Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Leaving Neverland 'LIES' exposed: 'Wade Robson lied about more than Michael Jackson abuse'

LEAVING NEVERLAND accuser Wade Robson "lied about more than the Michael Jackson abuse" and here is the proof.

The two-part HBO documentary has divided opinions. The harrowing testimony from Robson and James Safechuck is compelling but there has been a huge backlash at the lack of any other witnesses, both for and against. Filmmaker Dan Reed has dismissed criticisms: "What is the other side of the story? That Michael Jackson was a great entertainer and a great guy?" He says Robson's original 2005 denial of abuse was rooted in his devotion to his idol. Yet, there is evidence Robson lied repeatedly in the past, was viewed as an unreliable witness by a judge and some of his latest allegations are not even based on his own memories.

UK journalist Mike Smallcombe is the author of the biography Making Michael and spoke exclusively to Express Online.

He said: "Unless you are in the Michael Jackson fan community, or a journalist who has researched the subject, you aren’t going to know about the publicly available information which would have formed part of Jackson’s defence. Viewers of the documentary are essentially the jury – but Leaving Neverland only gave them the prosecution’s side.

In 2012, Robson had a nervous breakdown, triggered, he said, by an obsessive quest for success. His career, in his own words, began to “crumble.”

"That same year, Robson began shopping a book that claimed he was sexually abused by Michael Jackson. No publisher picked it up. In the draft version of the book, Robson called himself a 'master of deception.'" "Robson filed a $1.5 billion civil lawsuit/creditor’s claim in 2013. He first filed it under seal (a procedure allowing sensitive or confidential information to be filed with a court without becoming a matter of public record), in the hope of reaching a financial settlement with the Jackson Estate.

"To be clear, the judge ruled that Jackson’s companies were not liable for any possible actions by Jackson; he did not rule on the credibility of the men’s allegations. But the trial judge in Robson’s initial case against the Estate disregarded his sworn statements on a summary judgment motion.

"Jackson estate attorney Howard Weitzman said Robson was “caught lying repeatedly” in the dismissed litigations.

"Weitzman added: 'The trial judge found one of Robson’s lies so incredible that the trial judge disregarded Robson’s sworn declaration and found that no rational trier of fact could possibly believe Robson’s sworn statements.'"

During his lawsuit against Jackson’s Estate, Robson was ordered by the trial court to produce all documents about written communications with anyone about his supposed abuse.

"In one email, he listed over 20 different questions to his mother asking her about the specific details of his interactions with Jackson. Some of these included: 'Can you explain all that you remember of that first night at Neverland? What happened when we drove in what did we do? And that first weekend at Neverland?'

"Despite telling the detailed story of his first night at Neverland in the documentary as if it is his own memory, at his deposition, Robson admitted that he 'did not know' if his memory of that night 'came from (his) own recollection or it was told to (him) by someone else." Another email showed that Robson found one particular story from the early 1990s which specifically named him and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked whether it was true. She replied, ‘Wow, none of that is true.’

"Weitzman said Robson was also trying to hide evidence before his cases were dismissed.

"Weitzman said: 'Robson lied under oath and stated that, other than one brief email in late 2012, he had had “no written communications” with anyone (other than his attorneys) about his newly-concocted allegations that he was abused by Jackson. This turned out to be a complete and utter lie. Robson had actually shopped a book about his allegations in the year prior to filing his lawsuit—a book he tried to hide from the Estate.'

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 404March 19, 2019 6:43 AM

Jackson liked Kiddie weenie. Anyone with a thought in their head knows that. Now go away.

by Anonymousreply 1March 17, 2019 4:58 AM

Best R1 ever.

by Anonymousreply 2March 17, 2019 5:00 AM

[quote] Jackson liked Kiddie weenie. Anyone with a thought in their head knows that. Now go away.

[quote] Best [R1] ever.

Feel free to start your own threads for your bullshit. Robson lies are being exposed. He has repeatedly lied under oath (resulting in the dismissal of his billion dollar lawsuit) and he has lied outside of court. His statements are public record.

by Anonymousreply 3March 17, 2019 5:17 AM

Michael Jackson was a Kiddie Diddler Extraordinaire

by Anonymousreply 4March 17, 2019 5:21 AM

Sorry too much evidence that Jackson was a filthy paedophile OP. Things like this are just nitpicking and victim blaming in an attempt to confuse the issue.

No-one's buying it. Nobody cares. It's too late.

by Anonymousreply 5March 17, 2019 5:32 AM

[quote] Sorry too much evidence that Jackson was a filthy paedophile OP. Things like this are just nitpicking and victim blaming in an attempt to confuse the issue. No-one's buying it. Nobody cares. It's too late.

Strangely none of the “evidence” was enough to convict Jackson nor was it used in the documentary. The only evidence that exist = the testimony of the two accusers. Both of whom were presented as having gained nothing personally and as having nothing to gain in the future.

No one who actually read the article or who has read Robson’s previous statements would refer to exposure of the inconsistencies as “nitpicking.” His entire case rests on his on credibility. He and the documentary have offered no other evidence.

by Anonymousreply 6March 17, 2019 5:49 AM

What evidence would there be, r6? Robson's stretched out asshole?

Be gone, troll.

by Anonymousreply 7March 17, 2019 5:57 AM

Have you seen my childhood? Have you seen my black nose?

by Anonymousreply 8March 17, 2019 6:02 AM

Damage control. Pedo is the meal ticket for a lot of acolytes, hanger ons, and bought and paid for "journalists", and they want the gravy train to continue. MJ is a serial child abuser. End of story.

by Anonymousreply 9March 17, 2019 6:33 AM

So Robson lied about Michael stories back in the '90s 1) WHEN HE WAS WORKING FOR MICHAEL JACKSON, LYING FOR MICHAEL JACKSON AND REPEATING COACHED LIES THAT MICHAEL TAUGHT HIM. What else is new? Robson admitted he was lying in the '90s in LEAVING NEVERLAND.

2) "Written communications" is not the same thing as a book Robson tried to shop. Clearly, the court was asking about direct, interpersonal communications with other people, such as text messages or e-mails. DON'T TRY TO TWIST THE MEANING INTO A BOOK. That's a totally different type from what the court was asking for.

FUCKING LAWYERS AND JACKSON STANS ARE SLEAZY!!!

by Anonymousreply 10March 17, 2019 6:44 AM

The Jackson Derangement Syndrome is real.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 11March 17, 2019 6:46 AM

Michael Jackson was creepy even if you leave out all the pedo accusations. They just solidify his inherent creepiness and are on brand tbh.

by Anonymousreply 12March 17, 2019 6:55 AM

He’s a pedo. The fact that wade lies doesn’t mean Michael wasn’t a pedo. Everyone lies at some point and people that have been abused have all kinds of problems and hang ups.

by Anonymousreply 13March 17, 2019 7:01 AM

Back in the day, Wade was up to another scam, but I can't recall it. I was so amazed to see the documentary featured him, when he went down in flames over lying/scheming in another unrelated thing.

by Anonymousreply 14March 17, 2019 7:08 AM

Being sexually abused as a child is being a liar. Period. These children are trained to lie, over and over again, for years. Sometimes they keep lying their whole lives. Wade finally decided to stop. Michael Jackson molested little boys.

by Anonymousreply 15March 17, 2019 7:08 AM

Jackson is where he belongs. Rotting in hell for sleeping with these young boys. It is absolutely sick no one put a stop to it. What grown man wants to sleep with a male child?

by Anonymousreply 16March 17, 2019 7:13 AM

[quote]Being sexually abused as a child is being a liar. Period. These children are trained to lie, over and over again, for years.

I was sexually abused, and I don't see it that way. Most survivors live in the shadows, if they don't tell, but to scheme and lie like Wade is not typical of a sex abuse survivor.

by Anonymousreply 17March 17, 2019 7:16 AM

"I was sexually abused, and I don't see it that way. Most survivors live in the shadows, if they don't tell, but to scheme and lie like Wade is not typical of a sex abuse survivor."

You're completely full of shit. You think you're the only abuse survivor on this thread? We are legion. You would know that, if you weren't full of shit.

by Anonymousreply 18March 17, 2019 7:24 AM

Dan Reed had an amazing research team which is why HBO ran the film with total confidence.

Spending your days hysterically supporting a man who’s favourite activity was fellating 7 year olds seems ill advised.

If I met anyone who believed Jackson was innocent, I’d immediately disassociate myself from them. It means your both evil and brain-dead.

Hope all the Jacksons rot in hell....they all knew.

by Anonymousreply 19March 17, 2019 7:44 AM

R18 is Wade.

by Anonymousreply 20March 17, 2019 7:49 AM

[quote]You're completely full of shit. You think you're the only abuse survivor on this thread? We are legion. You would know that, if you weren't full of shit.

You obviously can't read for shit, but you love to hurl insults. You just want to spout off, go take a shit and re-read what I wrote or just shut the fuck up, if you can't say anything intelligent.

by Anonymousreply 21March 17, 2019 7:51 AM

So true R15, I was molested as a child and lying about it is a form of self preservation. Guilt and shame play into it to & obviously pedophiles are massive manipulators.

MJ’s cock was described perfectly to authorities by Jordan Chandler in the 1990’s. I wish the Chandlers had gone to court (they would have won). They didn’t and I’m sure Jackson’s fucking lunatic fan base was a part of the decision. I doubt they wanted to further traumatize their son too.

by Anonymousreply 22March 17, 2019 7:59 AM

"You just want to spout off, go take a shit and re-read what I wrote or just shut the fuck up, if you can't say anything intelligent."

Why don't you lead by example?

by Anonymousreply 23March 17, 2019 8:03 AM

I already did lead by example, but you came at it all crazy.

by Anonymousreply 24March 17, 2019 8:04 AM

Pedophile. Lying doesn’t mean Jackson isn’t a pedophile.

by Anonymousreply 25March 17, 2019 8:07 AM

The relationship between sex abuse victims and their abusers is complex and perhaps too complex for many of us to understand.

Also, if you watched the documentary, one of the themes was how the mothers willingly let their sons stay with Michael unsupervised, giving him access to their sons. The end of the documentary is about how they are trying to forgive their mothers for basically handing them over to MJ.

If Wade is lying, then it's a pretty elaborate lie for him to involve his mother, brother and sister.

by Anonymousreply 26March 17, 2019 8:10 AM

I don't believe a word out of Wade Robson's mouth. Sorry, you couldn't tell the truth when the man was alive. Now you speak up when he can't defend himself or face his accuser.

FUCK WADE ROBSON

by Anonymousreply 27March 17, 2019 8:13 AM

Didn't he even went a step above and testified on MJ's behalf? Whether you believe MJ is a pedo or not, Wade is a lying piece of shit. He always lies, and he was caught lying on his other scams he had going.

by Anonymousreply 28March 17, 2019 8:51 AM

Well, r18 , that's the problem with you and your "legion" ('scuse me while I laugh at your melodrama): you're all too busy with your own baggage to view any situation or accusation objectively.

Any time there's a thread on DL about some accusation anywhere against some celebrity, and sex enters into it, you fucks come shrieking down, and all reason leaves the room.

by Anonymousreply 29March 17, 2019 8:52 AM

Interesting tweet.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 30March 17, 2019 8:52 AM

What kind of freak is obsessed with defending Michael Jackson like this? OP has an axe to grind. The raging about this makes no sense.

I hate to break this to you but children who have been abused rarely have witnesses, evidence, or proof. And they are damaged. Michael himself was probably abused, which would explain a lot.

by Anonymousreply 31March 17, 2019 9:12 AM

It is odd he didn't mention Brandi.

I mean he went into so much DETAIL.

(I'm NOT defending Jackson - it's totally clear what he was)

by Anonymousreply 32March 17, 2019 9:12 AM

and I don't know what they thought they would gain from that horrendous Oprah interview, filmed in some sort of theater with a huge audience...

by Anonymousreply 33March 17, 2019 9:14 AM

[quote]Strangely none of the “evidence” was enough to convict Jackson nor was it used in the documentary.

KInda like OJ and Casey Anthony who we ALL know are innocent, right?

Kill yourself.

by Anonymousreply 34March 17, 2019 9:18 AM

You first, r34 .

by Anonymousreply 35March 17, 2019 9:24 AM

Amen, R15... you said it, thank you.

[quote]"In one email, he listed over 20 different questions to his mother asking her about the specific details of his interactions with Jackson. Some of these included: 'Can you explain all that you remember of that first night at Neverland? What happened when we drove in what did we do? And that first weekend at Neverland?'

Right, so these idiot MJ stans are lambasting Wade for having the audacity to ask his mother to help clarify shit that happened when he was SEVEN FUCKING YEARS OLD... ummm, yeah... so, if I were being told to provide details of my experiences at the age of seven, then I'd damn well be asking BOTH my parents to help contribute to the truthful narrative, there...

P.S. You're a piece of shit, OP. Might wanna try LSA, you'll find much more acceptance (plus many other like-minded pedo-defenders) there...

by Anonymousreply 36March 17, 2019 10:00 AM

R32 Conniving Wade picks and chooses what he needs to say. What I find odd is why did the documentary use him of all people? He has a history of inconsistencies. Plus, for balance, they should have interviewed friends and family of MJ, just like they did on the R Kelly documentary, which was better than this shotty documentary.

by Anonymousreply 37March 17, 2019 10:07 AM

We’ve already had 20 years of Jackson family and friends lying on behalf of the pedo, it would be completely superfluous to include them, R37. None of them were in the room when your hero was raping little boys

by Anonymousreply 38March 17, 2019 10:10 AM

Wade is bottom-feeding money-grubbing scum and should get exactly squat (if not being charged with fraud, perjury, whatever).

His career should just go straight into the shitter .... oh right.

by Anonymousreply 39March 17, 2019 10:14 AM

[quote]We’ve already had 20 years of Jackson family and friends lying on behalf of the pedo

R Kelly had 30 years of family and friends lying on his behalf or believing him. Still, what they have to say is important in building a documentary.

by Anonymousreply 40March 17, 2019 10:18 AM

I'll never understand why people (besides his family) have such a passion for defending this freak.

M.J. raped children. Period.

And they all knew.

by Anonymousreply 41March 17, 2019 10:19 AM

A lot of your favorite philosophers, scientists, and artists were pedophiles. If you had to cancel the work of pedophiles, then there wouldn't be western civilization. Pedophiles have actually been very influential in history.

by Anonymousreply 42March 17, 2019 10:18 AM

R27, I was abused by my father for a years. I told no one. Lied, went down a rabbit hole of drugs, just was all kinds of fucked up. Only after he died could I finally come clean. It's hard to explain if you haven't lived it.

But keep on loving MJ's music. I ain't mad at ya.

by Anonymousreply 43March 17, 2019 10:18 AM

You all support pedophiles in some way. "Get over it."

by Anonymousreply 44March 17, 2019 10:26 AM

[quote]I'll never understand why people (besides his family) have such a passion for defending this freak.

Maybe it's less about defending him and more about countering a torch wielding mob. Some people really despise the sort of pack mentality which foments witch hunts.

If the accusers are lying, it will come out. If they're telling the truth, that will eventually be seen by everyone.

Until then, calm down. MJ will still be dead, either way, and you people have no stake in the game to begin with.

by Anonymousreply 45March 17, 2019 10:31 AM

R45 Yeah, watch those same people defend Woody Allen.

by Anonymousreply 46March 17, 2019 10:35 AM

Again, you have no stake in the game, so what does it matter to you ? You don't know either of those men, and you aren't getting any of their money.

by Anonymousreply 47March 17, 2019 10:37 AM

R45 Well said, there's a blinkered hysteria from both defenders and accusers in this story. Each is equally convinced of "the truth" but, for the most part, the "facts of the case" have been filtered by the media with a specific agenda or parties with a vested/financial interest in promoting a particular version of Michael Jackson as either monster or victim.

by Anonymousreply 48March 17, 2019 10:40 AM

Anyone with a heart can see these were kids traumatized by sexual abuse.

by Anonymousreply 49March 17, 2019 10:41 AM

Michael Jackson was a child do-er, and craved hairless cock. Those are the established facts.

Stop trying to protect the ped.

by Anonymousreply 50March 17, 2019 10:44 AM

Having a heart isn't the same as using facts or logic, so...the FBI must be heartless then.

by Anonymousreply 51March 17, 2019 10:46 AM

Okay, stop right there, r49 , with that hyperemotional Frau bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 52March 17, 2019 10:45 AM

This is why women don't belong on DL: they can't think without estrogen clouding their minds, and they have too much baggage when it comes to sex for them to be able to think clearly.

by Anonymousreply 53March 17, 2019 10:49 AM

Isn't it interesting how this argument is changing?

It was all "He's innocent!" or "They're lying!".

Now it's turning into "Well there are lots of pedos!" or "Just because he was raping children you can still like his music!".

Worse than tRump. "Look over there, look over there!".

