his enormous industry of people where orchestrating behind him, you can not really think you know who his was through the lens of the papers, tv and films? Even the people close to him probably only saw one side of him, with the exception of his family. He was a huge money making concern, an endless cash cow, it was totally in their interest to keep him Lily-white, in all aspects and feed the version of Michael his fans wanted to see.

I used to love his songs and I owned his records.

I cannot play them any more. Especially with the knowledge that the romantic / sexual ones could have been written with innocent children as his muse.

I agree. I also think that in the days before social media it was much easier for celebrities to hide their dark sides.

I find it troubling that two of his tours were called ‘Bad’ and ‘Dangerous’. You have to wonder if this was some sort of duper’s delight :/

I’m always amazed that people are happy to protest his innocence despite the facts.

The facts don’t amount to much in terms of evidence against him. It’s pretty much fuck all.

I notice Netflix have a docu series coming out soon and people aren't happy with it

If that were the case then he would never have been charged. The threshold is high in terms of evidence required to charge him.

At least two jury members thought he was guilty and another admitted he didn’t want a hung jury and just wanted to go home.

What else is there to bring up/make up? It'll be more guff. Seen a lot of people will be cancelling their Netflix subscriptions 👍

More leeches on the take, there won’t be any groundbreaking revelations.

Delusional I’m afraid, no way would it have gone to court if they didn’t think there was enough evidence. Notice he paid a fair amount of people off beforehand and that in itself is pretty suss. Even if you refute everything else sleeping with prepubescent boys is not a good look.

What? Over one documentary? That smacks of fear and denial. There has just been a heavily sanitized, estate-approved biopic Michael that was released, surely it’s okay to show another side? . What are you afraid of? That it might uncover truth? If fans are so convinced that they know him so well then what’s the problem. I’m sure Netflix are quaking in their boots 😂

Court case was a long time ago, and it didn’t go well for the prosecution.

On the subject of looks, it’s not a good one not having the correct understanding of cognitive dissonance on a topic like this, as well as ignoring or not understanding the complexities of it all.

It’s certainly not a good look being a denialist or an apologist in this situation. There’s no complexities involved in sleeping with children.

Hopefully the docu series will be well rounded with insight from both sides. I haven't watched many Netflix documentaries so I've no idea how objective they are usually.

@Missohnoyoubetterdont

😂yep! with 325 MILLION paid subscribers I don't think a few flouncers will affect them

There more against him than plenty of other convicted pedophiles.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/apr/29/michael-jackson-biopic-criticised-by-leaving-neverland-director-dan-reed

Has any one read this from a few weeks ago

‘It’s well-known that Jackson spent a long time with small-boy companions, including taking them into his bed at night and locking the door, which is undisputed – and that alone, if someone made a claim, is probably enough to convict him in a court of child sexual abuse – but with Jackson, none of this stuff seems to matter.” - taken from the above article. This is so true and what so many on here are excusing or side-stepping

The only one who seems to not understand it properly is yourself.

Very clear displays of cognitive dissonance on these threads.

I asked you to clarify your position and stance on this the last time you said this but you ignored it and then just try to repeat that people don't understand it and how it's 'not a good look' 😅

So I'll ask again, if it were some other man sleeping with little boys and then replacing them when they aged out and who was found with those nude books and was accused of sexually abusing boys, would you or would you not assume guilt?

Perhaps you wouldn't and therefore cognitive dissonance is not at play for you but that would be highly unusual and not the norm at all, it's clear from many peoples responses including some of your own that you deliberately ignore questions regarding MJs behaviour because to answer honestly would mean you were agreeing that his behaviour was damning.

Thanks everyone for your input. Going to ask for this to be removed now.

Why?
It's weird to start a follow on thread to someone elses thread about a famous person and then ask for it to be removed.

Interesting

"Obviously, the [Jackson] estate is going to make a huge amount of money. Everyone’s going to make money except – guess who? – Wade and James. They’ve never made a penny.”

Not strictly true. Wade was running MJ themed dance workshops for years prior. And obviously would have been paid if hed gotten the Cirque Soleil ( spelling 😬) gig. And of course there'll be a pretty epic payday if they win their court case.

Anyway I'm not taking sides. But full facts are important

okay then !

I think it’s clear you have been ( taking sides) but it means they have not benefited directly from the Jackson estate who have made millions. You can include things like cirque de soleil but that doesn’t really help your case as they didn’t make money from it. There are millions of people recreating dance moves from MJ. I don’t see that has any bearing on what this article is trying to say.