Blazing row about Michael Jackson

[PLP432]

I know it sounds ridiculous on the face of it but hear me out.

I was in a shop with DP last night and they were playing Michael Jackson music. I commented that I don't like hearing his music as I can't get past everything he did. Yes, I know he wasn't convicted but he openly admitted to sleeping in bed with random children, showering together and whatever else.

DP said "we have different opinions on that, he's a really good artist" to which I replied something about Rolph Harris being a good artist and Jimmy Saville being a good fund raiser.

DP then goes on to say he doesn't think MJ did anything untoward with the children and he thinks it's all innocent and because he had a "childlike mind" due to not having a proper childhood.

I said that was no excuse and plenty of people have bad or unusual childhoods and don't groom children.

He was getting defensive and talking about how he was found not guilty in court, to which I pointed out how few rape and sexual abuse cases even make it to court let alone conviction.

I asked whether he'd listened to anything the men on Leaving Neverland said before he formed his opinion that MJ wasn't guilty of anything. He said no, and refused to look it up.

It descended into a row and I was very hurt by some of the things he said, as I have a history of child sexual abuse and rape - which he knows all about.

I asked him whether he would have gladly left our DS in the company of someone like MJ unsupervised and he took a while to answer before saying "I don't know"

I said how that concerned me from a safeguarding perspective to which he took huge offence, started shouting and told me to return all of the presents i'd bought him as he doesnt want them anymore, the immature dickhead.

Now we're not talking.

Was I being unreasonable here?

I’ve realised this is what you refer to.

So what? That was in 2005. Her son disclosed his abuse in 1993. What exactly is your point? June Chandler, a witness for the prosecution, gave a compelling and detailed statement about how Jackson the pedophile groomed her poor son.

And frankly if my mother had been complicit in my sexual abuse I’d probably emancipate myself from her too. Poor Jordy. How does it feel to be part of the crowd who makes CSA victims go into hiding? Do you feel good about that?

I'm not surprised OP hasn't been back to the thread for a while. So many posters (ie the Jackson fans) don't seem to have bothered reading her updates. It's not only about him, her DP has previously visited a convicted paedophile and taken his daughter, because he felt it was all just nasty rumours. OP has every reason to distrust this idiot's judgement - the MJ argument is just one example of it.

Yep.

I honestly would (and have) steer clear of anyone who defends Jackson. I know a teacher who defends him FFS and dresses her kids as him. I worry deeply for her children

I remember specifically though they were recalling happy memories with Michael - I don't think that's normal when talking about such a serious issue even if they were recalling a happier time. I've seen other sexual abuse documentaries - the accusers stay serious throughout.

Macauley Culkin and Brett Barnes for a start. They were recipients of the child wedding ring on previous versions of the tale that were lifted word for word from page 79 of the Victor Guttierez book before it then changed again to being Safechuck.

It's all available in the transcripts. It was stated on the stand. This below is from Blana Francia who Robson laughingly says corroborates his allegations. Now you know what you are looking for, go check it to make sure it's genuine from the primary sources.

Wow, great come back for when you're stumped for anything intelligent and credible to say 🤣😂 Look how angry you're getting 🤣

So in 30 years of pitch fork wielding and at least 3 surprise police raids while he's not in the country you think that a couple of best selling art books that are in The Library of Congress are evidence but The Gynoids now isn't 😂🤣 brilliant. So what did this time travelling master criminal do when his prized possessions were confiscated?? Did he fall back on the rest of his art collection or something because we know they weren't replaced after 93 and nothing else was found from things taken. Not even on all 17 of his computers or with the help of 20+ agencies.

I'm not muddling them up in the slightest. I'm conveying the looooong recorded reality of the situation and you're doing your best to ignore it all because you have realised it shits all over the gross narrative you've had your mind set on for so long. This is why you have no desire to indeed go read the transcripts and everything because it will then confirm you are wrong.

I would accept it if it was true. Just like i did with Ian Watkins who I was actually a fan of years ago. It actually makes no difference to my life one way or the other. I'm actually a heavy metal fan and Jackson is just somebody who's music is pretty cool but not really aimed at folks like me. I prefer his rock stuff over everything else for obvious reasons but my real interest in him particularly came about from a project I did when I studied media. That's where I found a lot of the stuff out when there wasn't as much. I have just followed it since then.