He raped those kids. Pig.

by Anonymousreply 54March 17, 2019 10:51 AM

Nobody is "protecting" anyone here, r50 . That's just another example of how people whip entire fantasies up from nothing, sort of like a meringue.

It is impossible for someone to protect a dead man. He's dead. He doesn't need protecting. That's just your fantasy .

by Anonymousreply 55March 17, 2019 10:52 AM

^You want him to have raped those kids. There is a difference.

by Anonymousreply 56March 17, 2019 10:54 AM

[quote]Anyone with a heart can see these were kids traumatized by sexual abuse.

Yes, it was very affecting.

[quote]Okay, stop right there, [R49] , with that hyperemotional Frau bullshit.

Oh, I see - you have no normal human feelings and insult people who do.

No wonder you're on the MJ bandwagon.

by Anonymousreply 57March 17, 2019 10:54 AM

How typical that you would jump to that conclusion, obvious female @ r57 .

Follow the facts, not your goofy-juice soaked mind.

As I said already, if the accusers are telling the truth, that will eventually come out. If they're lying, that will be exposed.

Until then, you have no stake in the game, and thinking emotionally only makes you look like a crazy Frau who shouldn't be here in the first place, one who would rather trade in sensationalized half-truths than deal in facts.

And again, remember, you gain nothing from the eventual outcome. It's not your game.

by Anonymousreply 58March 17, 2019 11:02 AM

So Harvey Levin of TMZ bankrolled this even though he knew about the fake victims lies. Well i better add him to my POS pile.

by Anonymousreply 59March 17, 2019 11:09 AM

Dear , Harvey Levin has been exposed as a POS long ago.

by Anonymousreply 60March 17, 2019 11:11 AM

Wade Robson lacks credibility. Michael Jackson most likely was a pedophile but using Wade Robson's testimony does not help. Wade Robson always comes off as a liar and opportunist.

by Anonymousreply 61March 17, 2019 11:12 AM

How disgusting that there are still defenders of this evil creep.

And all because they can't deal with the fact that someone they foolishly idolized in their youth was a monster.

by Anonymousreply 62March 17, 2019 11:13 AM

Wade Robson was not alone

by Anonymousreply 63March 17, 2019 11:14 AM

I was molested by my father. I told no one.

by Anonymousreply 64March 17, 2019 11:14 AM

Safechuck will always be more believable than Robson.

by Anonymousreply 65March 17, 2019 11:19 AM

"Hope all the Jacksons rot in hell....they all knew."

Exactly R19.

LaToya even tried to make it public. Not only did every single member of the Jackson family know but so did Liza Minnelli, Elizabeth Taylor, Lisa-Marie Presley et al. Madonna knew and would have nothing to do with him once she found out. The music industry knew. Everybody knew.

The only reason this has made a major resurgence today is because finally we have some facts, whereas the Jacksons shut down the trials by paying everybody off and quashing discussion. The trials were also in a non-social media age. Had they happened today then things would have been very different.

The paedophile defenders on this and every other thread about this are just sickening, foul excuses for human beings.

The fact remains that Jackson was a filthy paedophile who destroyed many young boys lives over many decades. We will never know the truth about how many there were.

by Anonymousreply 66March 17, 2019 11:26 AM

Michael must be so beloved now in the industry that only Z-listers Aaron Carter, Brigitte Nielsen, Monique and Peter Andre came to his defense.

by Anonymousreply 67March 17, 2019 11:26 AM

Did Jackson diddle Aaron Carter too?

by Anonymousreply 68March 17, 2019 11:38 AM

I believe Safechuck, the poor guy seems shattered. Although both described Michael's penchant for having the boys spread their cheeks while he sat and masturbated behind them. I believe Robson was abused too, but that he is opportunistic as well. I believe Jackson paid Robson to testify in favour of him, then once Jackson was dead and Robson was broke, his career in the toilet, the abuse starting to haunt him, he's come forward with these allegations not out of healing but to make money. I think Robson is cold enough and detached enough not to have had the abuse really affect him, he just wants the money.

by Anonymousreply 69March 17, 2019 11:53 AM

[quote]Strangely none of the “evidence” was enough to convict Jackson

Same could be said about O.J. and Robert Blake.

by Anonymousreply 70March 17, 2019 12:06 PM

The Jackson family, many of them were living off his payroll. It paid for them to keep quiet.

This story is as much about money as it is pedophilia.

by Anonymousreply 71March 17, 2019 12:13 PM

Yes Robson lied under oath to defend MJ.

Many people, including Rosie ODonnell recently, first reveal their abuse in a book

Op’s Article just yells, “He lies under oath!!! He wanted to sell a book about being abused!!!”

by Anonymousreply 72March 17, 2019 12:14 PM

[quote]Michael must be so beloved now in the industry that only Z-listers Aaron Carter, Brigitte Nielsen, Monique and Peter Andre came to his defense.

And that AWFUL Wendy Williams - who looks almost as freaky as Jackson himself did.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 73March 17, 2019 12:17 PM

It isn't "yelling" anything, r72. This the problem I'm having with you people; you can't discuss the subject rationally, and you seem to have an affinity for hyperbole and sensationalism over cut-and-dried information.

by Anonymousreply 74March 17, 2019 12:25 PM

[quote]So Harvey Levin of TMZ bankrolled this even though he knew about the fake victims lies. Well i better add him to my POS pile.

THIS decision from an anonymous poster will undoubtedly SEVERELY affect Harvey Levin. I saw on CNN that he's on a 24-hour suicide watch because of it.

by Anonymousreply 75March 17, 2019 1:04 PM

If it were only Wade making accusations and MJ’s public persona had been more like Mr. Rogers (someone who did a lot of work for kids but didn’t seem to take it home), I’d be shocked and want to do more research — but it’s not just Wade.

It doesn’t matter how unlikeable or self serving Wade is. At the end of the day, MJ himself is his own greatest accuser. Someone with a charitable spirit with a soft spot for kids behaves like The Rock. They visit hospitals, invite kids on set, film messages of well wishes, donate financial support. They don’t jet set around with one specific gender in one specific age range. They don’t want kids sleeping in their bed. (Do you remember vacations and sharing a bed with your younger sibling who kicked you all night?) They don’t build an exclusive park at their house for a select few, they sponsor Make A Wish trips so hundreds of kids can enjoy an amusement park like Disney or Six Flaggs.

An adult behaving as MJ in your neighborhood would have parents on the porch with bats. People rationalize it in their fandom and because they think “we’ll the parents pumped them out, so fair trade.” You cannot remove his name, look at his behavior and not have giant alarm bells ringing.

It doesn’t matter if Wade’s way of dealing with things was to become calculating and work whatever his best option is. He can be that way and this can still be true. We’re not talking about a Wade type and some benign public figure there was never a peep about prior.

by Anonymousreply 76March 17, 2019 1:09 PM

Why do people care so much if a dead man was a pedophile? There are many living pedophiles that you all love and support.

by Anonymousreply 77March 17, 2019 1:19 PM

Anyone who takes camp Jackson's word over the boys who spent their lives with Jackson has no heart.

It's clear by now he had a sexual fetish and compulsion that involved underage children. These boys were exploited by a person they trusted. He kept them around not because he cared one iota about their well being but because he found them sexually exciting.

by Anonymousreply 78March 17, 2019 1:22 PM

r41, you don't know this so it's not PERIOD. You believe this. You are convinced of this. In your opinion this.

The man was acquitting in a court of law - with this character defending him and swearing on a bible he didn't do anything to him.

Yet we are to believe him now. I don't think so. This doesn't mean that Jacko is innocent of molesting children but it certainly doesn't mean he is guilty of it. Why come out with this now when the man cannot defend himself or face his accuser? There is no credibility with Robson.

Why the sudden turn on Micheal. I don't know if he was guilty or not but he certainly was a weirdo. This is what I have thought for decades. My impression of him has not changed due to this documentary which I don't give credit to. Your opinion of Michael should be how you felt about him last year. Why would it change now? If you feel he was a pedo and should be surged from all memory, you should have felt like this before the documentary came out.

Most always thought he was a pedo but still love him. No evidence has come out to prove anything. The court of public opinion is being swayed by a couple of grifters. Either way they both played or are playing with the truth to suit their selves. They don't get to have it both ways.

by Anonymousreply 79March 17, 2019 1:58 PM

[quote]Why come out with this now when the man cannot defend himself or face his accuser?

It's not the children he molested's fault he had an addiction to dissociatives meant to used as anesthetic and died from an overdose. Why should they be held responsible for that? Jackson had a severe monkey on his back... The Dr. that gave him the hotshot showed little guilt about it too.

by Anonymousreply 80March 17, 2019 2:21 PM

It is weird how all reason goes out the window about this.

The article proves the accusation are lies? How?

It merely points out that an accuser sometimes lies and may have self-serving motives for telling the story at this point.

But that has no bearing on the veracity of the story because it does not get to the heart of the accusation.

But no one disputes that Jackson had small boys share his bed and no one disputes that some boys provided accurate descriptions of Jackson's penis.

by Anonymousreply 81March 17, 2019 2:29 PM

Go back to lipstick alley, op. Take your mental damage with you.

by Anonymousreply 82March 17, 2019 2:47 PM

[quote] If you feel he was a pedo and should be surged from all memory

Oh, dear!

by Anonymousreply 83March 17, 2019 3:39 PM

[quote] Go back to lipstick alley, op. Take your mental damage with you.

Your racist assumptions don’t belong here. Nor do they help your argument. Take your white supremacist racism to stormfront. You will be much more comfortable there.

[quote] But no one disputes that Jackson had small boys share his bed and no one disputes that some boys provided accurate descriptions of Jackson's penis.

The rumor is that Jordan Chandler accurately drew Jackson’s penis. Which is incorrect. Jackson was uncircumcised. Chandler drew a circumcised penis, like his own. But you’ve changed a lie into a bigger lie; with your claim that multiple “boys” provided descriptions. Which is the problem with all of this. People are repeating misinformation. When called out. You hurl personal insults (some racial) and claim that facts don’t matter.

[quote] It merely points out that an accuser sometimes lies and may have self-serving motives for telling the story at this point.

The article addresses Robson’s inconsistencies. He has repeatedly changed his account. Is it plausible that you may not remember details from events that occurred when you were 7. Yes and if that’s the case. You need to be honest about that. Instead of making things up and continuing to tell a different story each time. Robson claims that he was abused into his teens. Which you would be more likely to remember. However if you cannot you need to be honest about that. Robson claims to remember every detail and those details keep changing.

Robson’s lawsuits failed because of his lies. He lies unnecessarily and almost pathologically.

If any of the Datalounge favs were accused, by someone who told this many lies and lacked any credibility. You would question them and you would question the accusations. Yet with Jackson, all of that goes out the window. In this very thread; people are repeatedly claiming that the facts don’t matter.

by Anonymousreply 84March 17, 2019 4:14 PM

MJ was a child molesting pervert and Wade is a lying money-grubbing scumbag who is desperately thirsty.

by Anonymousreply 85March 17, 2019 4:20 PM

[quote]The rumor is that Jordan Chandler accurately drew Jackson’s penis.

Wrong. Chandler described distinct marks on Jackson’s penis and described said marks to detectives. They then got a warrant, photographed his penis to prove or disprove the allegations.

Suddenly, Jackson settled with the boy (read: gave him money) and the case was dropped.

by Anonymousreply 86March 17, 2019 4:21 PM

R84, the kid drew a picture of Jackson's erect penis. The foreskin retracts, so it would not look much different whether circumcised or not.

by Anonymousreply 87March 17, 2019 4:34 PM

None of this negates the FACT that Michael Jackson was a very smart, very sophisticated child groomer and pervert. Fuck that bleached, self-loathing PRICK.

Team Wade.

by Anonymousreply 88March 17, 2019 4:40 PM

[quote] [R84], the kid drew a picture of Jackson's erect penis. The foreskin retracts, so it would not look much different whether circumcised or not.

[quote] [R84], the kid drew a picture of Jackson's erect penis. The foreskin retracts, so it would not look much different whether circumcised or not.

These are your assumptions. Assumptions are not facts,

by Anonymousreply 89March 17, 2019 5:07 PM

Again were these same allegations levied against any Datalounge fav; any accuser who had told as many lies as Robson would instantly be ripped to shreds. The misinformation would also be ripped to shreds.

by Anonymousreply 90March 17, 2019 5:12 PM

Who among us ISNT a liar ? If you grew up in a certain time,lying about our sexuality was something 90% of us did without a second thought. For years,if not for decades. It was self preservation and very much second nature. Is Wade being a habitual liar really so different ? I firmly believe that MJ was a child molesting freak and we all sorta knew it but didnt want to believe it. Even in the 80s-90s his "friendship" with pretty young boys raised brows. Thats a fact.

by Anonymousreply 91March 17, 2019 5:19 PM

Dr.Conrad Murray stated that he couldn’t comment on Jackson’s paedophila because it would hurt the family. It’s obvious that he thought he was.

He did the world a service by doing away with that monster

by Anonymousreply 92March 17, 2019 5:23 PM

I believe the victims and I am horrified at how many insane, mentally ill types are prepared to give cover to this vile POS

by Anonymousreply 93March 17, 2019 5:28 PM

[quote] Wrong. Chandler described distinct marks on Jackson’s penis and described said marks to detectives. They then got a warrant, photographed his penis to prove or disprove the allegations.

No one knows if any of this is true. It comes from gossip rags and tabloid books. It’s never been confirmed. Everything is under seal.

by Anonymousreply 94March 17, 2019 5:29 PM

The police said it was a suicide attempt

by Anonymousreply 95March 17, 2019 5:29 PM

New - Fantastic interview with the brilliant Dan Reed.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 96March 17, 2019 5:55 PM

Irrespective of whether you believe that Jackson is or is not a pedo child abuser, Robson's claims don't seem to be particularly credible.

Now, that doesn't exonerate Jackson from other abuses, merely that Robson's claims seem more rooted in a big payday than actual events.

by Anonymousreply 97March 17, 2019 6:03 PM

[quote]No one knows if any of this is true. It comes from gossip rags and tabloid books. It’s never been confirmed. Everything is under seal.

Um, maybe you’ll believe it from the lead detective himself?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 98March 17, 2019 6:06 PM

LA- DEE- DA... Can't hear you! It's a fool's paradise and to his heartless fans it's still 1987 and Jackson's squealing and moonwalking is all that matters.

by Anonymousreply 99March 17, 2019 6:11 PM

Reed adressess Robson in the interview above. He also addresses the insane truthers and the fact that he & his team spent THREE years on this project. He' fucking aces.

by Anonymousreply 100March 17, 2019 6:12 PM

Everyone who believes Michael wasn’t a pedofile points to Wade being a liar. Wade admitted he lied in court but it doesn’t change the fact that Michael’s own sister in an interview said he was a pedofile. It also doesn’t change the fact that Michael had little boys as constant companions. You never saw girls or ugly kids with him and he had two adult relationships that looked fake. If you take the name of Michael Jackson out it is very obvious he was a pedofile, regardless of Wade Robson lying.

by Anonymousreply 101March 17, 2019 6:13 PM

"and to his heartless fans it's still 1987 and Jackson's squealing and moonwalking is all that matters. "

Hell, if they actually admitted that his 'artistic side' is all that they care about, I'd have a lot more respect for them. But to still be in denial at this point... pathetic.

by Anonymousreply 102March 17, 2019 6:18 PM

[quote]Um, maybe you’ll believe it from the lead detective himself?

That, again, is not confirmation. That is opinion.

by Anonymousreply 103March 17, 2019 6:19 PM

R101, maybe purchase a dictionary or learn how to use spellcheck. Jesus Christ.

by Anonymousreply 104March 17, 2019 6:20 PM

[quote]Dr.Conrad Murray stated that he couldn’t comment on Jackson’s paedophila because it would hurt the family. It’s obvious that he thought he was.

Murray, the murderer? Um, I don’t think you wanna go there. I have no doubts that Michael was inappropriate with children, but stop talking stupid.

by Anonymousreply 105March 17, 2019 6:23 PM

Could have been an angel of mercy to end to suffering of so many.

by Anonymousreply 106March 17, 2019 6:24 PM

[quote] Who among us ISNT a liar ?

If you believe that is a legitimate argument; then you do realize that it can be used to justify anyone’s lies. You are arguing that no one person is ever credible.

[quote] Wade admitted he lied in court

As an adult Robson lied in court under oath. That’s a problem. What is more problematic is that since his initial lawsuit (filed under seal; he didn’t want the public to know) he has continued to change his story.

Again:

The article addresses Robson’s inconsistencies. He has repeatedly changed his account. Is it plausible that you may not remember details from events that occurred when you were 7. Yes and if that’s the case. You need to be honest about that. Instead of making things up and continuing to tell a different story each time. Robson claims that he was abused into his teens. Which you would be more likely to remember. However if you cannot you need to be honest about that. Robson claims to remember every detail and those details keep changing.

