Have any of you furiously defending MJ even seen the documentary?

I have not heard of anyone not being furious at MJ and the parents after seeing it. People want to believe what they want. One of you with your head up your ass said he doesn’t even see anything wrong with his behavior with the kids. SMH

sro100 said:

4. If he truly just loved children why did the boys all have a certain look and never girls?

http://mjfa.forumotion.co...-media-lie

It lists a whole lot of girls who knew him and spent time with him over the years.

PatrickS77 said:

sro100 said:

4. If he truly just loved children why did the boys all have a certain look and never girls?

http://mjfa.forumotion.co...-media-lie

It lists a whole lot of girls who knew him and spent time with him over the years.

Thanks. Care to take a crack at the rest of the questions?

skywalker said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

On the issue of credibility and the fact that the two initially denied that they were molested by MJ - MOST vicitms of child sexual abuse deny it when asked and fear that if they tell the dark truth something bad will happen to the abuser, themsleves or their families. And these kids many times love, admire and revile their abusers because they are too young to mentally & emotionally comprehend that they were in fact being abused. These two boys loved Michael and he told them he loved them. He showed them with attention, gifts, money, etc He doted on them, sent 100 faxes a day to one of them - talked on the phone for hours <-- *THAT* is not healthy adult/child interaction.

The ultimate damage of the abuse rears its ugly head when victms are adults the abuse they experienced as children deeply affects the mental and emotoinal health of the individual as they enter adulthood. This is why so many adults have come forward years later to reveal that their priests and ministers and family friends and relatives did this to them. Children are not emotionally equipt to deal with this. But this is not to say that the parents get a pass - anyone who allows their child to spend one or several nights with an adult unsuprevised - be it MJ or the Pope - is beyond remiss.

I certainly am aware that most abuse victims have fear of coming forward (and all the baggage and shame that comes with it)...especially as children.

-

However, these two have been grown men for awhile and (as grown men) had repeatedly defended Michael Jackson ...they testifed on his behalf as adults. After his death, they both were had a falling out with the Jackson estate . Then they claimed Jackson abused/molested them. As I said, their credibility is questionable at best. They are not reliable narrators.

Their credibility is a matter of opinion. They both signed depositions as children when MJ was first accused but then he settled out of court, but only one of them (Robson) testified as a young adult during the trial. You are quick to merge facts here.

I have been listening to what vicitms of child abuse and doctors who treat them have to say in this case and in the cases involving Catholic priests - they do not come to terms with this for several years after the abuse because they are emotionally and mentally fucked up. They deny it happened and lie to protect the abuser because they care for them, trust them and love them.

It's also true that Jackson can be a child abuser and still be a good person in many other respects. Some of the priests accused were beloved pastros of their communities and did good work through the church. Jackson was philanthropic, he was generous, he was kind, he was immensely talented. But he was also a grown man who spent many intimate hours with very very young chidren - Robson was only 7 years old when he slept over Jackson's home. Perhaps he only molested some of these children but not all f whom he befriended (at least 5-6 have openly accused him) - why is that not a possibility?

DiminutiveRocker said:

very young chidren - Robson was only 7 years old when he slept over Jackson's home. Perhaps he only molested some of these children but not all f whom he befriended (at least 5-6 have openly accused him) - why is that not a possibility?

Go ask Bryan Singer?

If you're hungry for it you're going to get as much as you can and nothing will stop you; certainly not common sense.

That's why it's not a possibility.

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

Have any of you furiously defending MJ even seen the documentary? I have not heard of anyone not being furious at MJ and the parents after seeing it. People want to believe what they want. One of you with your head up your ass said he doesn’t even see anything wrong with his behavior with the kids. SMH

Good point. I went into the viewing with a bias of "MJ has bene acquitted, these guys have testified the other way! Who is this filmmaker anyway? Jackson is dead and leaves behind children - wtf dredge this up?

But I watched it and now I feel there is a reasonable doubt that the two are telling the truth.

sro100 said:

DiminutiveRocker said:

Go ask Bryan Singer?

If you're hungry for it you're going to get as much as you can and nothing will stop you; certainly not common sense.