Fucking Jesus it's a sad state that some of you think what he did was on any bloody level normal. They even removed that monkey from him. He dangled his own son over a bloody balcony.
He is your at archetypal sexually inappropriate adult who lives on a world where the rules don't apply to them. I think he even called it special love which is a red flag.

MB was right about Diana he let her tell her truth. Most journalists used snide tactics. He did what any brilliant interviewer does got his guard down and let him speak. Watch the interview how hos creepy voice changes. My friend is a huge fan she didn't want to admit her idol wasn't simply an eccentric.
I hope to God you don't have or are responsible for children those who are passing this of as normal. He used is power and fame to groom kids. He had the best lawyers he chose families who were fame whores. Those poor kids
I'm shocked so many have voted yabnu no wonder we are constantly having to make safeguarding rules stricter there are far too many gullible fools out there allowing innocent children to be abused.

The partners? They never met Michael?

Unless you understand the impact grooming can have, don’t ever say accusers should behave a certain way. Part of the way the nonce could get them where he wanted was bewitching them and making them fall in love with him.

Although I don’t remember the accusers laughing and smiling

What do Culkin and Banres have to do with anything? They can’t tell us if other boys were abused.

I want an actually reputable source - your picture is doctored. It’s obvious, the clarity is inconsistent.

Can you give me a transcript that Culkin and Barnes were recipients of the rings? If they were one must have been invisible on that shopping trip.

Anyway I have no idea what that doctored picture is supposed to be about or how it tells us Jackson is innocent

Where to start. Bless you for wasting time typing out garbage

So basically you can’t counter any of the facts or respond to any of it because the things I have pointed out come from their very own mouths during the paedo fantasy film that you love so much. Good to know.

If like reputable sources on the following claims please because otherwise it’s just made up nonsense because googling brings up nothing (except thicko apologists wanking over Jackson)

Lame put-downs will never replace factual primary evidence but as that is all you have I am happy to just point and laugh at you when you have to resort to such things 😂🤣

Must be why you have completely swerved the whole code of practice thing I cited to back up my point of LN not being a documentary as you valiantly argued it was…..😂

Even Dan Reed the director of Lying Neverends has conceded that it's not true.

Got nothing for that, huh, You must have found his tweet and the interview so can’t possibly refute it 😂🤣

he was accused more often of being the baby daddy and of plagiarism than of child abuse (sounds like a great man ) you know he can be all those things right?

He could be, but that wasn’t your point. Your whole point was the no smoke without fire nonsense. And guess what they all wanted too and got nowhere. Just like these multi time failed inadequates 😂

And by the way they are not kids, they are fully grown adults in their 40's with financial problems (They we’re kids once or does the abuse not count once you reach adulthood)

Your own fair hand wrote “how could anybody not believe those kids” - fail.

It was then discovered that James's Etsy account had been shopping for the exact same ring he then showed in the new scenes 18 months later.

this ring being given to him in 1988 when it wasn't designed until 2009

There were 2 or 3 versions where the recipient of the ring changed and was scrapped when the named recipient came out fighting and denied it ever happened and threatened to sue

The next thing you seem to have no clue about dispite following this all so closely is the hot air balloon story. This is part of what the Arvizo's actually went to court with after radically changing their original sworn statements

Looking at the testimony there’s absolutely nothing from Gavin Arvizo at all ever to say he was sexually abused in a hot air balloon.

If you had bothered reading it you would see that kidnapping in hot air balloons is the tale added in to their story to bolster their claim as arriving of their own free will fucks up their story for obvious reasons.

You got nothing for the whole Safechuck busted shopping for the very ring he showed as ‘evidence’ in the film leading to the scene having to be re-shot 18 months later and edited in to the original and then them all lying about it for months, nah. Good to know.

And then…

debunked doco's like lying neverends

How clever - did one of your Nonce lover online friends come up with that?