Robson’s lawsuits failed because of his lies. He lies unnecessarily and almost pathologically.

If any of the Datalounge favs were accused, by someone who told this many lies and lacked any credibility. You would question them and you would question the accusations. Yet with Jackson, all of that goes out the window. In this very thread; people are repeatedly claiming that the facts don’t matter.

by Anonymousreply 107March 17, 2019 6:31 PM

[quote] The relationship between sex abuse victims and their abusers is complex and perhaps too complex for many of us to understand.

So complex that we don't have to explain it. It's true no matter what.

[quote] hate to break this to you but children who have been abused rarely have witnesses, evidence, or proof.

Who needs proof?

[quote] Anyone with a heart can see these were kids traumatized by sexual abuse.

Just because we questions the allegations without evidence means we're bad people, I guess.

by Anonymousreply 108March 17, 2019 6:32 PM

There wasn't enough evidence to indict, let alone, convict Michael in 1994. Chandler's description was never entered into evidence because it didn't match. Jordy Chandler chose not to testify in 2004. Evan Chandeler was estranged from his son and committed suicide a few years later. The End.

Moreover, Jackson described the accusations to Wade as "disgusting sexual stuff", clearly the words of someone who tried to groom someone in order to perform that sexual stuff. None of this adds up. Wake up people.

by Anonymousreply 109March 17, 2019 6:46 PM

Is there anything worse than a pedo apologist

by Anonymousreply 110March 17, 2019 6:58 PM

I was molested by every Datalounger, from birth to age 30. You may not question my credibility. You must not question any inconsistencies in my story. You may not review my history or take into account any past statements. You must believe my accusations. Anyone who does not is a “ pedo apologist.” Anyone who asks questions is a “pedo apologist.”

by Anonymousreply 111March 17, 2019 7:08 PM

A grown man that has multiple secret bedrooms laden with stuffed toys and Peter Pan pillows. He only shares those beds with boys 6-12 and has an alarm system that notifies him when someone is coming.

He’s a pedo and if you can’t see that - get mental help

by Anonymousreply 112March 17, 2019 7:16 PM

Say what you will about George Michael but he wanted nothing to do with MJ after meeting him.

by Anonymousreply 113March 17, 2019 7:15 PM

R112 You mean the most famous man in the world with hundreds of staff working for him had in home security? Shocking.

by Anonymousreply 114March 17, 2019 7:17 PM

George Michael was awesome

by Anonymousreply 115March 17, 2019 7:19 PM

This is not the face of a monstrous child molester!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 116March 17, 2019 7:25 PM

[quote]Your racist assumptions don’t belong here. Nor do they help your argument. Take your white supremacist racism to stormfront. You will be much more comfortable there.

I told you to go back to lipstick alley. Shouldn’t you be defending Cosby in another thread?

by Anonymousreply 117March 17, 2019 7:30 PM

[quote] I told you to go back to lipstick alley. Shouldn’t you be defending Cosby in another thread?

And I told you to go back to Stormfront. What did any of that accomplish? You cannot argue the facts so you resort to nonsensical racist ad hominems. You don’t belong here.

by Anonymousreply 118March 17, 2019 7:42 PM

[quote]Michael Jackson was a child do-er, and craved hairless cock.

Hairless child anuses, too. Jackpedo traded in when a pube appeared.

by Anonymousreply 119March 17, 2019 7:43 PM

[quote]George Michael was awesome

Are you fucking joking?

Here we again with this NUTTINESS.

This is half the problem - more than half the problem.

by Anonymousreply 120March 17, 2019 7:59 PM

It is not unusual for children that have been sexually abused to not remember the details. Michael Jackson was the most famous person in the world, that they looked upped to. In their mind they probably thought he could not abuse/hurt them. What grown man sleeps with kids? If it were Harvey Weinstein or Kevin Spacey you would say it was strange. Most adults would say it is strange. We've heard too many stories of children suppressing the abuse they received from a neighbor or family member.

by Anonymousreply 121March 17, 2019 8:01 PM

[quote] Your opinion of Michael should be how you felt about him last year. Why would it change now?

Now there's an intelligent way to go through life. Once you have formed an opinion, dig your heels in, and make sure you never allow any new information to penetrate your brain and possibly change that opinion. It does explain the pedo defenders here, though: "I decided in 1984 that Michael Jackson was my idol; why would I ever allow anything to change my opinion of him?"

by Anonymousreply 122March 17, 2019 8:02 PM

[quote]that they looked upped to

LOL

by Anonymousreply 123March 17, 2019 8:02 PM

[quote] It is not unusual for children that have been sexually abused to not remember the details.

The article addresses Robson’s inconsistencies. He has repeatedly changed his account. Is it plausible that you may not remember details from events that occurred when you were 7. Yes and if that’s the case. You need to be honest about that. Instead of making things up and continuing to tell a different story each time. Robson claims that he was abused into his teens. Which you would be more likely to remember. However if you cannot you need to be honest about that. Robson claims to remember every detail and those details keep changing.

Robson’s lawsuits failed because of his lies. He lies unnecessarily and almost pathologically.

by Anonymousreply 124March 17, 2019 8:05 PM

Its Sunday, shouldn’t you be upstate visiting your son in prison?

by Anonymousreply 125March 17, 2019 8:06 PM

Notice the Jackaloons only attack Wade, but keep their pieholes shut about James. They know deep down their idol fucked that kid up.

by Anonymousreply 126March 17, 2019 8:08 PM

People of all ages block out traumatic experiences R124.

by Anonymousreply 127March 17, 2019 8:09 PM

R124, you already posted that bullshit at r107. Did you really think it was so compelling it needed to be posted twice?

by Anonymousreply 128March 17, 2019 8:12 PM

I'd recognize him anywhere.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 129March 17, 2019 8:11 PM

R126 Check the Leaving Neverland part 8 thread. His story is falling apart too. No one has even dug into the Diane Dimond connection which is what I think will be most damaging when that is uncovered.

[quote] It is not unusual for children that have been sexually abused to not remember the details.

For someone who claims at first not to remember the abuse, and then say they didn't think of it as abuse, all of a sudden he remembers every little detail including anal intercourse making it even more difficult to believe that he somehow rationalized it even as an adult who was severely cross examined in 2005.

by Anonymousreply 130March 17, 2019 8:15 PM

Also according to Wade, he was abused hundreds of times, which means at least oral sex and digital penetration. I'm sure at 23, it was just a blur.

by Anonymousreply 131March 17, 2019 8:16 PM

[quote]Check the Leaving Neverland part 8 thread. His story is falling apart too.

I have. And, it's not.

Try harder, pedo-lover.

by Anonymousreply 132March 17, 2019 8:18 PM

Okay, this is a serious question for the Jackson defenders. Do you think he was attracted to women or adult men (or both)? Both of his marriages were shams, and there's no evidence of him having relationships with men either. Or do you think he was voluntarily celibate throughout his life? Some people are happy being celibate, after all. But the odd thing is that he DID invite people to his bedroom and take them on tour with him - it's just that they were all little boys.

by Anonymousreply 133March 17, 2019 8:19 PM

Fuck off R124.

by Anonymousreply 134March 17, 2019 8:23 PM

Oops, sorry, meant R127

by Anonymousreply 135March 17, 2019 8:24 PM

Lets see if I can get it right this time. Fuck off R128

by Anonymousreply 136March 17, 2019 8:25 PM

Even the title of this thread is bullshit, because Wade lying about Jackson abusing him (in "LN") hasn't been exposed nor proven.

by Anonymousreply 137March 17, 2019 8:25 PM

[quote] The singer insisted he’s not gay, but some reporters and biographers suggest he was not exactly leveling with the public. Ian Halperin, author of 2009’s “Unmasked: The Final Years of Michael Jackson,” reports that Jackson was gay; Taraborrelli suggests he had a romantic male companion; and Randall Sullivan, author of 2012’s “Untouchable: The Strange Life and Tragic Death of Michael Jackson,” calls him “presexual.” Sullivan claims, without any real evidence, that he was a “50-year-old virgin” when he died.

[quote] The problem with such theories is that women who were in a position to know contradict them. Jackson’s ex-wife, Lisa Marie Presley, said the couple’s sex life was “very hot.” And other women have pointed to romantic relationships with him, including Ola Ray, co-star of the “Thriller” video, who said they’d made out. Theresa Gonsalves, who says she was Jackson’s girlfriend while he was filming “The Wiz” in New York in the ’70s, claims they had sex more than once.

Jackson also dated Stephanie Mills, Brooke Shields, and Tatum O'Neil. He was a bit of a prude and quite religious, so a lot of his early relationships may have not been consummated.

by Anonymousreply 138March 17, 2019 8:27 PM

If he was gay, there would have been intense pressure for him to keep it hidden from the public. Most likely, he was just extremely shy.

by Anonymousreply 139March 17, 2019 8:34 PM

OP was dragged by everyone.

by Anonymousreply 140March 17, 2019 8:36 PM

It looks like there would be an overlap of when Jackson was dating these women and when he was involved with these kids R138. Michael Jackson is an enigma. Just because he dated these women doesn't mean he didn't or couldn't sexually abuse these kids. Wasn't it Brooke who said he was childlike?

by Anonymousreply 141March 17, 2019 8:36 PM

R141 If it doesn't prove anything, then why do people keep using it against him? It was obvious he was very childlike in interviews.

by Anonymousreply 142March 17, 2019 8:40 PM

There are men and women who claim to have been in love with Michael Jackson. People just assume that they are lying, but that every one who made a provably false allegation must be telling the truth.

by Anonymousreply 143March 17, 2019 8:45 PM

I didn't use it for or against him R142. I will add, I think if the kids saw Jackson as childlike I could see their unwillingness to testify against him. If anyone is looking for a definitive answer, either way, they are going to be sorely disappointed.

by Anonymousreply 144March 17, 2019 8:44 PM

Who among us remembers every detail of our lives at age 7? I remember going to Disney Worldat age 10 or so. Loved it - vaguely remember certain details. But what was a major life event is pretty hazy in my memory. So it doesn’t surprise me he is asking family members to verify details.

My sister in her early 50s had repressed memories of a family member abusing her, but that seems far less believable than wade or James. They did not repress this - MJ was like a first live for each of them since he took advantage of them. They remembered but did not see it as abuse (which it undoubtedly was) until they were able to get out of that orbit with their own families and children.

by Anonymousreply 145March 17, 2019 8:46 PM

[quote] [R124], you already posted that bullshit at [R107]. Did you really think it was so compelling it needed to be posted twice?

It’s certainly more compelling that Wade’s inconsistencies.

by Anonymousreply 146March 17, 2019 8:47 PM

[quote] Who among us remembers every detail of our lives at age 7? I remember going to Disney Worldat age 10 or so. Loved it - vaguely remember certain details. But what was a major life event is pretty hazy in my memory. So it doesn’t surprise me he is asking family members to verify details.

[quote] For someone who claims at first not to remember the abuse, and then say they didn't think of it as abuse, all of a sudden he remembers every little detail including anal intercourse making it even more difficult to believe that he somehow rationalized it even as an adult who was severely cross examined in 2005.

by Anonymousreply 147March 17, 2019 8:49 PM

R16 what the hell?

by Anonymousreply 148March 17, 2019 8:49 PM

R116 what the bloody hell?

by Anonymousreply 149March 17, 2019 8:51 PM

Jackson wanted Wade to live with him and Wade's mother says no. Didn't she finally relent?

by Anonymousreply 150March 17, 2019 8:55 PM

[quote]Who among us remembers every detail of our lives at age 7? I remember going to Disney Worldat age 10 or so. Loved it - vaguely remember certain details. But what was a major life event is pretty hazy in my memory.

I did too when I was 11. I can tell you what I did every day of that trip and even remember conversations.

by Anonymousreply 151March 17, 2019 8:59 PM

Remembering or not remembering your childhood tells us nothing. I have almost completely blocked out my childhood. Of course there are instances I remember, but I don't have years of remembering and can't remember how old I was in some instances.

by Anonymousreply 152March 17, 2019 9:03 PM

Mj dated women. omg loooooolll

by Anonymousreply 153March 17, 2019 9:09 PM

R18 = Matt Anscher, the Loon

by Anonymousreply 154March 17, 2019 9:10 PM

[quote]Again were these same allegations levied against any Datalounge fav; any accuser who had told as many lies as Robson would instantly be ripped to shreds. The misinformation would also be ripped to shreds.

Well, obviously R90 (who is also R84 and R107) ain't from around here, LOL. Honey... "DL fave" is a sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek term we use here when referring to literally ANY celebrity, from the most revered A-lister to the most reviled has-been. Oh, and speaking of tongues in cheeks... ummm, isn't there a seven-year-old boy whose cute little ass you should be rimming right about now, you fucking pedo-defending freak...?

by Anonymousreply 155March 17, 2019 9:17 PM

Adult molestation victims rarely make good witnesses for the reasons you see here. The story tends to change as it gets older, many get involved in drugs, and their sexual behavior can be compulsive. If you want to poke holes in their story, it is pretty easy.

That is why you need to keep focusing on the provable facts and not the character of the alleged victim.

Do that and it seems more likely than not that Jackson was a guilty of child molestation. And that is the standard in civil court

by Anonymousreply 156March 17, 2019 9:27 PM

R89, it may be my assumption, but that is how many penises are. And it is possible that Jackson's penis worked that way.

My guess that the reason why court documents emphasize that the drawing was of an erect penis is because the judge and other lawyers were expected to make the same assumption.

by Anonymousreply 157March 17, 2019 9:31 PM

One thing's for sure: I now know much more about Michael Jackson's penis than I ever wanted to.

by Anonymousreply 158March 17, 2019 9:36 PM

Which video is this from? He looks pretty dark skinned in this, so I am assuming it is from early in his career.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 159March 17, 2019 9:38 PM

Michael was once a beautiful, young, white girl. How could things have gone so wrong for her?

by Anonymousreply 160March 17, 2019 9:41 PM

Was it Blanket that he dangled off a balcony?

by Anonymousreply 161March 17, 2019 9:42 PM

Yes R161.

by Anonymousreply 162March 17, 2019 9:43 PM

R61 I agree. I had a hard time believing Wade at first, considering his past lies and the fact that he's a known opportunist. However, I had no issue believing James. That's why I figure Wade was probably speaking the truth too. Yes, he lied in the past, and yes, he's probably an opportunist, but that doesn't mean he's lying now about the abuse. Victims of child abuse often lie for many years, for a number of reasons. I believe him, even though I was skeptical at first.

by Anonymousreply 163March 17, 2019 9:46 PM

This is perhaps the best article I've ever read not just on Michael, but on social media justice.

[quote] Director Dan Reed has stated that he took that approach because he wanted this project to be about abuse and the survivors of abuse; but that rings disingenuous when you consider this documentary was purchased because it’s about Michael Jackson and the conversations that were going to be had once it aired were going to be about Michael Jackson. Reed has asserted that there is no “journalistic value” in interviewing other Jackson family members or Jackson associates because they wouldn’t be able to speak to the details that Safechuck and Robson have presented — and that’s a very valid explanation, on its face. But there would be significant journalistic value in talking to former Jackson employees or people who knew Safechuck and Robson at the time. Who else could corroborate, for instance, driving Jackson and Safechuck to a jewelry shop to purchase wedding rings (one of the film’s most disturbing moments is Safechuck describing a mock wedding to the star); or former girlfriends who could describe emotional or sexual problems the boys may have shown as adolescents/young adults? Was there no attempt to talk to anyone?

[quote] In contrast to the Bryan Singer allegations detailed by The Atlantic back in January (allegations that barely dented Bohemian Rhapsody’s Oscar push and didn’t lead to any Oprah sit-down with the director’s alleged victims), or the just-as-explosive Lifetime docuseries Surviving R. Kelly — this project, as many have pointed out, comes across as far less journalistic and thorough. There was no expertise of any kind presented in the four-hour …Neverland doc; no detectives, investigative reporters, child psychology experts, etc. appear in it. There are no professional or tangential associates of Jackson, no outside observers of anything over the periods of time in question. Everyone interviewed is either Robson and Safechuck or someone reacting to what they’ve been told by Robson and Safechuck. Oprah’s post-broadcast conversation with the two seemed to try and address this by including an abuse expert and abuse victims such as actor Anthony Edwards; but it was mostly soft questions in front of a sympathetic audience — and a lot of very general commentary about abuse that, while acknowledging the extraordinary specificity of this story of abuse victims, rarely faced how such extraordinary specificity may render any general comparisons inapplicable.

[quote] It would seem, then, that as common as disassociation is, it’s just as common that outside stimuli should/would trigger an abuse survivor. When both Robson and Safechuck indicate that they only regained awareness/full acceptance of their childhood traumas around 2013, I found myself wondering how such repression could withstand being bombarded with constant outside stimuli — i.e. two media-heavy legal battles; constant reminders of Jackson and abuse in virtually every facet of said media; in the case of Robson, being in virtually the same field as your abuser and working with professionals (Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears, etc.), whose very careers evoke your abuser. It would seem that all of those things would likely be triggers for past trauma. But they weren’t for these men. I kept waiting for something to explain this in a more specific way than “it doesn’t always look how you think.” I am still waiting.