That's why it's not a possibility.

Anything is possible - human nature dictates that. WHo would have thought that a grown man could call and talk to a 7-year-old for hours on the phone or send 100s of faxes to him in one day?

[Edited 3/5/19 17:46pm]

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

People want to believe what they want.

Yes you do. Facts be damned. Was there a single new FACT presented? Or is it simply based on emotional one-sided testimony?

Just like Mr. Smollett? Nooooo way is Mr. Smollett, Mr. Gay Tupac, lying? What does he have to gain? Then it becomes: it DOES NOT matter if he's telling the truth because other people are?

Emotion and always believe the victim. That will lead to a great society.

DiminutiveRocker said:

sro100 said:

Go ask Bryan Singer?

If you're hungry for it you're going to get as much as you can and nothing will stop you; certainly not common sense.

That's why it's not a possibility.

Anything is possible - human nature dictates that. WHo would have thought that a grown man could call and talk to a 7-year-old for hours on the phone or send 100s of faxes to him in one day?

[Edited 3/5/19 17:46pm]

Everyone KNEW Micheal had odd relationships with little kids. He made absolutely no secret about it at all. He basically boasted about it.

sro100 said:

Have you actually seen the documentary?

sro100 said:

PatrickS77 said:

http://mjfa.forumotion.co...-media-lie

It lists a whole lot of girls who knew him and spent time with him over the years.

Thanks. Care to take a crack at the rest of the questions?

1.) I don't know. Some say it matches, some say it don't. Depending on who the source is.

2.) It is an art book. As I understand it doesn't only feature naked boys. It's a book about boyhood. But whatever. I don't know the book, so I can't really comment. But what I know is, we do not even know how he came into the possesion of this and either way, owning this, does not make one a pedophile. It's a book. Nothing about it was illegal or forbidden.

4.) During the trial it was revealed that the Arvizo kids went through Michael's stuff, without him knowing, breaking open the suit case he had adult stuff in.

PatrickS77 said:

sro100 said:

Thanks. Care to take a crack at the rest of the questions?

1.) I don't know. Some say it matches, some say it don't. Depending on who the source is.

2.) It is an art book. As I understand it doesn't only feature naked boys. It's a book about boyhood. But whatever. I don't know the book, so I can't really comment. But what I know is, we do not even know how he came into the possesion of this and either way, owning this, does not make one a pedophile. It's a book. Nothing about it was illegal or forbidden.

4.) During the trial it was revealed that the Arvizo kids went through Michael's stuff, without him knowing, breaking open the suit case he had adult stuff in.

Thanks.

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

sro100 said:

Yes you do. Facts be damned. Was there a single new FACT presented? Or is it simply based on emotional one-sided testimony?

Just like Mr. Smollett? Nooooo way is Mr. Smollett, Mr. Gay Tupac, lying? What does he have to gain? Then it becomes: it DOES NOT matter if he's telling the truth because other people are?

Emotion and always believe the victim. That will lead to a great society.

Have you actually seen the documentary?

You haven't answered my first question and yet you come back with a question?

Beautiful. Very Trump-like!!

Or if you lean the other way, very Pelosi-like!!

[Edited 3/5/19 17:59pm]

DiminutiveRocker said:

Their credibility is a matter of opinion. They both signed depositions as children when MJ was first accused but then he settled out of court, but only one of them (Robson) testified as a young adult during the trial. You are quick to merge facts here.

I have been listening to what vicitms of child abuse and doctors who treat them have to say in this case and in the cases involving Catholic priests - they do not come to terms with this for several years after the abuse because they are emotionally and mentally fucked up. They deny it happened and lie to protect the abuser because they care for them, trust them and love them.

It's also true that Jackson can be a child abuser and still be a good person in many other respects. Some of the priests accused were beloved pastros of their communities and did good work through the church. Jackson was philanthropic, he was generous, he was kind, he was immensely talented. But he was also a grown man who spent many intimate hours with very very young chidren - Robson was only 7 years old when he slept over Jackson's home. Perhaps he only molested some of these children but not all f whom he befriended (at least 5-6 have openly accused him) - why is that not a possibility?