Genius. Did you write that stunning wit all by yourself?

it’s not debunked at all. HTH. Jackson’s family making a bogus documentary does not a debunking make. You can’t debunk someone’s abuse experience by saying “He was in room 203 not room 204”

Jackson’s family have made no such thing. In fact they have done fuck all because they haven’t needed to. Everything has been pulled apart by a small section of the media and by the fans and he was uncancelled. What do they need to worry about. They have their own lives and careers.

BLANKET STATEMENT ABOUT THINKING YOU HAVE A ‘GOTCHA’ OVER DATES AND TIMES.
until you understand that the traumatised mind of a CSA isn’t perfect and it’s VERY common to get dates/rooms/places wrong - don’t talk about ‘haha he wasn’t at the Grammys gotcha’. Also - unless you have Grammys performance on film you’re going off the Jackson fans word that he wasn’t there. How convenient they say he wasn’t. But wierd I can find videos of him performing. As an aside, the abuse of Safechuck started in 1988 so not sure why you’re claiming he abused him in 1987. He hasn’t said that.

If you’re going to go to the effort of creating a paedo fantasy epic to support your claims and go to the effort to come up with so much detail to sound credible you should at least come up with things that can’t be so easily proven as lies. They could have easily said he molested us in his bed, we can’t prove it for obvious reasons but the world needs to know and he wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. But no. They went into too much detail all of which is checkable and they have been found out. Have you not even noticed in your spittle flecked rage that the abuse is pretty much always described as during the day and all over the place including in other countries and places where Jackson would have zero control of anything. Course you haven’t. It doesn't fit your narrative 🤣🤮

You are quite right about 1987 however, that is my mistake. 1988-1992 are the years in question. Nothing happened in 87 or before as he was working on Bad. See, it’s easy to admit when you are wrong or made a mistake.

There aren't many acusers at all. 5 out of the thousands upon thousands of kids that Jackson had access to over the years and all with their own issues that keep tripping them up

8 actually. I find it disturbing that you don’t think 8 is enough to warrant belief or suspicion. He also didn’t invite thousands of kids into his bed. Do you think every pedophile misleads every child they meet? Genuine question

How many have filed actual complaints with the authorities as apposed to just selling a story to the media or going to civil lawyers?? 🤔🤔🤔

6 kids accused John Stohl and he was innocent.
Dozens accused Kelly Michaels and she was innocent
3 kids accused Tonya Craft and she was innocent

I have seen leaving neverland and these few points among many, many, many others which I am happy to go through are the reason why I don't believe them

Go on then

Why has Reed edited the Geragos press conference the way he did for one?

All the footage shows is MJ shopping with somebody. In no way does it prove either who the other people there are or what was bought

It was very obviously James Safechuck.I was entertained about your long story about how the news footage was faked though 😂. Do you think Dan Reed faked the news pieces on YouTube years and years before allegations from Safe buck even came out? If so he’s good!! I should ask him about lottery numbers

Nobody mentioned news footage being faked. Your claim is just not the proof you’re desperate to be. Which is why you have completed ignored the whole part about Safechuck being busted shopping for the ring during leaving neverland post production.

What do you think about Dave from Asda? You’ve never answered

Who the fuck is Dave from Asda?

I actually can’t believe people think Jackson isn’t the world’s biggest pedo. I’m actually embarrassed for these posters and I PEAY they are childless

We all would and most did until these carefully crafted stories fell apart with the most basic of fact checking and then each story ended up fucking up somebody elses. It was especially great when it was noticed that both men contradict each others stories only for their mums to then contradict their stories too all within the same film. I honestly didn’t notice myself until it was pointed out. I just took it all in in horror and was disgusted with him.

Well for a start Cory feldman and macaulay culkin were not family friends

They are named as being victims. Along with Emmanuel Lewis and Nick Carter which is the question you asked. They were also named as being there to support their tales. They then fell apart with their rejection.

Let’s pretend for a second it’s true. Can you imagine how much of a scumbag somebody must be to out somebody else’s abuse on a platform such as that to millions before they were ready. Atrocious behaviour.

I want an actually reputable source - your picture is doctored. It’s obvious, the clarity is inconsistent.

Doctored is it? 😂🤣😂🤣🤣 Ok, well show me the actual version and highlight the bits that are doctored. A split screen should work well. Just like the Geragos press conference.