[quote] Robson took the witness stand in Jackson’s defense as an adult. He seems intent on ascribing this solely to his abuser’s psychological hold on him: (“As a soldier, I couldn’t think of anybody else…”); but I admit that I have trouble making such grand allowances for an adult who was complicit in a predator’s acquittal, victimization or no.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 164March 17, 2019 9:47 PM

[quote] In one of the documentary’s most quietly fraught sequences, Safechuck describes Jackson calling his mother in the wake of the 2005 trial, seeking to get James to testify on his behalf. Safechuck explains that he told his mother Jackson was an evil man — and his mother vividly recalled how her son wept and begged her “Please don’t tell anyone.” During “After Neverland,” when Oprah asks Safechuck “When did you realize it was abuse?,” he explains that it was only after he saw Robson come out with his story that he realized the horror of what he’d endured. Safechuck is clear that his reason for not testifying in that case wasn’t due to him understanding he’d been abused. “I didn’t think of it as good or bad. It was that old wiring of sort of — if you’re caught, your life will be over,” Safechuck explained, reiterating that he only declined to testify out of self-preservation. “To be thrown into that would be too much to handle.” But that seems to contradict the timeline of 2005 events he and his mother described in the doc, when he states that “I told my mom then, that…he wasn’t a good person.” His mother adds that James told her “Michael’s an evil man.” It’s a confusing bit that warrants some clarity. What could’ve made Michael “evil” in 2005 were it not the abuse you’d endured? If you were revealing this trauma to your mother then, how does that connect to you not realizing what you’d experienced until 8 years later?

My favorite

[quote] I am not a journalist, but if all I am good for, as a writer, is churning out Woke Nigga™ rhetoric for white liberal consumption, then I have failed in every way that matters. Mastering the jargon and slogans was never my goal; they sit in service to larger ideas that will sometimes be messy and complicated in application. Many have consistently stated over the past few days that victimhood doesn’t always look the way you’d expect it to; well, standing up for victims won’t always look the way you expect it to, either. If you are of the mind that “regardless of whether these guys are right — I know he did something,” then I need for you, as Reed himself has intimated, to de-center Michael Jackson. Your need for cultural closure on a 25-year scandal may be blinding you to the fact that this particular saga isn’t going to end with a pedophile in handcuffs. Michael Jackson is dead and his legacy has already been tarnished. No — this story is going to most likely end with a lawsuit settlement that will no doubt look like a victory — now that the men who filed said lawsuit have the visibility and push of public opinion behind them. I don’t know how anyone’s idea of justice can include persons possibly exploiting abuse survivors and an entire movement to support victims, then getting a huge payday for it. That’s why questions can’t be shuttered for the sake of pseudo-empathy. Fighting for the oppressed should never require weaponized naiveté. I don’t know when that has ever helped anyone.

by Anonymousreply 165March 17, 2019 9:48 PM

[Quote]Safechuck will always be more believable than Robson.

Yes, which is why the crazy MJ defenders always attack Robson and not Safechuck. Robson will always be called out for lying about the abuse during the trial.

by Anonymousreply 166March 17, 2019 9:53 PM

[Quote]I believe Safechuck, the poor guy seems shattered.

Yup, you can't fake how broken James is.

by Anonymousreply 167March 17, 2019 9:57 PM

[Quote]I believe Robson was abused too, but that he is opportunistic as well. I believe Jackson paid Robson to testify in favour of him, then once Jackson was dead and Robson was broke, his career in the toilet, the abuse starting to haunt him, he's come forward with these allegations not out of healing but to make money. I think Robson is cold enough and detached enough not to have had the abuse really affect him, he just wants the money.

THIS. The crazy MJ defender thinks Robson being opportunistic is proof that he's lying. I disagree. I don't see it that way at all. I think he's telling the truth about being abused, but yes, he's probably also speaking out about it so that he can make a few bucks. It doesn't have to be one or the other. He can tell the truth and still want money from it. Wanting money doesn't mean he's lying about being abused. That's what the MJ defenders don't get. I also agree that maybe that's why he didn't seem that affected by what he said in the documentary, he seemed detached. He has probably processed it so it doesn't affect him much anymore. James on the other hand, yikes! He's truly the picture of a broken man.

by Anonymousreply 168March 17, 2019 10:04 PM

Notice that the OP never actually defends Jackson and/or his character, but instead attacks the accusers. They're probably into little kids, too, more than being an actual fan of Jackson and his music.

by Anonymousreply 169March 17, 2019 10:07 PM

Exactly, R169, I've thought that the Jackson defender may be a pedo. Who else would defend sleeping with young boys?

by Anonymousreply 170March 17, 2019 10:10 PM

Why hasn't he been charged with perjury?

by Anonymousreply 171March 17, 2019 10:12 PM

No one here is defending that, r170. Are you a woman? Asking because your brain doesn't seem to be working correctly.

by Anonymousreply 172March 17, 2019 10:15 PM

Excuse me, R172? There have been plenty of posts here normalizing and excusing Jackson sharing his bed with boys.

by Anonymousreply 173March 17, 2019 10:16 PM

R173 Jackson grew up sleeping the same bed as his brothers. Many poor families still do to this day. MJ didn't know any better. To him, there was nothing sexual about it. He comforted sick children.

by Anonymousreply 174March 17, 2019 10:20 PM

Again, why would a grown man admit to it unless he didn't believe it was completely innocent?

by Anonymousreply 175March 17, 2019 10:23 PM

Comforted them by sticking his dick in their mouths, delusional creep at R174. Fuck off.

by Anonymousreply 176March 17, 2019 10:22 PM

Oh do fuck off, R174. You must be a pedo yourself if you can excuse an adult sharing his bed with a child and see nothing wrong with it.

by Anonymousreply 177March 17, 2019 10:23 PM

I would not do it but Jackson was hopelessly naive.

by Anonymousreply 178March 17, 2019 10:23 PM

Just answer the question, r173. Female?

Women drag a whole bunch of emotional crazy into any debate. They don't need no stinkin' facts. Their HEARTS tell them what is true.

by Anonymousreply 179March 17, 2019 10:24 PM

As are you R178

by Anonymousreply 180March 17, 2019 10:24 PM

No, R179, and speaking of facts, it's you that has a problem with them.

by Anonymousreply 181March 17, 2019 10:25 PM

Just look at r177 . That's quite a pronouncement.

by Anonymousreply 182March 17, 2019 10:27 PM

R181 either you're lying or you're a man and have no more ability to think rationally than the women in this thread.

If I were you, I wouldn't admit to either of those things.

Facts count. Feelings don't, you big emotional woman.

by Anonymousreply 183March 17, 2019 10:30 PM

Wade's inconsistencies is because he was groomed to lie. He was seven, a baby and a grown man was trying to fuck him and telling him if you tell WE will both be in trouble. What seven year old wants to get into trouble? Please, Michael Jackson admits he slept with stranger's children. Michael Jackson is a duck. Get over it.

by Anonymousreply 184March 17, 2019 10:30 PM

Hey, R83, keep rationalizing Jackson's penchant for sleeping with children. What are you hiding?

by Anonymousreply 185March 17, 2019 10:31 PM

R174 Bullshit. He befriended young boys not girls. Why? Because he liked and was attracted to them. Children my ass you pedo loving scum.

by Anonymousreply 186March 17, 2019 10:31 PM

I can't believe there are so many comments for this troll ass post #bebetter

by Anonymousreply 187March 17, 2019 10:38 PM

R184 Yes a grown ass man would totally believe he would go to jail unless he lied about MJ. A grown man who willingly perjured himself because he did not realize getting fucked in the ass is abuse.

by Anonymousreply 188March 17, 2019 10:39 PM

Ever heard of Stockholm syndrome R188?

by Anonymousreply 189March 17, 2019 10:41 PM

Maybe the Jackson defenders here are boys he didn't abuse and feel rejected.

by Anonymousreply 190March 17, 2019 10:44 PM

More idle speculation from the woman @ r185 . Get away from DataLounge, girls. Your brains can't handle it. Let the men sort this out.

by Anonymousreply 191March 17, 2019 10:47 PM

Why is everyone picking on the "extremely shy" ped,er, man child with a heart of gold?

by Anonymousreply 192March 17, 2019 10:47 PM

What a misogynist asshole R191 is.

by Anonymousreply 193March 17, 2019 10:51 PM

Oh here we go. Calling women's bullshit for what it is doesn't make me a misogynist. Women don't belong here in the first place.

Then, when they get here, they revert to hearsay and mobthink .

by Anonymousreply 194March 17, 2019 10:54 PM

Where does it say on DL women don't belong here R194? The word "gay" encompasses women too.

by Anonymousreply 195March 17, 2019 10:55 PM

The anti-woman, pro Jackson troll is a woman posing as a gay man herself, trying desperately to convince us that a gay man would see no issue with a grown man sleeping with a underage boy. Homophobic cunt.

by Anonymousreply 196March 17, 2019 10:59 PM

This has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with false virtue signaling. Speaking out against Metoo is treasonous.

by Anonymousreply 197March 17, 2019 11:01 PM

Women don't belong here any more than they belong in a gay bar. You just think that because you can create a post that you belong. You don't.

As a matter of FACT - something you girls have a problem with presenting on this thread (or any thread involving sexually charged matters) - as a matter of FACT, there's a couple of related threads about why women don't belong in gay spaces, you might want to check them out, because they're talking about you.

Re: this thread, women don't belong here because you can't keep your feelings out of it and just hold a rational conversation based on fact. Shit that you read in a tabloid doesn't count as fact. Your feelings aren't valid. Your opinions don't matter.

How about all women leave this thread right now, and let's see who's left? This thread would dry up.

Maybe take your fat asses over mumsnet; see how long they put up with your nonsense.

Or maybe LSA. They fucking love lunatic women over there.

by Anonymousreply 198March 17, 2019 11:33 PM

You're a fucking idiot R198.

by Anonymousreply 199March 17, 2019 11:36 PM

Brilliant rebuttal.

by Anonymousreply 200March 17, 2019 11:39 PM

"Any time there's a thread on DL about some accusation anywhere against some celebrity, and sex enters into it, you fucks come shrieking down, and all reason leaves the room," shrieked the pedophile.

by Anonymousreply 201March 17, 2019 11:42 PM

[quote]Why hasn't he been charged with perjury?

Do you really want him to be charged with lying under oath that Jackson DIDN'T molest him? LOL, the Jacksons and the stans do NOT want that can of worms to be opened.

by Anonymousreply 202March 17, 2019 11:45 PM

And again, you just make shit up, in this case, it's libel, because the facts either elude you, or they are inconvenient to your mob scene.

Keep proving my point.

by Anonymousreply 203March 17, 2019 11:46 PM

r198 = angry troll from the Spacey threads.

by Anonymousreply 204March 17, 2019 11:55 PM

Court document from September 9th 2016:

'Plaintiff is unable to continue writing songs or producing music, as well as being unable to continue performing and directing in any manner or capacity whatsoever.'

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 205March 17, 2019 11:57 PM

Discard Robson from the case and kick him to the curb.

by Anonymousreply 206March 17, 2019 11:59 PM

Cont: R205

September 20th 2016 Facebook Post

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 207March 17, 2019 11:59 PM

'It has always been a dream of mine to dance with Wade Robson. Now he is directing and choreographing for me.' -re: R207

Contradicting the reasons for his breakdowns:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 208March 17, 2019 11:59 PM

Wade's wife lied too. In the documentary "Leaving Neverland," she said she was not a victim of sexual abuse (video below) and didn't know how to help wade; however, on their family fund page (and a since edited out bit from Wade’s website), it stated she was herself a victim of child abuse. Oops!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 209March 18, 2019 12:01 AM

R171, are you reading all this?

First the prosecutor would have to prove that Jackson was a pedophile. Then he would have to prove that Robson consciously deceived. And the obvious defense is emotional distress or mental illness.

And why would any prosecutor go through that?

by Anonymousreply 210March 18, 2019 12:04 AM

[quote]Jackson grew up sleeping the same bed as his brothers. Many poor families still do to this day. MJ didn't know any better. To him, there was nothing sexual about it. He comforted sick children.

Jackson wasn't still growing. He wasn't poor. He absolutely knew better. To him, there was nothing wrong with sex with children. He was the sick one.

by Anonymousreply 211March 18, 2019 12:05 AM

Harvey Levin is an empathy-free aspies. Notes his eyes can’t sustain eye contact with a camera. They dart around. Plus no one with a soul could do what he does. He’s a loathsome creature.

by Anonymousreply 212March 18, 2019 12:11 AM

More fact-free speculation and emotional embellishment, I see.

by Anonymousreply 213March 18, 2019 12:14 AM

Who are you talking about, r213?

by Anonymousreply 214March 18, 2019 12:18 AM

Yet Michael didn’t physically harm or murder his victims like us...stupid man!

by Anonymousreply 215March 18, 2019 12:28 AM

[quote]People just assume that they are lying, but that every one who made a provably false allegation must be telling the truth.

Who has made a provably false allegation and what was the proof?

by Anonymousreply 216March 18, 2019 12:29 AM

Thanks to all who pointed things out about no perjury charges. I was looking at the big picture of someone who is basically saying that they lied in court - but not looking at the can of worms.

by Anonymousreply 217March 18, 2019 1:00 AM

Wade Robson is absolutely not credible. Not only is his story rehearsed, fake, and unbelievable; but his own past lies are numerous and contradict his supposed reasons for filing the lawsuit and suddenly claiming to want to tell the truth about this alleged abuse (a decade after Jackson’s death.)

Yet some of his supporters keep making excuses for his bizarre actions, such as his claiming to have “lost” his copy of a draft book (and other versions) about the allegations before the lawsuit, redacting emails showing he (unsuccessfully) tried to shop his book proposals, asking to wed at Neverland during the 2005 abuse trial, testifying as a 23 year old the second time in Jackson’s favor, dating another girl during the abuse (Reed claims he was seeing both her and Jackson), etc. The lies are endless, he and James Safechuck are pitiful liars who used the same lawyer to try to win a payday.

by Anonymousreply 218March 18, 2019 1:00 AM

You people watch too much TV. Not all perjury or supposed perjury cases are prosecuted.

by Anonymousreply 219March 18, 2019 1:07 AM

R218 De-platform Robson. No books, no interviews, no nothing.

by Anonymousreply 220March 18, 2019 1:24 AM

Why wouldn't Jackson have molested Wade when he molested all those other boys?

by Anonymousreply 221March 18, 2019 1:35 AM

I never believed those two and couldn't even watch them being interviewed.

why didn't Jackson molest his own kids? pedophiles aren't choosy. I often wondered if Michael was just trying to live out his childhood with younger boys. No one will ever know for sure what he did. Most people cannot believe that this didn't have to do with sex in some form. There really are some things that don't involve sex but I know I'm talking to the wind.

by Anonymousreply 222March 18, 2019 1:44 AM

[quote]Yet some of his supporters keep making excuses for his bizarre actions,...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 223March 18, 2019 1:48 AM

You aren't talking to the wind, but you are trying to reason with the unreasonable. Good luck.

by Anonymousreply 224March 18, 2019 1:48 AM

Apparently, Jackson molested Wade hundreds of times. I imagine he would've gotten sick of him at some point.

by Anonymousreply 225March 18, 2019 1:55 AM

[quote] Are you a woman? Asking because your brain doesn't seem to be working correctly.

There are plenty of women who are defending Jackson. This is what his obsessed haters look like.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 226March 18, 2019 1:58 AM

Or this

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 227March 18, 2019 1:57 AM

Just asking. Women have a tendency to infest DL and muck it up with multiple celebrity threads. You knew that already.

by Anonymousreply 228March 18, 2019 2:01 AM

I wouldn't be surprised if Perez is posting in these threads.

by Anonymousreply 229March 18, 2019 2:02 AM

What I find hypocritical are those calling us who defend Michael paid posters and pedo apologists (despite the HUGE holes in these guy’s stories), but at the same time are calling out their own suspected “victims” (who say he did NOTHING inappropriate) like Mac, Barnes, and Feldman, who never admitted any wrongdoing, or even worse blaming them for being complicit. Even Dan Reed was uncomfortable with the idea of "outing" victims, yet there seems to a contingent on DL who want Jackson's legacy to go down so bad, they are actually hoping for victims, the more the better. That's truly twisted and they need to find another way to fill the credibility gap with their sh***y accusers.

by Anonymousreply 230March 18, 2019 2:08 AM

You pedo lovers sure are pompous. Don't you have to practice your moonwalking and crotch grabbing?

by Anonymousreply 231March 18, 2019 2:10 AM

Right on cue, r231 . And once again with nothing real to contribute, just a tepid attempt at insult.

by Anonymousreply 232March 18, 2019 2:14 AM

[quote] You aren't talking to the wind, but you are trying to reason with the unreasonable.