Safechuck wasn't called for the defense, as they could only respond to what the prosecution brought up. Robson was named as a prior victim, Safechuck wasn't.

Yeah. And that is the loophole these people use to flip flop back and forth and change their stories as they see fit.

Because people like that usually do not restrain themselves and use any chance they can get. See, that works too.

URGENT: “Leaving Neverland” Second Night was a BUST With Fewer than 1 Million Viewers, Oprah Part Scored Just 780K https://www.showbiz411.co...on-viewers

Yikes! The second night of “Leaving Neverland” was worse than the first.

Only 927.000 people watched. The audience didn’t break 1 million. Oprah’s “After Neverland” did worse–780,000.

"This is very important: no victim of sexual abuse should ever be disbelieved, or ignored. Everyone should share their stories, and there is no shame.

But “Leaving Neverland” broke several conventions of documentary. It functioned not as journalism but as a personal grudge. I expected lie detector tests to show the veracity of the claims. But there were none. There was also no context provided. No medical or psychological expert to explain how Jackson could have been one way with so many other children, and this way with Safechuck and Robson."...................................

Plus that Brillo pad comment and the endless amounts of drone shots pretty much sealed it for me. I give Leaving Neverland and Oprah's After Neverland a out of 5

Goddess4Real said:

URGENT: “Leaving Neverland” Second Night was a BUST With Fewer than 1 Million Viewers, Oprah Part Scored Just 780K https://www.showbiz411.co...on-viewers

Yikes! The second night of “Leaving Neverland” was worse than the first.

Only 927.000 people watched. The audience didn’t break 1 million. Oprah’s “After Neverland” did worse–780,000.

"This is very important: no victim of sexual abuse should ever be disbelieved, or ignored. Everyone should share their stories, and there is no shame.

But “Leaving Neverland” broke several conventions of documentary. It functioned not as journalism but as a personal grudge. I expected lie detector tests to show the veracity of the claims. But there were none. There was also no context provided. No medical or psychological expert to explain how Jackson could have been one way with so many other children, and this way with Safechuck and Robson."...................................

Plus that Brillo pad comment and the endless amounts of drone shots pretty much sealed it for me. I give Leaving Neverland and Oprah's After Neverland a out of 5

sro100 said:

So in in other words. You haven’t.

peggyon said:

Purplestar88 said:

I don't care who is boo- hooing. These two have no credibility because they flip flop their stories. These two accusers are fishy as hell and so are their families. This is problem people are going with emotion instead of facts. You saw what happened in the Jessie Somellet case people were attacked because they question a story that made no sense. Just because people look and act sad and tell a disturbing story does not mean they are telling the thuth. Actions speaks louder than words.

I recommend watching the documentary and the after-show with Oprah

It is very compelling and disturbing.

Thank you for your reponse but I have no interest in watyching it.

purplethunder3121 said:

Pedophiles are not good television. Most people at the Sundance screening couldn’t watch any more because they were so disgusted. One person said she couldn’t take enough showers to wash what she just saw and heard. Most people have been equally disturbed and disgusted by MJs actions

DiminutiveRocker said:

Anything is possible. I am open to the fact that Jackson abused kids. As I have said before, after all of these years, there just hasn’t been any real evidence. So, we are left to believe what we will. Wade Robeson is relatively famous, and infamous for being one of the shadiest guys in Hollywood. Look into it his history. Is it not a possibility that these two have ulterior motives? They had a contentious falling out with the Jackson estate. Have they provided any semblance of evidence to back up their clsims?
[Edited 3/5/19 18:27pm]

DiminutiveRocker said:

skywalker said:

I certainly am aware that most abuse victims have fear of coming forward (and all the baggage and shame that comes with it)...especially as children.

-

However, these two have been grown men for awhile and (as grown men) had repeatedly defended Michael Jackson ...they testifed on his behalf as adults. After his death, they both were had a falling out with the Jackson estate . Then they claimed Jackson abused/molested them. As I said, their credibility is questionable at best. They are not reliable narrators.

