Do you believe the Michael Jackson allegations part 2

[AutumnLover1990]

New thread 😀

Evidence? The evidence that would stand up in court, you mean? The evidence that meat Jackson was acquitted of several charges of child abuse, after due process had taken place? That kind of evidence?

No, the evidence that convinces me and many others, that's the kind of evidence I mean.

It’s in @sickofsixseven ’s post.

Of course we all know that no one guilty is ever aquitted of their crimes in error 🙄I watched the new Netflix documentary about the trial, the jurors who appeared in that should never have been on the jury. They were fans of Jackson and completely star struck. They reminded me of the similar woman from the diddy trial who was fawning over him the whole time. They already had preconceived notions about the accuser being out to get money. I mean it's been how many years now and the Arvisos are yet to do any interviews or release a tell all book, or appear in any documentary. They haven't made any money at all so to label them money grabbers is a lie.

Yep

The same sort of evidence that found OJ innocent eh

If the glove dont fit you must aquit eh?

Anyone with a decent moral compass have a look at the post a bit above and what was found and tell me that man was not a nonce

Ugh

And they are excellent posts being conveniently ignored!

That poster is clearly not posting in good faith. Everything that goes against the narrative that Jackson was a poor innocent soul is conveniently ignored and the next talking point brought up. Oh well, at least the evidence is being posted for anyone who is genuinely interested in the facts and open to changing their mind.

I just hope they don't have the same approach to child abuse victims in real life because it's very weird and disturbing to just refuse to believe anything and defend clearly abusive behaviour

No, it isn’t.

Honestly, why bother?

Agreed.

And in a light hearted thread folk would take the piddle, but its actually scary in a thread about a child abuser

Legally I hope the families are successful but they can take heart that the dogs in the streets know what he was either way.

It absolutely is. I don’t know why you can’t find it. Try googling if you are unable to see her post. 🙄

Bloody Nora its literally the 4th paragraph down!

Do stop taking the piss, it's an important discussion🙄

Telling eh? Ill close my eyes and say ner ner and it won't be there 😄

This one you mean?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2005-03-26/jackson-jurors-consider-further-fingerprint/1539898

Fuckit ive edited

Not wasting my valuable time any more on obfuscation on a child abuser.

Oh dear…

www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/06/michael-jackson-police-reports-pornography-collection?srsltid=AfmBOor39O3V1XCouT_zhslLtGvGrERNXvlsufoJzcRwzKLzbPixrycn

Fundamentallyinauthentic 🤣

Thanks for providing that link @Missohnoyoubetterdont you know, a different link to what was posted earlier? Also, emojis make you look really childish.

Funnily enough, the link to the documents don’t work.

You didn’t really think that was your gotcha, did you?

Congrats

Ive posted on forums since pussy was a kitten and never flounce, at 69 ive seen quite a lot, but your posting here made me angry

The other poster was quite correct, you aren't here for the right reasons, a sensible discussion.

Then I think you should get some help or report my posts.

In other news its perfectly fine for Michael to chill out in his bedroom giving his young friends jesus juice and flicking through porno mags leaving their prints all over them

Nothing to see here folks, it's what our Pop Prince deserves

Thank the good lord he didnt carry out his wish to have Elvis's grandchild and use Lisa Marie as a brood mare. Shes said he was a virgin when he met her, thats really normal right?

Never had sex with a woman or a man in his mid 30s but has little boys in his bed?

But lets look the other way he sang some good songs

Im not the one with the memory issues🤯

I dont report posts, I believe posters show their true colours, it being the case here.

It’s not a different link to the one I was referring to. I don’t understand your reasoning ( or lack of it) you are clearly here just to be difficult and that’s fine but don’t pretend otherwise. I don’t need to engage with it.

The actual police documents related to what images were found can be viewed here. Specifically, as well as all the other disturbing material left within reach of children, and on which the children's fingerprints were found, it lists a book or magazine called "Room to Play" 🤮 which consists of the images of children's heads on adult bodies and sexualised images of children. This is what you are defending. Weird

I await you just ignoring this, claiming that you can't see them, or refusing to accept it.

The link doesn't work