Oh, please. It's hardly unreasonable to believe that a man who never had a non-showmance relationship with another adult, built a secluded ranch with its own amusement park and zoo, openly and regularly held slumber parties with with young boys, and has been accused of sexual abuse by four of those boys might, just might, be a big ol' pedo.

by Anonymousreply 233March 18, 2019 2:16 AM

[quote]Not only did every single member of the Jackson family know but so did Liza Minnelli, Elizabeth Taylor,

How do you know that? I can see Lisa Marie Presley knowing, probably contributed to their divorce, but there's no proof that Liza and Liz knew.

by Anonymousreply 234March 18, 2019 2:15 AM

Did your friend tell you to post that, r232?

by Anonymousreply 235March 18, 2019 2:16 AM

^And once again, another lame response.

by Anonymousreply 236March 18, 2019 2:24 AM

Anyone else think Wade Robson is ugly as hell? I mean he looks like a lying scumbag and a dirtbag. Now the evidence is coming out to prove it. Beats my mind how anyone can lust after this.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 237March 18, 2019 2:23 AM

Wade was a gorgeous little boy and he's a beautiful man. R237 hides in the bathroom at the Y to see five year old boys undress.

by Anonymousreply 238March 18, 2019 2:25 AM

R237 I felt really bad for Brandi but then thought she is way better off having cut him loose.

by Anonymousreply 239March 18, 2019 2:26 AM

Wade is more attractive nowadays than when he was in his 20s. Maybe being free of the burden of carrying the secret has helped him. He looks much better now.

by Anonymousreply 240March 18, 2019 2:25 AM

"Didn't he even went a step above and testified on MJ's behalf?"

Oh, dear, dear, dear, r28. You can't even claim dyslexia.

by Anonymousreply 241March 18, 2019 2:27 AM

R240 is Wade Robson.

by Anonymousreply 242March 18, 2019 2:32 AM

You Jackpedo defenders are losing it, posting the same repetitive shit in both threads because you have no coherent argument.

And LOL at you freaks calling Wade ugly when your idol's plastic face was BUSTED as fuck.

by Anonymousreply 243March 18, 2019 2:31 AM

R241 love how you’d rather call out a spelling mistake than the truth of R28’s post. Wade’s a fucking liar. A scumbag. We all believe it. Nothing you say will change it. Get over it.

by Anonymousreply 244March 18, 2019 2:33 AM

R233 what you are presenting is your opinion, your opinion is not fact. If you're going to discuss this, stick with facts. Avoid sensationalism, and avoid presenting your speculation as truth.

by Anonymousreply 245March 18, 2019 2:33 AM

R245 Exactly. They deflect every single time someone starts talking about what a lying fucking scumbag Wade has been.

by Anonymousreply 246March 18, 2019 2:34 AM

No one likes the spelling and grammar queens around here R241. Congratulations, you are replicating your childhood.

by Anonymousreply 247March 18, 2019 2:34 AM

[quote]the same repetitive shit in both threads because you have no coherent argument.

Look in the mirror before you sling that mud, baby. You're covered in it.

by Anonymousreply 248March 18, 2019 2:37 AM

Brandi Jackson and Wade Robson had a relationship for about 8 years. Brandi Jackson is a niece of Michael Jackson. They where both 12 years old when the relationship began. Do you know who brought them together?? Uncle Michael Jackson! When they where about 20 years old Brandi found out that Wade cheated on her with multiple woman who he hoped would advance his career. One of those woman was Britney Spears. Britney had a relationship with Justin Timberlake at the time and Wade Robson still had an relationship with Brandi Jackson.

Brandi said: "Wade is not the victim, he is an opportunist! Wade, you constanly talked about wanting to be "relevant". You've burned so many bridges now the only time you are relevant is when you headline with my family's name next to yours. It's time to stop these lies and live your own life."

by Anonymousreply 249March 18, 2019 2:37 AM

[quote]Wade was a gorgeous little boy and he's a beautiful man.

Hee hee! Shamon!

by Anonymousreply 250March 18, 2019 2:40 AM

[quote] why didn't Jackson molest his own kids? pedophiles aren't choosy.

Who says? It's clear that Jackson only liked boys, for starters, and beyond that, he seemed to have a "type" or a couple of types. Wade Robson and James Safechuck looked remarkably similar as kids. None of little boys who hung around MJ were ugly.

by Anonymousreply 251March 18, 2019 2:41 AM

[quote][R245] Exactly. They deflect every single time someone starts talking about what a lying fucking scumbag Wade has been.

Actually, quite a few people have noted that Wade Robson could have lied about some details and still have been molested. That's not a deflection.

by Anonymousreply 252March 18, 2019 2:43 AM

[No one likes the spelling and grammar queens around here]

I do.

I fucking LOVE them, because they point out that stupid people can't spell. The opinions of stupid people who can't spell mean nothing. They shouldn't be here.

by Anonymousreply 253March 18, 2019 2:43 AM

Dan Reed is losing his shit trying to come up with lies to justify why Robson isn’t a nutter.

“'The fact that he was boyfriend and girlfriend with Brandi at the age of 12 or 13 doesn't mean he wasn't seeing Jackson too but I don't really follow the logic.' -Dan Reed

More desperation. Ive never seen a director of a doc go this hard about what people say about the film. Guess what Dan—everyone with a BRAIN follows the logic, he’s lying is ass off.

by Anonymousreply 254March 18, 2019 2:49 AM

There is NO way that Brandi had a relationship with Wade until he was 20. He had 2 public girlfriends before the age of 19. One was Mayte, Prince's ex wife who he met when he was 17 and dated publicly, meaning multiple articles by NY Times and other sources said they dated 2000/2001. He met his wife when he was 19 and they had a public relationship. Was Brandi not following the press which noted who his girlfriends were (she wasn't mentioned)? Besides her dating him has no bearing on the sexual abuse. Wade already said that he was very promiscuous with women before settling down bc he was trying to prove his masculinity which was impacted by bein sexually abused from the age of 7 to 14.

I still haven't even seen pics of Brandi and Wade together so even if they dated it didn't seem to be serious. Not that any of that relates to whether MJ abused Wade.

by Anonymousreply 255March 18, 2019 2:49 AM

R255 Still making excuses to cover Wade’s lies. He’s a sick individual, just like his father, probably also bipolar. Can’t wait until he one of his little lawsuits ends up leaking his medical records.

by Anonymousreply 256March 18, 2019 2:56 AM

Wow, is the ugly pedo OP being paid to come on here and defend the vile pedophile Michael DISGUSTING Jackson? This hoe needs to shut up and go away, because everyone here hates Jacko now and we will do everything we can to DESTROY his legacy.

by Anonymousreply 257March 18, 2019 2:59 AM

From the other thread. Too good to not repost here:

They removed the part with the jewelry. Wasn't that supposed to be the most damning part of all? Does anyone else wonder why Safechuck kept the rings but didn't keep the vows?

by Anonymousreply 258March 18, 2019 2:58 AM

R257 The only hoe is Wade Robson, who thinks we believe that he was dating Michael Jackson and Brandi Jackson at the same time.

by Anonymousreply 259March 18, 2019 2:59 AM

Also, the MAJORITY of DL is pro Michael. Just because you post hundreds of replies using different devices doesn’t mean we recognize you. Get a grip.

by Anonymousreply 260March 18, 2019 3:00 AM

[quote]Can’t wait until he one of his little lawsuits ends up leaking his medical records.

And then what, you'll have a good belly laugh? Did you laugh when it was revealed your idol was a sicko junkie who ODed?

by Anonymousreply 261March 18, 2019 3:02 AM

Wade Robson’s Emails: ‘A MASTER OF DECEPTION’ What Wade Robson doesn’t understand is that the version he is currently promoting (“I always remembered the ‘abuse’, but didn’t see it as such and thought it was consensual love”) is a totally impossible one.

This theory is devised by real pedophiles, and Robson is unfortunately giving it certain veracity by passing it off as truth – and the worst that could happen to all of us would be believing that this is indeed possible.

If applied to 14-year old teenagers the theory could at least look more or less plausible because of the teenagers’ own stormy sexual issues, confusion and turmoil of emotions. They can imagine that they are in love when it is only curiosity and the adventurous spirit that is driving them into some dubious relationships. At their awkward age adolescents don’t often understand what they themselves want and certainly don’t realize what their escapades into the luring world of adults may result in.

But what may be confusion for a teenager is no longer confusion for a 23-year old man, who is grown up enough to realize that a heinous thing like ‘anal penetration’ of a child, for example, cannot be ‘consensual love’ and can be nothing else but abuse. In fact thinking different at so mature an age is actually another way of supporting pedophilia, only from the opposite end of the spectrum.

In other words if the 23-year old Robson who testified in the defense of Jackson at the 2005 trial had really been a victim, he had the option to say that he hated or loved it, or choose not to testify at all, but the option of defending the alleged perpetrator thinking that there could be ‘consensual love’ between a seven-year old boy and a grown up man was simply not open to him. When you are an adult, believing theories like that is not only ridiculous but is actually a crime.

MORE AT THE LINK BELOW

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 262March 18, 2019 3:04 AM

The majority of DL is not pro Jackson R260. Why would people believe Brandi, since she has skin in the game being related to Michael?

by Anonymousreply 263March 18, 2019 3:06 AM

The stans are just trolling at this point. Even they can't possibly believe the shit they're trying to peddle.

by Anonymousreply 264March 18, 2019 3:11 AM

R260, I think you mean 90% of the DL love JANET JACKSON, not her sex offender brother. 90% of DL have hated him since the1993 trial when he paid Jordy 20m not to take his accusations further. He has paid off countless boys and members of staff since then, so many that he was bankrupt in 2009 and hoping to pay off his debts through the 02 dates.

Unfortunately, the guilt of being a filthy pedophile meant that Jacko couldn't sleep without being hooked up to a general anaesthetic drip and he died and the children of the world were spared further abuse. He, like Macbeth, another child abuser, had murdered sleep.

by Anonymousreply 265March 18, 2019 3:11 AM

R265 Yes, we're supposed to believe that the FBI covered up for Jackson and that anyone that comes to his defense is a liar. However, Diane Dimond, a tabloid reporter, and her sources are telling the truth. Victor Guiterrez, a member of NAM*LA who claimed to have a secret videotape of Jackson molesting a child, and who was successfully sued by Jackson is telling the truth. Isn't it troubling that this same man contributed numerous stories to Hard Copy and met with many of the alleged victims or eyewitnesses? Of course not. There was an entire thread on DL that contained excerpts from his pedo fantasy book, Michael Jackson Was My Lover. Did anyone look into the acknowledgments where he thanks that organization? No, they still publish stills and drawings from that book on here. Diane Dimond is regarded as brave and a hero.

Thankfully, that POS book is out of print but people are still peddling its lies to this day. Diane Dimond was the first to report on Jimmy's lawsuit and is alleged to have been in contact with him. That's not troubling at all.

by Anonymousreply 266March 18, 2019 3:27 AM

The majority of DL is not pro-Michael Jackson. The majority of posters here are white gay men, 99% of whom hate Michael Jackson and would never support any theory other than his 100% guilt. They don't like Bryan Singer either but are far less offended by his pedophilia than Michael Jackson's (which is why 10 "Michael Jackson is guilty" threads are created here per day and no one sees that as being the least bit extreme).

Kevin Spacey and Woody Allen still have plenty of defenders here, many of whom have openly attacked Anthony Rapp (in Spacey's case) and Mia Farrow (in Woody's case), so the outrage is, unsurprisingly, very selective.

Does any of that mean Michael Jackson wasn't a pedophile? Of course not. I think the evidence is undeniable. But as many here have said themselves, two truths can co-exist at once and Michael's guilt and DL's selective outrage are two distinct truths. It also just proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Michael Jackson Derangement Syndrome is a real thing that cuts in both directions.

by Anonymousreply 267March 18, 2019 3:28 AM

It's the old saying, 'you can't rape a whore.'

by Anonymousreply 268March 18, 2019 3:33 AM

[quote]Kevin Spacey and Woody Allen still have plenty of defenders here, many of whom have openly attacked Anthony Rapp (in Spacey's case) and Mia Farrow (in Woody's case), so the outrage is, unsurprisingly, very selective.

Uh, no...more like one or two defenders of those two, and one of them is here defending Jackson. Nice try at trying to race bait, though.

by Anonymousreply 269March 18, 2019 3:33 AM

R269 do you spend a lot of time on the Woody Allen and Kevin Spacey threads?

by Anonymousreply 270March 18, 2019 3:47 AM

Indianapolis Children's Museum removes Michael Jackson glove and record player after bombshell Leaving Neverland documentary details sexual abuse allegations

by Anonymousreply 271March 18, 2019 3:48 AM

First of all , Michael Jackson was ONLY accused by 5 people. Had he been a pedophile he would have had way more accusers, dozens if not hundreds, like Seville and Sandusky and R Kelly. That is NOT the case. Only 5 accusers in 35 years , all proven liars and extortionists. In addition , Michael Jackson’s houses were numerous times raided by the Police and 16 of his computers were confiscated by the FBI and they NEVER found ANY child pornography, hence the acquittal in 2005. That is a FACT.

Pervert objects allegedly found in Neverland of kid and animal torture was a false rumor invented by a loathsome , tabloid , garbage site RadarOnLine, which the Jackson family sued and settled out of court. That was NOT the case. No child porn. That is a FACT, confirmed by the FBI and multiple police departments which investigated Michael Jackson for years. The Truth About What Michael Jackson Had (And Didn't Have) In His Bedroom. The FBI, noting that Jackson was acquitted of all charges, said the case files were made public after Freedom of Information Act requests filed after MJ’s June 25 death. FBI files on Michael Jackson published online. Everything published by Radar Online is false and tampered. NO child pornography has been found. I don’t remember the FBI investigating R Kelly or Weinstein for years nor Weinstein's home wrecked by 70+ police officers for investigational purposes.

by Anonymousreply 272March 18, 2019 4:10 AM

[quote]Only 5 accusers in 35 years ,

That's five too many, pedo lover.

by Anonymousreply 273March 18, 2019 4:12 AM

R273 Seems like you're the pedo lover, posting hundreds of replies about Michael Jackson licking your anus. Just log off Wade (or Amanda.)

by Anonymousreply 274March 18, 2019 4:14 AM

[quote] Does any of that mean Michael Jackson wasn't a pedophile? Of course not. I think the evidence is undeniable.

I personally questioned his relationships with children. I, like probably most, assumed that Jackson initiated the relationship with Robson. Then I read his mom's testimony. She worked very hard to establish that relationship with Jackson. She continued to contact him. He did not seek Wade out. His mom sought Jackson out. She even talks about being angry and "cutting" Jackson off because he did not contact Wade. Jackson had access to and relationships with hundreds of children, boys and girls. The 4 accusers though all have one thing in common. They all have questionably shady parents. Gavin Arvizo's parents were straight up professional grifters who targeted a number of celebs. You have to wonder why more children have not come forward and why no children with decent parents (who had no serious financial problems) have not come forward. Then when did Wade and Safechuck come forward? When the themselves faced financial problems. Joy Robson's testimony, the testimony regarding the Arvizo's financial schemes all really changed my perspective. The more details that I've read; the more I am convinced of Jackson's innocence. The actual evidence does not support the accusations. Wade's inconsistencies discredit his accusations. And Robson owes the Jackson estate 70,000 and Safechuck is also in debt to the estate due to their failed court cases. They were both already having financial problems. Now they have attorney's fees to pay. It seems as though they have really dug holes for themselves. Millions of people feel the same way.

[quote] But as many here have said themselves, two truths can co-exist at once and Michael's guilt and DL's selective outrage are two distinct truths. It also just proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Michael Jackson Derangement Syndrome is a real thing that cuts in both directions.

Datalounge hates black people and datalounge hates successful black people most of all. So there is a double standard. You have 20 threads denouncing not only Jackson but his entire family. Then you have 20 threads filled with dataloungers lusting after convicted murderer Chris Watts. A man who murdered his wife and his children. The child advocates in the Jackson threads couldn't care less about the children who were murdered by Watts.

I personally wouldn't call anyone who has read through the facts, not the tabloid rumors, and developed an informed opinion, deranged. Most people have not though. Most are you spouting tabloid rumors.

by Anonymousreply 275March 18, 2019 4:15 AM

[quote]Most are you spouting tabloid rumors.

No more so than the Jackson stans, whose desperate, repetitive "evidence" is continually shot down and proven wrong.