Their credibility is a matter of opinion. They both signed depositions as children when MJ was first accused but then he settled out of court, but only one of them (Robson) testified as a young adult during the trial. You are quick to merge facts here.

I have been listening to what vicitms of child abuse and doctors who treat them have to say in this case and in the cases involving Catholic priests - they do not come to terms with this for several years after the abuse because they are emotionally and mentally fucked up. They deny it happened and lie to protect the abuser because they care for them, trust them and love them.

It's also true that Jackson can be a child abuser and still be a good person in many other respects. Some of the priests accused were beloved pastros of their communities and did good work through the church. Jackson was philanthropic, he was generous, he was kind, he was immensely talented. But he was also a grown man who spent many intimate hours with very very young chidren - Robson was only 7 years old when he slept over Jackson's home. Perhaps he only molested some of these children but not all f whom he befriended (at least 5-6 have openly accused him) - why is that not a possibility?

I don't think they have any credibility. You can not just change your story and think people are suppose to believe the new story like that. It does not work that way in the real world. When you go to court flip floping, it is looked down upon no matter the reason because how can anybody take you serious and determine what really went on if you are saying one thing and then later say something else.

These two grown ass men are changing their stories because they have beef with MJ's estate and think MJ owns them something. It is always some excuse as to why they changed their stories. People have every right to question their motives and credibility. They choose to support MJ. No one force them to do so.

They both had a chance to tell their stories in the court of law but choose as grown ups to say nothing happen for whatever reason and that is on them. They could had had an impact on how things turned out. I stand by my statement that they have no credibility and this documentary is about ratings. HBO, Oprah, and the filmmakers do not care of about what is true and what is not. These two men and their families are shady and have no credibility.

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

Have any of you furiously defending MJ even seen the documentary? I have not heard of anyone not being furious at MJ and the parents after seeing it. People want to believe what they want. One of you with your head up your ass said he doesn’t even see anything wrong with his behavior with the kids. SMH

Stop worrying who watch what. Noting these two men are saying in the documentary is any thing new. I can't speak for others but my head is not up MJ's ass. Just because people are pointing out questionable actions and behavior from these two men(who changed their stories) does not mean they think

MJ's actions were ok. I just want facts because anybody can get on t.v and cry and tell a sad tale that does not mean they are telling the truth. People do lie and people do tell vicious lies. The parents are not being draged like they should in my opinion.

There has not been on shred of evidence to back up the pathological liars claims. Nothing but graphic pedophilic fantasies. That is what so disgusting about these perjurers, they have been allowed to spew all of this filth without a semblance of evidence. This man’s that anyone could accuse either of you of a disgusting crime, with NO evidence, and you would be ruined.

I have lost all respect for the MeToo movement, Ofra Winfrey and anyone else for giving these perjurers a platform. For me, the MeToo movement has no credibility. Everytime, a person claims to be a victim, I am going to have doubts. This is what a lot of people are expressing on social media, in my workplace, friends and family.

If two perjurers are ALLOWED to just make up graphic accusations, with no proof, why should we believe people who may be REAL victims? This is the damage that Wade Robson, James Safechuck and Dan Reed have done to the MeToo movement. Ofra Winfrey endorsed these perjurers, without the decency to even question their motives or story. Her own father was accused of abusing women, and she was outraged. Yet, this deceptive woman gave these liars a platform and endorsed them with no questions. I am crying because Taj said that Michael’ kids have lost hope. He said they have lost hope because Neither the public or media cares about truth and facts. To think that these perpetrators of a HOAX are still not being investigated when Jussie Mollett( I am not a fan of what he did), was charged with a crime is unbelievable and nauseating. Jussie only hurt himself, Robson and Safechuck and Reed are hurting Michael’s kids, his family and his supporters with their lies. I pray that justice will prevail.
[Edited 3/5/19 19:12pm]

Goddess4Real said:

The “Brillo Pad”comment was racist and offended a LOT of people. This comment also shows how trashy and lowlife the perjurers are. The Brillo statement alone, show that Robson and Safechuck are making this shit up as they go along. Why would the bastard use that analogy on a black man’s hair? It shows their agenda and what they are trying to do with no facts to support their pedophilic fantasies and assertions.
This racist scum will go to the depths of hell trying to dredge up ANYTHING to satisfy a weak, guillible and stupid public. Wade is laughing his ass off at the idiots who believe this shit. Safechuck looks as if he is going break at any second. Of course, we are speaking of two perjurers who have rehearsed their script for two years before they made this fraudomentary.