Can you give me a transcript that Culkin and Barnes were recipients of the rings? If they were one must have been invisible on that shopping trip.

Go look for them yourself. It comes from Michael Jackson Was My Lover notably page 79. It also states Wade received it which Wade had never claimed in any of his versions. So James goes and copies the story word for word and then makes the recipient himself. Not only is Safechuck copying lies from another person he is dumb enough to copy easily disproven ones. From a book that was busted for libel and slander no less

😂🤦🏼‍♂️😂

😂🤣😂🤣 factually incorrect. Cry harder poppet

😂🤣 He hasn’t gone into hiding. He just refuses to be cross examined where the stories his father created are going to fall apart. They already have the recorded conversations of the extortion attempt being discussed.

Wade and his wife Amanda visited Neverland in 2007 but there were most likely other visits too. They were in contact with Michael a lot as adults.

How is any of this funny to you?

I would say to leave him but your son might be better off if you don't unfortunately.

Leave him over a row about a dead popstar? He probably wasn't thinking that deeply and suddenly found himself plunged into a row about low rape conviction statistics.

Until very recently pop pedophilia was on full display. Countless grown men sleeping with teenage girls. Bill Wyman started seeing Mandy Smith when she was 13. Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin. David Bowie slept with a 14 year old groupie. Priscilla was 14 when she met Elvis. Jimmy Page had 14 year old Lori Maddox basically kidnapped and delivered to his hotel room.

I know Michael Jackson's accusations involve younger children, but they are also just accusations. Nothing was proven. He left himself very vulnerable with his odd lifestyle but oddness doesn't always equal depraved.

Oh bless you you’re confused. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt over this whole ‘9 out of 12 thing’ (though a source would be good). It’s called a draft. Do you understand what that is?

Noooo, they’re not drafts. They are stories that got pulled apart and failed in various ways when things were pointed out and caused them to sink They then had another go such as the child wedding ring. First Jordy was the recipient then it became Wade. Wade never claimed the story happened to him so James lifted it word by word from the book and made himself the recipient 😂🤣

Explain about Wrvizo’s changing their timeline please.

They claimed Michael was an absolute angel the whole time they knew him. Credited him with Gavin’s recovery from cancer, visiting him and staying at the ranch etc. They stood up for him during the Bashir interview debacle and only once he was already under investigation for possible child abuse after the interview they claimed Mj then decided it was the oerfect time to start abusing him 😂 With the eyes of the world and the authorities upon him 🤦🏼‍♂️🤦🏼‍♂️ They shifted the date range the abuse happened from and to once they became aware Jackson wasn’t in the country during the dates they originally gave.

Examples? How can you ‘take apart’ the verbal testimony of every instance of a child’s abuse? I’d love to know. Go on, every single story - show me how you, person with an IQ of about 52, have taken it apart

Examples? Sure. Claiming abuse began while Robson’s family were away at the Grand Canyon only for interviews from that time in 93 to surface where they’re talking about the whole family leaving the ranch to take the trip. Along with other interviews long before the LN tales saying the same even up to their own 2017 depositions.
Joy’s interview in recent years explaining how and why they moved to America VS the completely different story then told in the film.
Stephanie’s story of the loan for their house told in the film absolutely mullered by their own documentation.
Abuse in multiple buildings 6 years before they were built - the fairground etc hadn’t been built yet.
Tales of being bullied and threatened to testify (which in itself doesn’t make sense) only for it to become apparent that Safechuck was already ruled a non-entity to the trial for either side 9 months previously by the judge.
Robson’s mum claiming to jump for joy when Jackson died in 2009 so he couldn’t hurt any mire children…..only to then explain later in the show she found out her son was abused in 2013 which is 4 years later. More time travelling 😂

He didn’t just abuse them in the train station. HTH.you haven’t given examples of ‘continents he never visited’ either.

No they also claimed abuse in places such as the Indian village which also hadn’t been built yet. The swimming area next to the house that is surrounded by cameras and not to mention staff always on the move around the property. That didn’t go how they expected for them, huh.
The continent he hadn’t travelled to - Claims of abuse after thanksgiving dinner in Simi Valley in 1988 only for the touring schedule to show he was performing in Australia. California is North America. Australia is Oceania. They are 2 different continents 11,500km apart.