Jackson's legacy is now shit, and there's no coming back. Deal with it.

by Anonymousreply 276March 18, 2019 4:25 AM

[quote]Dan Reed is losing his shit trying to come up with lies to justify why Robson isn’t a nutter. “'The fact that he was boyfriend and girlfriend with Brandi at the age of 12 or 13 doesn't mean he wasn't seeing Jackson too but I don't really follow the logic.' -Dan Reed

How is that losing his shit? By 12 or 13, Robson was aging out of MJ's target age group, and says himself that he was only seeing Jackson a few times a year at that point. He easily could have been dating Brandi during the same time period.

by Anonymousreply 277March 18, 2019 4:31 AM

[quote] In addition , Michael Jackson’s houses were numerous times raided by the Police and 16 of his computers were confiscated by the FBI and they NEVER found ANY child pornography, hence the acquittal in 2005. That is a FACT.

The absence of kiddy porn on his computer does not necessarily indicate that he wasn't molesting real, live kids in the flesh.

by Anonymousreply 278March 18, 2019 4:35 AM

How'd you all feel if he was really innocent?

by Anonymousreply 279March 18, 2019 4:38 AM

R275 THANK YOU. If this was Reddit I would guild that post. You tackled everything--from the shady parents who are after money to the accusers themselves who lack complete credibility. Even got the DL gay, white racism in--the people who keep posting (it's the same two or three folks) hundreds of anti-MJ replies hate Michael Jackson because regardless of what they claim--they see Jackson as black person who is accused of targeting a white person. And in their minds that just won't do. Nevermind that as adults the accusers denied it ever happened. Nevermind that the stories don't add up. Nevermind evidence suggests this was all invented around 2012. Nevermind that the other "victims" say nothing ever happened. Nevermind that even a reasonable defense points to duplicity at work here. They aren't such staunch advocates of the accusers because of any major evidence against Jackson--it's woefully deficient and circumstantial--much less that of any serial abuser like Weinstein or Savile (who they would never advocate this hard against.) They post here so much because they are trying to defend a narrative that they themselves feel has to be true. Even in the absence of evidence. That Michael Jackson is a bad, black man whose white accusers say he did something bad to a white person simply on their word alone, regardless of what the rest of us know to be true.

by Anonymousreply 280March 18, 2019 4:39 AM

But, but...he only molested 5 kids! What about all the pedos that molest 6?!

by Anonymousreply 281March 18, 2019 4:39 AM

Sorry if this has been covered already, but has the nutty OP explained how he reconciles his belief in Jacko’s innocence with the undisputed reality that he moved heaven and earth to sleep in the same bed with prepubescent boys night after night after night and ditched each of the boys once they reached ~13 years of age?

Or that he had a security alarm system set up outside his bedroom to alert him whenever someone approached?

Or that his other accusers don’t have these supposed credibility issues?

by Anonymousreply 282March 18, 2019 4:40 AM

R275 & R280, feel free to answer my question as well.

by Anonymousreply 283March 18, 2019 4:44 AM

How has Jordan been proven a liar and extortionist? We have never heard his side of the story and most likely, never will.

by Anonymousreply 284March 18, 2019 4:45 AM

No, sorry, r244 and r247--stupid is stupid. And r244, it wasn't a spelling mistake--it's not knowing the difference between "gone" and "went."

by Anonymousreply 285March 18, 2019 4:49 AM

Give it a rest R285. No one gives a shit except you.

by Anonymousreply 286March 18, 2019 4:53 AM

But maybe it's unfair of me to judge--maybe it's okay with r244/r247 if they sound like they're from the Ozarks.

by Anonymousreply 287March 18, 2019 4:52 AM

[quote] the people who keep posting (it's the same two or three folks) hundreds of anti-MJ replies hate Michael Jackson because regardless of what they claim--they see Jackson as black person who is accused of targeting a white person.

Uh, no, we see him as an adult who liked to screw very young kids. White pedos are equally disgusting.

by Anonymousreply 288March 18, 2019 4:53 AM

Yeah, what r288 said--pulling the race card when it comes to Jackson and the charges against him are as absurd as OJ Simpson pulling the race card in his murder trial. Downright laughable.

by Anonymousreply 289March 18, 2019 4:58 AM

R265 No way (except in Janbots wettest dreams) has Janet been loved by 90% of the DL.

by Anonymousreply 290March 18, 2019 5:11 AM

RE R282: I will answer your question--

"has the nutty OP explained how he reconciles his belief in Jacko’s innocence with the undisputed reality that he moved heaven and earth to sleep in the same bed with prepubescent boys night after night after night and ditched each of the boys once they reached ~13 years of age?"

I don't have to understand Jackson's odd behavior. I can simply ask the many children (as the LEO/FBI did) who did not wait 33 years to make an accusation after he died. We can also look at the kids who have come forward who also shared that bed and reaffirm as adults that nothing inappropriate happened with Jackson. Speculation ends there.

"Or that he had a security alarm system set up outside his bedroom to alert him whenever someone approached?"

Michael Jackson had a net worth of over one billion when he was alive, an alarm in his living space is not a bombshell revelation. Culkin described this alarm as a motion sensor that would make a "dong dong" when someone approached his hallway. This is hardly a Matt Lauer situation, who would push a button and lock women in his office.

"Or that his other accusers don’t have these supposed credibility issues?"

They all do, and they are massive. Gavin lost--by a jury who voted 9-3 to acquit Jackson because of major credibility issues. Chandler's case is the definition of credibility problems. His son's confession under drugs, voicemails plotting the accusation days before, and complete lack of a desire to pursue criminal charges after settling his civil claim is highly suspect. Details about Wade's current accusations show he has a major credibility crisis ahead of him. And James Safechuck has no texts, emails,, documents, notes or anything resembling proof. Neither does his mother he claims he told in 2005. The only thing clutches is 30 year old jewelry collection from the man he says put his tongue in his anus hundreds of times 3 decades ago.

by Anonymousreply 291March 18, 2019 5:13 AM

R289 is idiotic. OJ pulling the race card in his murder trial was not absurd or laughable. It just proves you have no idea what you're talking about and lack even a rudimentary grasp of race relations during the 1990s.

by Anonymousreply 292March 18, 2019 5:15 AM

R291 Oh, yes. Janet's image salvaging team was Sunshine Sachs during nipplegate. Now the pieces all fit together!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 293March 18, 2019 5:17 AM

Sure Jan, r292. An Oj Simpson defender to boot!

Anyway, isn't this inevitable thread a little late in coming? Thought I would've seen Michael Jackson stans here before now.

by Anonymousreply 294March 18, 2019 5:17 AM

R294 Your poor reading comprehension skills and lack of discernment explain why you are likely unemployed and live in a trailer park home in Mississippi or Texas.

Michael Jackson's fans have been defending him against these false claims in the Leaving Neverland threads from parts 4 - 10. That includes setting the record straight and providing context to these allegations and their accusers. Much to the chagrin of those supporting the lying accuser's failed extortion and lawsuit attempt by peddling fake news and tabloid claims from twenty years ago. We will continue to do so indefinitely.

by Anonymousreply 295March 18, 2019 5:27 AM

Cool, Stan at r295! Carry on, crazy!

by Anonymousreply 296March 18, 2019 5:31 AM

Sleeping in the same bed as little boys--perfectly normal!

by Anonymousreply 297March 18, 2019 5:32 AM

I'm a gay woman. I had this neighbors daughter that liked my dog and the feeling was mutual. She would come to my home and play with my dog. I always made sure my door was unlocked so her parents or brother could walk in at any time. What a fucking sad commentary that I had to protect myself, even knowing I wasn't doing anything wrong.

by Anonymousreply 298March 18, 2019 5:40 AM

R297 Seeing someone else sue a pop star, forgetting that the man who you claim licked your anus "hundreds of times" and tried to fuck you (drawing blood) could even be REALIZED as abusive behavuir until seeing a therapist (in your mid 30s) a year and a half before suing with the same lawyer at the beginning of the sentence. --perfectly normal!

by Anonymousreply 299March 18, 2019 5:53 AM

Posting link again as a HIGHLY recommended breakdown.

Wade Robson’s Emails: ‘A MASTER OF DECEPTION’ What Wade Robson doesn’t understand is that the version he is currently promoting (“I always remembered the ‘abuse’, but didn’t see it as such and thought it was consensual love”) is a totally impossible one.

This theory is devised by real pedophiles, and Robson is unfortunately giving it certain veracity by passing it off as truth – and the worst that could happen to all of us would be believing that this is indeed possible.

If applied to 14-year old teenagers the theory could at least look more or less plausible because of the teenagers’ own stormy sexual issues, confusion and turmoil of emotions. They can imagine that they are in love when it is only curiosity and the adventurous spirit that is driving them into some dubious relationships. At their awkward age adolescents don’t often understand what they themselves want and certainly don’t realize what their escapades into the luring world of adults may result in.

But what may be confusion for a teenager is no longer confusion for a 23-year old man, who is grown up enough to realize that a heinous thing like ‘anal penetration’ of a child, for example, cannot be ‘consensual love’ and can be nothing else but abuse. In fact thinking different at so mature an age is actually another way of supporting pedophilia, only from the opposite end of the spectrum.

In other words if the 23-year old Robson who testified in the defense of Jackson at the 2005 trial had really been a victim, he had the option to say that he hated or loved it, or choose not to testify at all, but the option of defending the alleged perpetrator thinking that there could be ‘consensual love’ between a seven-year old boy and a grown up man was simply not open to him. When you are an adult, believing theories like that is not only ridiculous but is actually a crime.

MORE AT THE LINK BELOW

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 300March 18, 2019 6:00 AM

Only Wade can understand the inner workings of his mind, and he's only answerable to himself. His actions are consistent with the trauma that goes along with abuse and the five stages of grief. A 40 year old man that admits to sharing his bed with dozens of children however....

by Anonymousreply 301March 18, 2019 6:00 AM

[quote] Yeah, what [R288] said--pulling the race card when it comes to Jackson and the charges against him are as absurd as OJ Simpson pulling the race card in his murder trial. Downright laughable.

1. That expression is stupid.

2. I didn't have to "pull" anything. All I had to do was read the comments here. Which comments, the "Go back to lipstick alley" comments (as if Jackson doesn't have millions of fans of different races all over the globe) and the comments about Jackson's family. Datalounge has an overtly racist history. Some of it gets deleted and some of it remains, for the world to see. Have you not seen the Academy Awards threads. Some Dataloungers (consciously and subconsciously) obviously resent successful black people. There is always this underlying notion that black success is unearned. Even with the Jackson family most of whom get nothing from the estate, the comments often center around the idea that Jackson's siblings may get something that they didn't earn. I cant think of any other family where Datalounge was so concerned about how one members wealth is distributed. When wealthy people die the money is usually left to relatives. That is not unusual. In this case it was left to Jackson's children and his mother. But even if Jackson chose to spread it out throughout the family. Who gives a fuck. The estate's attorney's are getting rich. I've seen no other celeb's wealth scrutinized (after their death) here like Jackson's. Its ridiculous.

OJ Simpson's defense introduced race because the LAPD has a well documented history of racial discrimination. Mark Fuhrman was a racist. Had those 2 things not been true; race would not have mattered. Most of us are familiar with the kind of conversations that whites have when nonwhites are not present. We see them often posted here. Lets not pretend otherwise.

by Anonymousreply 302March 18, 2019 6:03 AM

F&F 300

by Anonymousreply 303March 18, 2019 6:04 AM

[quote] Only Wade can understand the inner workings of his mind, and he's only answerable to himself. His actions are consistent with the trauma that goes along with abuse and the five stages of grief. A 40 year old man that admits to sharing his bed with dozens of children however....

The only thing that is consistent about Wade Robson is the fact that he lies unnecessarily and almost pathologically.

by Anonymousreply 304March 18, 2019 6:05 AM

R302 Well that's it. All else has failed and only the race card remains. Time to close the offices of Sunshine Sachs.

by Anonymousreply 305March 18, 2019 6:07 AM

[quote] F&F 300

How juvenile. We don't need your announcements.

[quote] [R302] Well that's it. All else has failed and only the race card remains. Time to close the offices of Sunshine Sachs.

That's your argument not mine. I've addressed why I doubt the accusations. It has nothing to do with race. My comments regarding race are observations about Datalounge.

by Anonymousreply 306March 18, 2019 6:12 AM

r80, but they testified in open court that he did not molest them. Were they honest when he was alive he might not be dead but in jail

by Anonymousreply 307March 18, 2019 6:14 AM

As much as I despise Dunce the King of Perverts, I'm glad that he overdosed and didn't get the chance to buy his way out of another bunch of accusations.

by Anonymousreply 308March 18, 2019 6:22 AM

R308 As much as you are glad that: MJ "overdosed and didn't get the chance to buy his way out of another bunch of accusations," the rest of us feel the same way that Dennis Robson's father took a rope to his neck to avoid having to look at his failed son another day longer. No telling how he would have felt about them making up an abuse allegation on his other major psychological issues.

by Anonymousreply 309March 18, 2019 6:29 AM

r122, you've taken that out of context.

There is no new proof that MJ molested boys, the documentary isn't credible. So if you believe his is a pedo now, you should have a year ago. All the same evidence we have now we had over a decade ago.

by Anonymousreply 310March 18, 2019 6:34 AM

Dunce the King of Perverts watched his cock expand,

when he molested little boys in a place called Neverland.

by Anonymousreply 311March 18, 2019 6:36 AM

[quote] Dunce the King of Perverts watched his cock expand, when he molested little boys in a place called Neverland.

Are you intentionally trying to make the accusers (and yourself) look foolish?

by Anonymousreply 312March 18, 2019 6:47 AM

That is just sick r309.

by Anonymousreply 313March 18, 2019 6:56 AM

Here's a current picture of R309.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 314March 18, 2019 7:00 AM

Better than you right now R314. Pick of you at home right now below.

And R313, Oh, well, you can go ahead and file that under “not my problem." Can't take it, don't dish it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 315March 18, 2019 7:53 AM

People use public figures as whipping boys for their own abuse stories.

by Anonymousreply 316March 18, 2019 8:24 AM

I have to laugh when people talk about Wade like he was some household name. If not for the whole Britney/Justin thing, only industry insiders would know his name. Jimmy Safechuck is also being described as a childhood actor but his sole credit was that Pepsi commercial.

by Anonymousreply 317March 18, 2019 8:45 AM

I mean....what's to gain here? If someone is deluded enough to defend this creepy, textbook pedo, how could you possibly get through to them? They CLEARY lack objectivity and their FUCKING eyeballs don't work.

by Anonymousreply 318March 18, 2019 9:39 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 319March 18, 2019 9:47 AM

Correction, R319: Jacko was raping Wade at 7 and Jimmy at 10...

by Anonymousreply 320March 18, 2019 9:50 AM

Sick of the pedo OP starting thread after thread to defend the atrocity that was MJ.

by Anonymousreply 321March 18, 2019 9:50 AM

Can't help but wonder how big a check it would take for Robson to slink back into Nowheresville.

by Anonymousreply 322March 18, 2019 10:08 AM

Agreed, R321... but there is simply no reasoning with these crazed lunatics. This guy pretty much sums it up:

[quote]However, in actuality, a lot of the interaction between Michael Jackson and his “fans” can easily be explained by a disorder called “Celebrity Worship Syndrome” (CWS). It's an obsessive-addictive disorder and if you think about it, Michael Jackson was the biggest celebrity so it makes sense that he has the most extreme “fans” with this disorder. A link has also been scientifically proven between poor mental health and people with “CWS”. Sufferers have a higher level of mental illness, anxiety and depression. It's also clear that, in my opinion, Michael Jackson was probably the most blatant example of a narcissist since Narcissus himself gazed at his own reflection and I do think that Michael Jackson fanatics emulate him and project their own narcissism and psychopathy onto Jackson (like he is a blank canvas … an idea that he propagated with the “I could live on stage” idea), so that if you criticize Michael Jackson, they actually feel a physical reaction and physical pain, as if you are criticizing THEM. That is because the fanatics often do not have a fully formed personality of their own and it is intertwined with that of a Pop Star that they do not know and have not met. It’s inherently unstable and a very sensitive unhealthy obsession for them.

[quote]It generates toxicity which elicits rage, anger and aggression, which combined with the obsessive-addictive disorder is a recipe for disaster in the “fans” own life and anybody around them. I have unfortunately been around them since I was that small child. They have no insight and are so blinded in their idols reflected glory that they have no qualms about defending child abusers and promoting child abuse and adults sleeping in a bed with unrelated children. I also suspect that many have low or non-existent levels of fear and empathy. I have seen (with my own eyes) the fans attack police and security, run into busy roads and put their own lives and the lives of others around them in danger to chase Jackson’s vehicle. They are none the wiser because they don’t exhibit normal reasonable self-reflection and judgement.