Free2BMe said:

Jussie only hurt himself,

UNTRUE. The Empire actor hurt real victims chance to be believed and hurt people that could've used the resources of the Chicago P.D. instead of chasing the African brothers because Jussie only saw "their fist and meats."

[Edited 3/5/19 20:15pm]

Free2BMe said:

There has not been on shred of evidence to back up the pathological liars claims. Nothing but graphic pedophilic fantasies. That is what so disgusting about these perjurers, they have been allowed to spew all of this filth without a semblance of evidence. This man’s that anyone could accuse either of you of a disgusting crime, with NO evidence, and you would be ruined. I have lost all respect for the MeToo movement, Ofra Winfrey and anyone else for giving these perjurers a platform. For me, the MeToo movement has no credibility. Everytime, a person claims to be a victim, I am going to have doubts. This is what a lot of people are expressing on social media, in my workplace, friends and family. If two perjurers are ALLOWED to just make up graphic accusations, with no proof, why should we believe people who may be REAL victims? This is the damage that Wade Robson, James Safechuck and Dan Reed have done to the MeToo movement. Ofra Winfrey endorsed these perjurers, without the decency to even question their motives or story. Her own father was accused of abusing women, and she was outraged. Yet, this deceptive woman gave these liars a platform and endorsed them with no questions. I am crying because Taj said that Michael’ kids have lost hope. He said they have lost hope because Neither the public or media cares about truth and facts. To think that these perpetrators of a HOAX are still not being investigated when Jussie Mollett( I am not a fan of what he did), was charged with a crime is unbelievable and nauseating. Jussie only hurt himself, Robson and Safechuck and Reed are hurting Michael’s kids, his family and his supporters with their lies. I pray that justice will prevail. [Edited 3/5/19 19:12pm]W

What proof do you have that proves none of this didn't happen? Where's the shred of evidence, the 100% positive proof to back up the claims that Michael didn't abuse those guys? You call these people pathological liars and perjurers, stating that they are disgusting for spewing filth without a semblance of evidence, well what evidence do you have that proves that Michael Jackson did not sexually abuse these guys? Were you there? Did you witness any interaction between Michael and these guys? Were you a part of their inner circle? Did you know any of them personally, including Michael? And as for Jussie Smollett, he hurt far more than himself, he hurt those that defended him and believed his lies, he wasted time and resources of the Chicago police department, and he falsely accused Trump supporters and tried to pin a hate crime on them, one that he cooked up and created, for his own selfish reasons, so that's bull that he's only hurting himself!

[Edited 3/5/19 21:22pm]

oceanblue said:

Free2BMe said:

There has not been on shred of evidence to back up the pathological liars claims. Nothing but graphic pedophilic fantasies. That is what so disgusting about these perjurers, they have been allowed to spew all of this filth without a semblance of evidence. This man’s that anyone could accuse either of you of a disgusting crime, with NO evidence, and you would be ruined. I have lost all respect for the MeToo movement, Ofra Winfrey and anyone else for giving these perjurers a platform. For me, the MeToo movement has no credibility. Everytime, a person claims to be a victim, I am going to have doubts. This is what a lot of people are expressing on social media, in my workplace, friends and family. If two perjurers are ALLOWED to just make up graphic accusations, with no proof, why should we believe people who may be REAL victims? This is the damage that Wade Robson, James Safechuck and Dan Reed have done to the MeToo movement. Ofra Winfrey endorsed these perjurers, without the decency to even question their motives or story. Her own father was accused of abusing women, and she was outraged. Yet, this deceptive woman gave these liars a platform and endorsed them with no questions. I am crying because Taj said that Michael’ kids have lost hope. He said they have lost hope because Neither the public or media cares about truth and facts. To think that these perpetrators of a HOAX are still not being investigated when Jussie Mollett( I am not a fan of what he did), was charged with a crime is unbelievable and nauseating. Jussie only hurt himself, Robson and Safechuck and Reed are hurting Michael’s kids, his family and his supporters with their lies. I pray that justice will prevail. [Edited 3/5/19 19:12pm]W

What proof do you have that proves none of this didn't happen?