😂😂😂😂
You are funny.
It is truthful and factual. Just because it’s not convenient to YOU and your noncey hero, it doesn’t t mean it isn’t truthful. Either way documentary or film - that’s just semantics. it’s the story of two brave victims and an evil predator. As an aside have you watch a different version? I don’t remember a ‘fax machine scene’ with Joy Robson and I watched it last night.

If is truthful and factual then why is it telling the polar opposite tales to what they told in their own legal filings that were running at the exact same time. Are you admitting that the legal filings are not the truth afterall as it can’t be both at the same time. Whoops.
Actually, yes there are different versions. When things were pointed out as impossible, rubbish or people came forward etc. Rather than defend his work or give an explanation they just edited that part out before the next countries premier. They made it drag out like the balls on a short dog for ‘maximum impact’ and just pretended it hadn’t happened. I believe the merch burning scene was also one of the parts and possibly the Geragos press conference as well. Depends which country you are watching it in. And Christ knows why you would want to watch such a thing more than once regardless of fact or fiction 🤮🤮

God you’re so desperate. How does it feel to be the kind of person nonces thrive on? Always some idiot in the wrongs waiting to defend them.

Makes no odds to me one way or the other. I’m just pointing out the plethera of issues these guys all have with their varying tales and you die hard padeo fantasists don’t like being shown to be wrong. It’s hilarious.

Oh bless. You don’t understand how these things work do you. That’s ok, not everyone has good Brian activity. A documentary is not a court of law. They don’t NEED every person to back up what they’re saying. It’s a documentary of someone’s experience. The same way recently released Lockerbie details people’s experiences. Dan Reed has explicitly stated it’s not a documentary about “is he guilty is he not”. It’s about the stories of his survivors. Do you understand the difference?

Who’s Brian?
No a documentary as according to the industry guidelines is indeed something clearly different to both a court of law and the carefully crafted narrative they ended up producing. It’s almost as though if they were honest, included the necessary actions the guidelines require etc then the story wouldn’t have worked and it wouldn’t have had the required impact….which ultimately still failed 😂🤣😂 Who’da thunk 🤔

Examples?
14 times is a lot.

But 4 is not. And that fucks the whole thing up. Whoops.

What are you referring to? No one has ever been to court over LN? Source??

No, not for leaving neverland. For a previous version before leaving neverland was made. They were caught withholding evidence and lying about its existence and were forced by the courts to hand over 4000 pages of email chains which showed them plotting the accusations. I believe this is what prompted the judge to say ‘no rational fact finder could ever believe these versions of events’ and turfed them out on their arses.
Source - the courts and judge.

🤣 it’s called prompting them to give context.

This is my area of expertise BTW. I’ve interviewed countless people, you have to remember the viewer/listener is watching from a place where they need all the context. So when someone for example says “and there was blood” saying “who’s blood?” Is providing context so in a Final Cut you don’t have a clip that makes no senses

As I said, not a biggie just added with all the other things it just added to the whole mistrust of the whole thing. They’re not being prompted as you say, they’re having to change the language to fit in with the new narrative Reed was making (you know, the one that’s the opposite of his own subjects legal filings running at the exact same time. That one) The language they used to tell the story didn’t have the same effect.

“He was my friend”
“You mean lover”
“Oh, yes, lover” to use your type of example

The funny part is the absolute desperation for this stuff to be true and how angry you get when basic points and facts fuck up the whole thing 😂🤣

Wrong. The niece’s and nephews all grew up together with these people. They all know each other well. The niece’s and nephews were often at the ranch and have stated many times in the past what a wonderful childhood they all had together in various interviews and conversations.

What happened to saville's estate in the wake of the fact we found out he did do it?

Oh so you’re freely admitting to not using the actual primary sources - well done 👍🏼🤦🏼‍♂️

I don’t need to provide anything as i am merely relaying the events of the past X amount of years as has been recorded into history.
If you’re so convinced what they have recorded is wrong then you must show us what the correct stuff is so we can then join your side of the argument.

In fact, you should present everything you have to the authorities so they can look into it as you surely have knowledge the best in the business managed to miss in their decade long run up at MJ 😂🤣