[quote]This toxicity surrounded Michael Jackson like an aura, which infected everything in its orbit. He was “untouchable” and thus in his fans minds, they too, in their heads, after mental gymnastics including psychological projection, are too, untouchable. He empowers them. They are still infected. He is their life and the reason they live and don’t have to face “real life”. Those enraged and moved to physical anger by criticism of Michael Jackson's behaviour recently, very possibly suffer from “CWS”. It is unhealthy and these people need medical help, in my opinion. However, if they break the law and abuse and harass, they should also be prosecuted. I have had to explain in a very methodically kindergarten standard level way, that they do not have to attack victims and alleged victims of child abuse to defend their idol. That is discouraging legitimate victims of child abuse coming forward and has a very detrimental impact on child well fare. They can defend without attacking and victim shaming. I have seen that this concept is like explaining Quantum Mechanics to a toddler. They literally can’t comprehend what I'm saying. I mean that literally. They cannot comprehend it. You need empathy and intelligence to understand it, which they just do not have. These are the people that Michael Jackson always attracted and they have always disgusted me.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 323March 18, 2019 10:23 AM

Of course not, r282. All the Jackson defenders can do is shit on Wade - notice how they never actually defend Jackson or his character, but only attack the abuse victims. OP and his sockpuppets are as whack as their lord and savior, the King of Pedos.

by Anonymousreply 324March 18, 2019 2:55 PM

Fuck you, MJ stans.

It was all "That Chandler guy is just so shady, you just can't believe anything he says!"

Then: But that family from the trial were obvious grifters. How could you trust those people, look how trustworthy Wade Robson is in comparison! (And yes, he was the first witness of defense for a reason. He started the defense with a bang, he was pretty much their best.)

Now, Wade Robson is just so shady, no one could ever believe him!? And Safechuck probably something, something.

Fuck you! I understand you can not deal with reality, but just shut the hell up and stop going after victims of childhood sex abuse. That can not be to much to ask, not from anyone.

by Anonymousreply 325March 18, 2019 3:40 PM

[quote]There is no new proof that MJ molested boys, the documentary isn't credible. So if you believe his is a pedo now, you should have a year ago. All the same evidence we have now we had over a decade ago.

Well, there is TWO more accusers. All Jackson fans know how deafening Safechuck's silence was and how much you all wanted him to comment. Now he commented and then some. This should clear up all open questions for anyone with the slightest bit of sense.

Wade's lie was a huge part of the reason Jackson was acquitted. Him taking it back (and then some) means everything. For anyone with the slightest bit of sense.

by Anonymousreply 326March 18, 2019 3:53 PM

I love how, in claiming Wade is nothing but a liar, the stans actually are admitting Jackson abused him, since they claim he lied on the stand about Jackson not abusing him.

by Anonymousreply 327March 18, 2019 3:57 PM

[quote] Of course not, [R282]. All the Jackson defenders can do is shit on Wade - notice how they never actually defend Jackson or his character

I'm not sure what you mean. People have defended Jackson's character for years. In fact there are several posts like R323 who dog fans because they worship his character.

R323 That article is an oversimplification to the extreme. It's true that Jackson has obsessive fans, but it's also true that many of the people who are now defending Jackson are not fans or once thought he was guilty before they did their own research into past allegations. They are more likely to think critically, not to excuse Jackson's behavior. As a matter of fact, many people, including Jackson fans, will admit that he was a very flawed person. However, as flawed as he was, he still has the right to a defense, especially now as he's not here to defend himself. Wades and James suits were tossed out due to lack of merit. Notice no one mentions the statute of limitations anymore. That's because their suits were continually amended to include relatively recent contact with Jackson, which in the case of Safechuck, has already been debunked.

As for the disgusting claim in R323's article that we are attacking abuse victims, I will refer you to this excellent passage by Stereo Williams, someone who initially supported the documentary.

[quote] I am not a journalist, but if all I am good for, as a writer, is churning out Woke Nigga™ rhetoric for white liberal consumption, then I have failed in every way that matters. Mastering the jargon and slogans was never my goal; they sit in service to larger ideas that will sometimes be messy and complicated in application. Many have consistently stated over the past few days that victimhood doesn’t always look the way you’d expect it to; well, standing up for victims won’t always look the way you expect it to, either. If you are of the mind that “regardless of whether these guys are right — I know he did something,” then I need for you, as Reed himself has intimated, to de-center Michael Jackson. Your need for cultural closure on a 25-year scandal may be blinding you to the fact that this particular saga isn’t going to end with a pedophile in handcuffs. Michael Jackson is dead and his legacy has already been tarnished. No — this story is going to most likely end with a lawsuit settlement that will no doubt look like a victory — now that the men who filed said lawsuit have the visibility and push of public opinion behind them. I don’t know how anyone’s idea of justice can include persons possibly exploiting abuse survivors and an entire movement to support victims, then getting a huge payday for it. That’s why questions can’t be shuttered for the sake of pseudo-empathy. Fighting for the oppressed should never require weaponized naiveté. I don’t know when that has ever helped anyone.

by Anonymousreply 328March 18, 2019 3:56 PM

I was a fan of Michael Jackson's since he was with The Jackson Five. Back in 2005 I believed he was a pedo. I wish it weren't true because I really liked his music. I don't own nor do I listen to any of his music now.

by Anonymousreply 329March 18, 2019 3:57 PM

R325 R326 327 Nice try. These two accusers are not believable. Wade is a scumbag, and his emails and actions suggest he is also a pathological liar. Hetried to hide a wild book proposal right before filing his lawsuit, and Safechuck is a nut who decided to make claims after seeing Wade in TV—first going through 18 months of therapy to “realize” his hundreds of abuse attempts (rimmed by Jackson) were wrong (he is 40), then teaming up with Wade’s lawyer to sue Jackson 33 years after the abuse and the man is dead.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 330March 18, 2019 3:58 PM

Not to mention, Wade was also dating Michael Jackson’s niece (a relationship that lasted 7 years before he cheated on her) WHILE he also claimed to be in love with Michael Jackson, who was molesting him also “hundreds” of times. Unlike James Safechuck though he didn’t forget and need therapy to remember, so what’s Wade’s excuse?

Dan Reed claimed on the radio that: ““'The fact that he was boyfriend and girlfriend with Brandi at the age of 12 or 13 doesn't mean he wasn't seeing Jackson too but I don't really follow the logic.'

What?????????

by Anonymousreply 331March 18, 2019 4:03 PM

[quote]many of the people who are now defending Jackson are not fans...

Yeah, they're fellow kiddie diddlers.

by Anonymousreply 332March 18, 2019 4:04 PM

Michael gave oral to first graders. He was a sick pedo. Facts hurt, which is why the Jackson's are making up lies about MJ's donor children and leaking it to the press. There sicker than sick.

by Anonymousreply 333March 18, 2019 4:06 PM

Court document from September 9th 2016:

'Plaintiff is unable to continue writing songs or producing music, as well as being unable to continue performing and directing in any manner or capacity whatsoever.'

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 334March 18, 2019 4:06 PM

Cont: R334

September 20th 2016 Facebook Post

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 335March 18, 2019 4:07 PM

[quote] Wade's lie was a huge part of the reason Jackson was acquitted. Him taking it back (and then some) means everything. For anyone with the slightest bit of sense.

Thomas Meseareau was confident, he said he didn't think he needed to put up a a defense since the prosecution's case was so weak. All this makes it all the weirder that Jackson would make his key witness someone he allegedly raped hundreds of times.

by Anonymousreply 336March 18, 2019 4:08 PM

It has always been a dream of mine to dance with Wade Robson. Now he is directing and choreographing for me.' -re: R335

Contradicting the reasons for his breakdowns:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 337March 18, 2019 4:07 PM

The suits were thrown out because of lack of evidence. The documentary provides no new evidence. If all it takes is an emotionally manipulative to documentary to successfully sue the estate, then that would make a mockery of our legal system.

by Anonymousreply 338March 18, 2019 4:09 PM

It speaks volumes that you pedo defenders are so obsessed with only discrediting one of Jacko's victims.

by Anonymousreply 339March 18, 2019 4:09 PM

Brett Barnes is also threatening to sue Reed and HBO, who aired the film that he believes (falsely) implies that he was abused by Michael Jackson. It’s so sickening to see these two, Wade and James, try to gain credibility on the backs of innocent people when their own actions have cost them the little credibility they had. I’m glad other men are coming out to reaffirm that no abuse ever happened.

Reed had no issue cutting out the obviously fake scenes about the pathetic jewelry collection James Safechuck claimed Michael gave him in a “mock wedding” in the UK version of the documentary—which many believe he did so because it mimicked a popular fiction book concerning Michael Jackson in the U.K. They should remove all references to Barnes also—and others who believe they were incorrectly portrayed in the film.

by Anonymousreply 340March 18, 2019 4:11 PM

I am glad I watched the documentary. I find Jackson downright obsession over these littl boys absolutely sick. I am glad to read more and more companies are abandoning their partnership with this molester. The museum did the right thing by removing the MJ items His relationship with these children is nightmarish

by Anonymousreply 341March 18, 2019 4:14 PM

Another thing “innocently” missing from the U.K. Version of the film. They claim these convenient edits were done to make room for “ads.”

Wade's wife lied. In the documentary "Leaving Neverland," she said she was not a victim of sexual abuse (video below) and didn't know how to help wade; however, on their family fund page (and a since edited out bit from Wade’s website), it stated she was herself a victim of child abuse. Just listen to her:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 342March 18, 2019 4:15 PM

R342 It's interesting that in this one sided documentary, they couldn't even get Amada Robson or Stephanie Safechuck to get their story straight. Joy Robson is also dubious as well. She completely denies her role being a relentless stage mother.

by Anonymousreply 343March 18, 2019 4:22 PM

r331 You are an idiot and you are sick. What's Wade's excuse? He was groomed and abused. Same as everyone's. Why was he dating Brandi at 12 years old.... What? Why the hell not? Have I missed some memo about child abuse victims never dating?

You deserve the pain that being an MJ stan brings. I hate everything about this, but when the next accusation comes along I will take comfort in thinking about you. When, not if.

by Anonymousreply 344March 18, 2019 4:30 PM

R343 Exactly. James had to say he told his mother in 2005 of the abuse to avoid looking like a complete crackpot who woke up one day and decided to see a therapist and then sue with James, but there’s not a single shred of evidence he ever mentioned it to her or she made the slightest move to do anything or even tell anyone else. And the 30 year old jewelry box claim was laughable also. He thought video of him and Jackson in a jewelry store would be his smoking gun—but they didn’t even buy anything there. Yet here he is with the previously packed rings from the man who he says licked his anus hundreds of times 3 decades ago.

by Anonymousreply 345March 18, 2019 4:30 PM

R334 Wade’s excuse is that he lies so often he can’t keep his story straight, and no one believes he was dating Brandi Jackson for 7 years while in love with her UNCLE. Even Dan Reed can’t spend that nonsense.

by Anonymousreply 346March 18, 2019 4:32 PM

I would believe them if they donated every dime of anything they are rewarded in a lawsuit to some organization that helps children.

Because it's all about 'healing'... right?

by Anonymousreply 347March 18, 2019 4:32 PM

R347 They would never do that.

by Anonymousreply 348March 18, 2019 4:40 PM

[quote] Of course not, [R282]. All the Jackson defenders can do is shit on Wade - notice how they never actually defend Jackson or his character, but only attack the abuse victims. OP and his sockpuppets are as whack as their lord and savior, the King of Pedos

[quote] However, in actuality, a lot of the interaction between Michael Jackson and his “fans” can easily be explained by a disorder called “Celebrity Worship Syndrome” (CWS). It's an obsessive-addictive disorder and if you think about it, Michael Jackson was the biggest celebrity so it makes sense that he has the most extreme “fans” with this disorder.

[quote] Sick of the pedo OP starting thread after thread to defend the atrocity that was MJ.

I've not started thread after thread. You will find thread after thread of misinformation being posted by others. Every debunked tabloid rumor has been posted and every new rumor has been posted. All of it is being accepted as fact. This particular article simply lays out Robson's inconsistencies. Which I don't believe should be ignored. Even if the allegations were true (I personally don't believe that they are); would that give Robson the right to tell as many lies as he can create. No it wouldn't. And the documentary offers no corroborating witnesses and no actual evidence. The credibility of the documentary rest solely on the shoulders Robson's and Safechuck's own personal credibility. Both on whom are represented by the same law firm. Both of whom have obvious credibility issues. This particular article focuses on Robson.

I explained my own personal conclusions:

[quote] I personally questioned his relationships with children. I, like probably most, assumed that Jackson initiated the relationship with Robson. Then I read his mom's testimony. She worked very hard to establish that relationship with Jackson. She continued to contact him. He did not seek Wade out. His mom sought Jackson out. She even talks about being angry and "cutting" Jackson off because he did not contact Wade. Jackson had access to and relationships with hundreds of children, boys and girls. The 4 accusers though all have one thing in common. They all have questionably shady parents. Gavin Arvizo's parents were straight up professional grifters who targeted a number of celebs. You have to wonder why more children have not come forward and why no children with decent parents (who had no serious financial problems) have not come forward. Then when did Wade and Safechuck come forward? When the themselves faced financial problems. Joy Robson's testimony, the testimony regarding the Arvizo's financial schemes all really changed my perspective. The more details that I've read; the more I am convinced of Jackson's innocence. The actual evidence does not support the accusations. Wade's inconsistencies discredit his accusations. And Robson owes the Jackson estate 70,000 and Safechuck is also in debt to the estate due to their failed court cases. They were both already having financial problems. Now they have attorney's fees to pay. It seems as though they have really dug holes for themselves. Millions of people feel the same way.

I explained my conclusions without the name calling, ad hominem attacks and without the over the top hysterics that we see here coming from Jackson's critics. I started the thread no because I am an obsessed fan. I don't personally own any of Jackson's music but because again the more I've read about the case; the more convinced I've become on Jackson's innocence. We can discuss the accusations without all of the insults and nonsense. Shouting "pedo" at everyone who disagrees with you is stupid. That's not a debate. It accomplishes nothing, other than making Jackson's critics looks foolish.

If you don't want to have this conversation or you are "sick" of this thread. There are 100 other threads that you may visit.

by Anonymousreply 349March 18, 2019 4:47 PM

Nobody doubted Sandusky victims because they sued. MJ fans are desperate. This is the most powerful expose of MJ as a serial child abuser that we've ever seen. Props to Dan Reed.

by Anonymousreply 350March 18, 2019 4:52 PM

R347 This documentary is a last minute attempt to try and impact their appeal and earn some sympathy from the public. I’m sure Robson is at least hoping to make some money from the book draft that publishers refused to pick up before this all started. It’s ironic that it took 4 repeated discovery demands and a court order to even get a draft copy. Safechuck also stands to benefit from the exposure, and can hopefully get a decent software job and out of his financial crisis. Dan Reed’s aggressive (and often puzzling) defenses of these two in this documentary seem to suggest he has a vested interest in something undisclosed also.

They’ve exhausted almost every legal attempt now to get money and are both tens of thousands in debt to the estate for legal fees resulting from their frivolous, dismissed lawsuits (which Wade and James’ lawyer admitted in the first complaint was past the statue of limitations (thus unlikely to succeed), and so filed under seal to try and negotiate a settlement). If you look at the legal documents in this case, you can see that both the judge and MJ’s attorneys from the beginning acknowledge it is likely to be dismissed for these violations. When that became apparent, Wade went on the Today show shortly thereafter and started pushing the story to prevent that from happening.

They first tried with Wade by suing the estate, and when that was dismissed for expected statutory violations the same lawyer had James try a different legal strategy by going after the companies.

Of course, a company isn’t responsible for the actions of its dead performer 33 years earlier (with no evidence to boot). So this was dismissed and they’re now appealing. The irony of it all is that in filing these lawsuits, they were repeatedly forced to produce discovery (emails, therapy timelines, book drafts, etc.) that further made it obvious all of this was concocted shortly before the first suit was filed in 2012/2013.

And R350, Sandusky has a number of accusers like Weinstein, and prosecutors were able to pull out half a dozen of the most credible cream of the crop in his trial because he was actually a serial abuser, unlike Michael Jackson.

by Anonymousreply 351March 18, 2019 4:55 PM

The evidence is Robson and Safechuck and Chandler and the Latino kid from the trial - forgot his name. Four (4) accusers we actually know by name and face. (even though they can expect to be harassed until the end of time. How many accusers is enough?) And all the staff who said they saw him molesting/taking showers with kids etc. ect. And Jackson admitting he likes to share the bed with boys. Discussion over, case closed.

If you are not even a fan, you have no excuse for your insanity. Find a better conspiracy theory to feel important about Literally every single one is better. I heard the Queen is a lizard. Run along and research that.

by Anonymousreply 352March 18, 2019 4:57 PM

R352 Again, look at other serial abusers you mentioned before like Weinstein, Sandusky, Savile. Dozens of victims coming forward, Detailed accounts of a disturbing and escalating pattern of abuse and manipulation; and they didn’t claim to forget the abuse. Or claim they were in love with him. Or testify for him twice. Or try to hide a book deal. Or try to wed at his home during his trial. Or profit off of being a victim. The list goes on and on. Michael Jackson’s 4 accusers are all the same in that none of what they say is overwhelmingly convincing to either majority of people.

by Anonymousreply 353March 18, 2019 5:03 PM

[quote]These two accusers are not believable.