You prove that something DID happen within this case. This is a documentary remember (if even that), not a hearing or trial.
Ans saying that his hair felt like a brillo pad..in the hawaiin silky yack hair era?
C'mon

Free2BMe said:

There has not been on shred of evidence to back up the pathological liars claims. Nothing but graphic pedophilic fantasies. That is what so disgusting about these perjurers, they have been allowed to spew all of this filth without a semblance of evidence. This man’s that anyone could accuse either of you of a disgusting crime, with NO evidence, and you would be ruined. I have lost all respect for the MeToo movement, Ofra Winfrey and anyone else for giving these perjurers a platform. For me, the MeToo movement has no credibility. Everytime, a person claims to be a victim, I am going to have doubts. This is what a lot of people are expressing on social media, in my workplace, friends and family. If two perjurers are ALLOWED to just make up graphic accusations, with no proof, why should we believe people who may be REAL victims? This is the damage that Wade Robson, James Safechuck and Dan Reed have done to the MeToo movement. Ofra Winfrey endorsed these perjurers, without the decency to even question their motives or story. Her own father was accused of abusing women, and she was outraged. Yet, this deceptive woman gave these liars a platform and endorsed them with no questions. I am crying because Taj said that Michael’ kids have lost hope. He said they have lost hope because Neither the public or media cares about truth and facts. To think that these perpetrators of a HOAX are still not being investigated when Jussie Mollett( I am not a fan of what he did), was charged with a crime is unbelievable and nauseating. Jussie only hurt himself, Robson and Safechuck and Reed are hurting Michael’s kids, his family and his supporters with their lies. I pray that justice will prevail. [Edited 3/5/19 19:12pm]

What Oprah is doing - and has done in the past - to MJ is sad. I'm in no way defending her, but perhaps she is doing this because she was molested as a child. She has publicly stated that it happended to her.

I was appalled when she did a "tribute" on her show for MJ after he died in the middle of the week where the topic was child molesters.

Jimmy Safeschuck was NEVER called for testimony on the MJ s trial. According to Masereau, he was never even considered.
Safes Chuck and Robson are liars.
If Robson was raped by MJ, he would have never testify for him in the 2005 trial. MJ would have faced the fear of his life of a so called real victim went on to testify. That s insane...

.
By 2005 Robson and MJ were not on good terms, he had cheated the niece of MJ with Britney and a lot of women...
And it was MJ who presented Robson to his niece. If he raped him, why would he make his niece intimate with his victim ?
.
That is not logical at all.
.
Every facts in this case points out that the two accusers are lyers and manipulators.
The things they describe are impossible. Do you imagine MJ raping them and then writing Heal the world ?
.
Their only motivation is money, just like Oprah.

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

The man has paid off accusers and been charged and gone to court for multiple allegations. How blind must someone be?

MJ never paid off anybody. His insurance company was on the hook because the 1st kid's dad wanted a civil case before the criminal one. MJ had an insurance policy that paid for claims of negligence, so they wanted to cut their loses and paid off the kid and his parents. MJ really did not have a say in it.

If you had paid attention to the Martin Brashire interview, the 2nd kid stated that he and MJ were having an "arguement" over who would sleep in the bed and who would sleep on the floor. Btw, MJ was aquitted on those charges in criminal court, mainly because there were too many inconsistencies in the testamony and it was proven that the mom was suit happy.

Robson and I believe the other guy in the HBO show only accused MJ after he died. All of these cases were suspicious - not one of them occurred without some shady business going on in the background, like the father of the 1st kid wanting MJ to get him a screen play deal. All of it was shady. When there's an accuser who does not have any shadiness going on, then I'll take them seriously.