There's no set number. Just has to be stories that don't fall apart with the most basic of fact checking and that keep changing whenever they're pulled up on things.
Who changed what exactly?
Robson and Safechuck are currently on version 12 of events. Leaving Neverland was version 9. The Arvizo’s changed their entire time line and story when it was discovered that Jackson wasn’t even in the country during the dates they first chose.
And if your bottom line is to get a traumatised adult to perfectly recount dates, times and facts right every time, then you literally believe all CSA victims are liars.
No, not at all. Just don’t invent buildings and spend 4 hours making a detailed film telling us this is why you must believe us when it then all falls apart within 3 weeks with the most basic of fact checking.
It doesn't happen with anybody else, why Jackson. Could it because over 10 years of trying for what they thought would be a quick pay off they have now got tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees on top of the mess they were already in when they started it?
Or…because it’s true and he’s a nonce?
Can you explain how he managed to molest these kids in multiple buildings 6 years before they were constructed, at events we now know he didn’t attend and in continents we now know he hadn’t travelled to all as claimed as your starter for 10. To be a nonce he needs to be a time traveller which is why none of the courts have believed them so far.
Leaving Neverland is a film, it's in no way a documentary
What? Of course it’s a documentary.
Not according to Frontline’s Best Practices model which Harvard’s Journalist Resources state as the bible structure of documentary making within the industry.
as it is supposed to be and has been marketed as because it fails at every single step of the guidelines for accepted documentary making.
Such as?
For example:
1) In the very first section under FAIRNESS, the Frontline guidelines state:
“Since publication of truthful accurate information is the prime mission of our programmes it should be clear that wilful misrepresentation or falsification of programme content will be considered unprofessional conduct and will carry the most severe consequences”
Reed continuously misrepresented content in LN such as the deceptive editing of the Geragos statement, misrepresenting how MJ actually started the relationship with Safechuck, misrepresenting the fax machine scene with Joy Robson, misrepresenting why the Robson’s came to the US, misrepresenting the final scene with Robson burning MJ memorabilia, presenting Francia’s claim of eye witnessing accounts without presenting her credibility issues. Because of all his misleading content, Reed fails at the very first guideline of fairness
2) The guidelines say to give individuals who are the subjects of attack the opportunity to respond to those attacks.
In the film Wade implicates those that are working in the recording studio, those working at Neverland and others working around MJ as enablers of abuse, but Reed never reaches out to any of them to get their side of the story and instead was content to portray them as Robson described them. Another failure in documentary making.
3) Fairness means that producers will approach all stories with an open, sceptical mind and a determination through extensive research to acquaint themselves with a wide range of viewpoints”.
Reed did not do this because according to his own interviews the only people he spoke with were Police and Prosecutors involved who we know from the 2005 trial were biased and seeking only confirmatory guilty evidence. He also kept the project secret from the family and the Estate so his movie could drop like a bomb without any prior counter arguing to diminish its impact. Reed didn’t interview anyone that knows the factual evidence or defends MJ such as Meserau, Charles Thompson or estate lawyers and he doesn’t interview anyone that could give an intimate but different description of Robson such as Brandi.
Out of the 4hrs there is only about 28 minutes of actual interviews.
Source? Because I have it on now I’m 90 minutes in and they’ve all been talking constantly.
If you’re gonna lie make it a good one.
The rest is all drone shots and recycled footage which is probably why it was pulled apart so quickly
Or because that’s a typical method to break up dialogue with something visual to feast on. Very normal in documentary making?
Or in reality they didn’t have as much contact with MJ as they need to make out for the stories to work. We know this from their own words in previous statements, depositions and interviews where for example Joy Robson says they only went to the ranch 14 times - 4 when MJ was present.
There should not be drafts of interviews of your own abuse
What do you mean? Why wouldn’t the victims prepare what they gonna say?
In emails they were forced to hand over to the courts before another loss it was discovered that Joy said there were many versions he could use that they had pieced together from his own father’s actual abuse so you’re probably right. They need to know which version they’re going with.
you shouldn't need prompting to change your wording when telling your story from behind the camera.
Can you be more specific? I’ve seen nothing like this. Conspiracy theorist shite from thick fuck Jackson fans more like
You can hear Reed prompt them to change words when they speak to fall in line with the narrative. Not a biggie on it’s own admittedly but combined with the other mountain of issues it’s something else to add to the pile. Name calling gets you nowhere pumpkin, just shows you’re all out of counter points.