Yeah, actuality they are.

by Anonymousreply 354March 18, 2019 5:04 PM

R352 Jackson being acquitted in the latter and not even indicted in the former is immaterial I guess. Those staff members were cross examined during the trial and whose testimonies crumbled. Yet you're the one lecturing about conspiracy theories? Whatever.

by Anonymousreply 355March 18, 2019 5:04 PM

And furthermore, if Leaving Neverland is to be believed, Jackson has hundreds of more boys who were also abused—it’s just nonsense. Yet, the other two people the doc tried to claim were also being abused are denying it and one is threatening to sue HBO.

R354 Sure, Jan.

by Anonymousreply 356March 18, 2019 5:05 PM

[quote]FUCK WADE ROBSON

Apparently Michael did.

And, if this thread is any indication, he is continuing to do so to this very day.

by Anonymousreply 357March 18, 2019 5:11 PM

Just a radio report in my neck of the woods. MJ music played since the airing of the doc zero. I have an hour and a half commute coming and going from the hospital I work at. Six days a week Before the doc I could hear maybe four to seven songs in that time span. I don think many radio stations are announcing that they are banning his music. But I am in metro Detroit where Jackson was a staple. How many times did I hear Bohemian Rapsody this morning? Twice the uptick for Queen is phenomenal

by Anonymousreply 358March 18, 2019 5:11 PM

R339 Nailed it. The pedo defenders only ever focus on Robson, never Safechuck. They won't even go there because it's so obvious he was abused.

by Anonymousreply 359March 18, 2019 5:12 PM

It’s too bad Jackson passed away without really being able to analyze his mental capacity. Why did he get so obsessive about sleeping with these young boys. He and Sandusky are so similar in their patterns of abuse

by Anonymousreply 360March 18, 2019 5:16 PM

I spend thousands on therapy +. yoga extra to recover from my CSA. I hope James and Wade get ALLLLLL the fucking money. I also hope the Jackson's are destroyed.

by Anonymousreply 361March 18, 2019 5:27 PM

Both of them belong in jail for perjury. There is no scenario where they told the truth both times.

by Anonymousreply 362March 18, 2019 5:32 PM

R358 has a point.

by Anonymousreply 363March 18, 2019 5:33 PM

r362 Safechuck never committed perjury. Robson did, but there is a statue of limitations. Perjury is not murder, you know. And to prosecute CSA victims for lying about their trauma is fucking despicable anyway, asshole.

by Anonymousreply 364March 18, 2019 5:37 PM

You Jacko defenders are fucking NUTS. Oh my god.

by Anonymousreply 365March 18, 2019 5:48 PM

Good observation r360. I hope a professional is getting closer to the core of Sandusky 's motivations.

by Anonymousreply 366March 18, 2019 5:56 PM

Sorry, r302--no.

"1. That expression is stupid."

It applies whether you like it or not.

"2. I didn't have to "pull" anything."

But you DID pull the race card for MJ, just like OJ did for himself. The irony is no two black men wanted to be white, figuratively in one case and literally in another, as those two.

Let's not pretend otherwise.

by Anonymousreply 367March 18, 2019 5:58 PM

It boggles the mind how disturbing the Basheer interview was and how long his abuse was allowed to continue. His treatment of his own children was shocking. I believe Blanket is the most messed up. Is this child in therapy? Does he speak at all. I wish nothing but the best for his three children who seem so damaged. Is Paris suicidal or just a desperate plea for attention.

by Anonymousreply 368March 18, 2019 6:02 PM

Couldn't agree more, r365.

by Anonymousreply 369March 18, 2019 6:19 PM

That Martin Bashir interview was bizarre R368. As I watched it I kept thinking, this is not normal. That was the first time I believed Michael was sexually abuse young boys.

by Anonymousreply 370March 18, 2019 6:30 PM

*abusing

by Anonymousreply 371March 18, 2019 6:31 PM

R365 When there is much doubt, one should be skeptical. There are many credible sources for those who want to learn about the effects of childhood sexual abuse. LN is not it.

by Anonymousreply 372March 18, 2019 6:37 PM

R368 what really boggles the mind is that after settling with the Chandlers for circa $25 million, and paying the Francias $2 million, Jackson STILL kept having young boys sleep in his room. That's not kindness, that's compulsion.

(And those are just they payoffs we know about.)

by Anonymousreply 373March 18, 2019 6:37 PM

Trump talks about his friendship with Jackson. DL heads explode!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 374March 18, 2019 7:10 PM

No we're not, R365...!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 375March 18, 2019 7:20 PM

[quote] Sorry, [R302]--no. "1. That expression is stupid." It applies whether you like it or not. "2. I didn't have to "pull" anything." But you DID pull the race card for MJ, just like OJ did for himself. The irony is no two black men wanted to be white, figuratively in one case and literally in another, as those two. Let's not pretend otherwise.

The irony is that the wanting to be "white" to which you refer, is really a desire to be free from societal racial oppression. It is the desire to not have to ever experience the indignities of white supremacist racism. Both men were born before the civil rights movement. Both experienced the indignities and both found out that fame and success in many cases still does not transcend race. Who wouldn't want to live free of prejudice and bigotry. They like any minority no doubt wanted to be free from the bigoted bullshit that is regurgitated here every day. Regurgitated and dragged into even the most seemingly benign thread topic. The thread history here speaks for itself. Jackson's make up artists has spoken about covering his Vitiligo patches with dark makeup until those patches were too large and too numerous. Jackson then chose to bleach his skin and make it all one color. He also has rhinoplasty. Which resulted in scarring which resulted in more surgeries. Now its fine if you want to argue that every person who has rhinoplasty wants to white or whiter. Its silly but you can make that argument. You can also make the argument that every person who augments their lips or their behind wants to be black. Again silly, but you may make those silly arguments.

The "race card" expression is stupid because it implies that we don't live in a color blind post racial society. When the reality is that race consciously or subconsciously plays a role in most everything that we think or do in this country. You see it with even the most benign threads here at Datalounge. And again we know the types on conversations that whites have when not in the presence of nonwhites. 1/2 of the country elected a president who the majority of the country believes is a racist. Over eighty percent of Republicans still support and many because they believe he is a racist.

I didn't have to "pull the race card"; race was always on the table. It never leaves.

by Anonymousreply 376March 18, 2019 7:33 PM

[QUOTE]Both of them belong in jail for perjury. There is no scenario where they told the truth both times.

People who were fucked by an adult when they were little children are given leeway as they are psychologically damaged.

by Anonymousreply 377March 18, 2019 7:39 PM

Now that Sandusky's name has come up, the only nut jobs crazier than wacko Jacko fans are Penn State Football fans and Penn State alumni. Not only do they want Sandusky exonerated and Joe Paterno's reputation restored in full, they want the Penn State administrators who covered up this shit for years to be exonerated, restored to their former positions with full back pay, and the guy who wrote the report criticizing Penn State and Joe Paterno, Louis Freeh, put in jail for life.

by Anonymousreply 378March 18, 2019 7:43 PM

R370 You keep posting about the Bashir interview, which was heavily edited to portray MJ in a bad light. It is well known that Bashir purposefully staged and omitted many details from his film to create an imbalanced and biased representation of Jackson. For example, when Michael Jackson stated that he shared his bed with the boy in the film, Bashir removed the section where the boy added that Jackson slept on the floor.

Another example, in the documentary Bashir said about MJ's children: “They are restricted, they are overly protected. I was angry at the way that his children were made to suffer”. But what he said behind the scenes was this: “Your relationship with your children is spectacular. In fact, it almost makes me weep when I see you with them”. On Neverland, his documentary comment was: “One of the most disturbing things is the fact that many disadvantaged children go to Neverland. Is a dangerous place for a vulnerable child to be”. Here he wanted to imply that MJ was a child abuser. But what he said about Neverland behind the scenes was: “I was here yesterday and I saw it, and it’s nothing short of a spiritually, kind thing”.

We know all of this only because Jackson had instructed his own videographer to record every interview without cutting (alongside Bashir's camera crew.) As a result, you can see what Bashir omitted and you also see the interactions between interviews. I highly recommend doing so. Bashir's journalistic practices in that documentary still affect his reputation today and reveal why he was voted the 5th most distrusted journalist in the U.K.

As I told you before, If you are truly interested in that interview, I would suggest watching: Take Two: The Footage You Were Never Meant to See (also referred to as "the rebuttal video"), which was seen on Fox in the United States. This was presented by Maury Povich and contains even more material which Bashir omitted (it is numerous.)

by Anonymousreply 379March 18, 2019 7:44 PM

Wade Robson has absolutely zero credibility. Not only was he not abused, but his creepy excuse that he thought he was "in love" with Jackson well into adulthood (which is why he testified the second time) makes him sound like the true predator. There is no way he thought that was an acceptable cover for his repeated propensity to lie.

by Anonymousreply 380March 18, 2019 7:47 PM

R378, it's not mere coincidence that Brandi Jackson went to nutjob and Sandusky defender John Ziegler to tell her story.

by Anonymousreply 381March 18, 2019 7:50 PM

And once again, the fantards display a complete abandonment of logic in their defense of the kiddie-diddler. R362... ummm, if you REALLY think that Wade and James should both be in jail for having lied to the court in defense of Jacko, then you are admitting that they were indeed diddled.

by Anonymousreply 382March 18, 2019 7:52 PM

[quote] [R370] You keep posting about the Bashir interview, which was heavily edited to portray MJ in a bad light. It is well known that Bashir purposefully staged and omitted many details from his film to create an imbalanced and biased representation of Jackson. For example, when Michael Jackson stated that he shared his bed with the boy in the film, Bashir removed the section where the boy added that Jackson slept on the floor.

Unedited Bashir interview.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 383March 18, 2019 7:51 PM

R381 Dan Reed admitted Brandi dated Wade Robson while he was supposedly being abused hundreds of times. He has just made so many ridiculous excuses for the duplicitous actions of his accusers that he doesn't realize that his explanation is absurd.

“'The fact that he was boyfriend and girlfriend with Brandi at the age of 12 or 13 doesn't mean he wasn't seeing [being abused by hundreds of times] Jackson too but I don't really follow the logic.' -Dan Reed

by Anonymousreply 384March 18, 2019 7:52 PM

R379 That was my first comment about the Bashir interview.

by Anonymousreply 385March 18, 2019 7:53 PM

Jacko was a sicko and stunted at age 11 but robson comes froma family of grifters!

by Anonymousreply 386March 18, 2019 7:54 PM

R385 Then I apologize. There is another person trolling these threads who repeatedly references the "Bashir interview" as if it is credible, so I just reply with R379 to educate people who are truly interested in seeing the full story.

by Anonymousreply 387March 18, 2019 7:55 PM

[quote] Safechuck is a nut who decided to make claims after seeing Wade in TV—first going through 18 months of therapy to “realize” his hundreds of abuse attempts (rimmed by Jackson) were wrong (he is 40), then teaming up with Wade’s lawyer to sue Jackson 33 years after the abuse

Surprised more people don't bring this up. Wade is not the only one who doesn't seem credible. If you take Safechuck's words at face value, then what hid was arguably worse than Robson. He knew he was abused at the time, yet Robson still insists that he was in denial.

by Anonymousreply 388March 18, 2019 7:57 PM

[quote] Surprised more people don't bring this up. Wade is not the only one who doesn't seem credible. If you take Safechuck's words at face value, then what he did was arguably worse than Robson. He knew he was abused at the time, yet Robson still insists that he was in denial.

by Anonymousreply 389March 18, 2019 7:57 PM

R384, why does Dan Reed have to explain something that needs no explanation? Kids who are abused also go on to other relationships. There is nothing about Brandi's story that puts anything Wade said in doubt.

by Anonymousreply 390March 18, 2019 8:00 PM

R386 Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck have imagined they were in a relationship with Jackson at 11, but the reality is that nothing ever happened illegal and as they both testified, he was nothing but kind and generous to them and the families who stalked him down. Even now the money-hungry families can't get the stories straight. I mean how do you go from claiming to be a sexual abuse victim who started a donor fund to saying you had no knowledge of childhood abuse/what to do about it in the documentary? Come on Amanda Robson. Even Wade's leading emails with his mother right before the lawsuit (that he tried to redact and keep from turning over in discovery) show her replying to his leading questions with complete denials like "Wow. None of that is true" before he shut her down. It's obvious that this story was invented circa 2011/2012.

by Anonymousreply 391March 18, 2019 8:02 PM

R390 Everything about Brandi's story puts Wade's narrative into dispute. The majority of people do not believe he was in a relationship with Brandi, while simultaneously being molested by Michael Jackson hundreds of times.

by Anonymousreply 392March 18, 2019 8:04 PM

"The irony is that the wanting to be "white" to which you refer, is really a desire to be free from societal racial oppression. It is the desire to not have to ever experience the indignities of white supremacist racism."

Oh, bullshit, r376--OJ Simpson desired and accumulated every trapping of a privileged white existence he so craved as a way of having arrived--right down to the white wife he gutted.

by Anonymousreply 393March 18, 2019 8:04 PM

^ OK, R392 is an unhinged nut.

by Anonymousreply 394March 18, 2019 8:06 PM

Hee Hee, I did diddle those young boys! Shamone!

by Anonymousreply 395March 18, 2019 8:07 PM

R391 R392 Brilliant take down. It's clear that the Jackson critics have nothing to counter your points other than absurd rationalizations.

by Anonymousreply 396March 18, 2019 8:07 PM

R394 Or simply old fashioned name calling. No intelligent debate here.

by Anonymousreply 397March 18, 2019 8:08 PM

^ Exactly, no intelligent debate here. Jackson defenders are down to "Things are true because I say so!"

by Anonymousreply 398March 18, 2019 8:10 PM

I highly suggest reading the emails Wade Robson turned over in his case, especially those between him and his mother as they plotted this out. It is clear that there is duplicity and deception as work in their interactions. We already know from the motion to compel that Wade Robson was shopping a book in late 2012-early 2013, before he filed his lawsuit in May 2013. The emails also give significant insight on that process and his lack of success before filing this lawsuit.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 399March 18, 2019 8:13 PM

Here are excerpts from an article posted in the other thread.

[quote] Well, I believe survivors. All survivors. But in America at large, and in Black America, specifically, in these first dramatic days after the raw reality of Leaving Neverland (a.k.a. the second death of Michael Jackson), I hold what I suspect is an unpopular opinion. I’m okay with that. I don’t care to convince the unconvinced of anything — neither the ignorant nor the well-informed — but not because it doesn’t matter. I think where we are societally on the issue of abuse and rape matters greatly. We all make progress at our own pace. I have little time to debate simply because in the case of the towering, mythical King of Pop, convincing someone to accept a truth this irreconcilable may not be possible.

[quote] when Oprah gave Safechuck and Robson an extended platform and an audience of sympathetic survivors, her starting place — like the starting place for anyone who believes survivors — was not one of questioning the documentary’s truthfulness.

[quote] Sometimes when it comes down to it, we have to use common sense. Every fan in the mirror has to ask him or herself: “What do I believe?” Not merely, what do I want to believe? Yes, this is a dismantling, a reckoning. But you know full-well, there are times when all the arguments against a thing just don’t square at your core. If you say you actually saw Leaving Neverland and came away with, “Every single disgusting detail these two men claimed Michael did to them when they were as young as 7 and 10 is a wholesale lie,” then I don’t believe you.

[quote] People increasingly want “evidence and proof” as the barometer for whether or not a victim of any kind of abuse is to be believed, yet by those standards nearly every survivor is a liar.

Does this sound like someone who's committed to truth? We are to just supposed to believe these men whose amended suits were continually challenged and thrown out that they are now telling the truth? We can't even allow some healthy skepticism? That's truly frightening and not the side I want to be on.

by Anonymousreply 400March 18, 2019 8:25 PM

R399 if they were "plotting" he wouldn't be asking his mother for details he understandably couldn't remember. Plotting would be: "this is what I'm going to say, make sure your version adds up" or "we have to change our story to fit this narrative."

Spend some time in a law office during witness prep or drafting of pleadings. It's a painstaking process to lay out a coherent version of events in any kind of case, because memory isn't a clean, neat thing. And trauma wreaks havoc on memory because the brain is literally trying to make itself forget for protection.

by Anonymousreply 401March 18, 2019 8:29 PM

Again if these two boys were not so believable Starbucks,LV, H&M LA Kings and all would not be thinking twice about pulling their support of MJ

by Anonymousreply 402March 18, 2019 8:34 PM

R402 They did that because of the fact that a documentary like this exists, not because it's been proven factual. It will be interesting to see what happens when the claims made are questioned, or when Taj releases his own movie.

by Anonymousreply 403March 18, 2019 8:37 PM

Part 2 Here

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 404March 19, 2019 6:43 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!