Simpsons pulling episode with Michael Jackson from streaming/future box sets
298 replies, posted
owlz, mj begged robson to defend him in 2003. if now his original testimony is thrown out, mj innocence has no leg to stand on.
the documentary is more than just two people saying their peace, it is their entire family and their involvement in this.
if he is scummy to file a lawsuit against the estate, what about the estate's counter-lawsuit against the filmmakers. If MJ was alive he would have won the case anyway, he lost only on technicality.
Plus what about the safechuck guy? He had a mental breakdown and it was in wade's confidence to speak out that made him involved in this film.
There is no hard evidence but we are talking about abuse, and very powerful people. People who had cameras and alarms outside the hallways of their bedrooms.
I want only those directly involved to have a say in his defence because everyone else has no right to say shit.
Corey Feldman is now doubting his innocence and won't defend him. He was a very close friend to MJ too in his childhood and HE understands being abused because he was abused himself.
Now the only one who is left to talk out is Macaulay Culkin..
You're ignoring the context in which he said that. He claims that Michael Jackson made him into a 'master of deception' because he was coached during his abuse and had to lie about it for years to the public. You can't argue that someone is a self admitted liar if you also claim that what they say they were lying about was actually the truth and they were never lying to begin with.
I legitimately can't tell if you're trolling or if you're this ignorant. The FBI had conducted a decade of surveillance on Michael Jackson's activities including, but not limited to; working with local law enforcement agencies, questioning witnesses both in the United States and in the United Kingdom, searched through 16 computers found in Jackson's estate, the sudden and unannounced raid against Neverland, etc.
The fact you claim it was just some random cop that showed up to "visit" is so painfully wrong that I can't help to wonder if you're even remotely aware of what you're saying.
Nothing about tapping phones or cameras?
MJ is the perfect example of people hating others for being different. Because really, MJ was truly exceptional at being different. A masterclass musician who composed all his songs but could not even play an instrument. A black man turned white due to illness. A true child at heart, who never grew up and found himself better connecting with children than adults. Also a burn victim who got addicted to painkillers. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
He was as different as people come. And that's why these accusations stuck, despite there being no real evidence. It was just easy for people to believe all that shit, just because the man was different. In the end, it was just a couple of degenerates who wanted to swindle some money from the naive fool that was Michael Jackson. No grand conspiracy. Just greed and hate.
Well documentaries has 100% on RT, clearly the law is wrong and mj is a peado
Jesus FUCKING CHRIST AK'z
Talk about moving the goddamn goalposts.
"it was just a single cop checking in once in a while"
"Actually no it wasn't they did a fuckload"
"oh yeah well YOU DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WIRETAPS MY POINT IS PROVEN"
Goddamn your posts are fucking horrid
Correct me if im wrong but werent there multiple full scale raids on MJs house by the FBI to try and find shit and they never found shit?
There was at least one.
Which may not have produced hard evidence of rape, but 13 year old Jordan Chandler was still able to correctly describe Jackson's genitals, including details that would have had to be expressly shown
to him by Jackson. There's no evidence of him being a rapist, but he's absolutely a nasty fucking creep if he was exposing himself to boys if they were staying in close proximity to him.
it's not moving goalposts, you say full FBI investigation but I want more detail.
16 computers back in 1993 don't generally store files of abuse behind locked doors.
at least have a bit of a questioning mind, even pre-documentary, I wasn't totally sure about him and neither was a lot of people.
I say powerful person, you ignore it, caps lock on full then vent a bunch of very weak points.
First hand testimony keeps people in the clear. And it's all gone to shit. Who do you think needs to testify now? Tito Jackson?
Would prefer they slap a warning before the episode rather than pull it all together
There were two unannounced raids. One in 1993 and one in 2003. Nothing illegal was found.
He also incorrectly identified Jackson as circumcised when he was uncircumcised according to his autopsy. The photos have never been released so we can only trust the jury and police, who disagreed about whether the description matched.
the part three to this covers the documentary in detail
i find it interesting that you do research on his penis but can't be bothered to see the documentary.
didn't pop up in my sub feed (and I forgot about this thread) otherwise I would have posted it. Really not surprised - the documentary claims to have evidence but shows... nothing.
when a child is abused behind a locked bedroom. please tell me which hard evidence should be available.
forget michael jackson, just give me a bog standard abuse scenario.
after you give me the hard evidence, we can then insert michael jackson's ability to sway people and see where we go.
I'm not really interested in taking a position on this issue, since I don't feel as though I know enough to come to a definite conclusion
What I will say is, if you come to a conclusion based on how you felt about someone's edited testimony without even taking the time to check if that testimony is consistent with established fact, then you're being grossly irresponsible.
You are not an infallible judge of character. You can be fooled. This applies to everyone. The idea that it would take "world class acting" to fool you is dangerous egotism and nothing more.
"W-well the kids identifies his penis!"
"The autopsy proves the prior statements were false"
"BUT THE DOCUMENTARY WHY ARENT YOU WATCHINNNNG THE DOCUMENTARRRRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY"
Hasn't it been pointed out multiple times that his description of MJs donger was incorrect. And MJ's "bedroom" was literally multiple rooms with multiple beds, this misinformation was pushed hard by tabloids and you still seem to be peddling this shit.
is that why there's a video of him with a child saying mj made him sleep in HIS bed if he loves him. while holding his hand and effectionately hugging him.
oh this transcript?
Gavin says he regularly stays at Neverland and adds: 'There was one night, I asked him if I could stay in his bedroom.'
They had an argument about who should sleep where and Jackson said, 'Look, if you love me you'll sleep in the bed'.
Gavin adds: 'I was like, "Oh man!" So I finally slept on the
bed. But it was fun that night.'
An apparently-unconcerned Jackson interjects: 'I slept on the floor. Was it a sleeping bag?' the kid then says: No it was a bunch of blankets on the floor.
weird how people keep telling you to just watch the documentary yet only a couple posters have actually pulled any evidence from it instead of making you watch it
aren't documentaries supposed to be historical representation of things and not a literal hit piece
hell, i've seen Hitler documentaries that are less biased than all this shit about one specific one for MJ, and I grew up thinking the guy was a pedo because my mom was deadset convinced on it
his penial description did have legitimacy. a retracted foreskin can seem like a circumcised dick.
unfortunately mj didn't want to argue that case and paid them off. so for all that, we can't really further that discussion since he gave in.
the reason prior to the documentary that I wasn't sure what to think was that his initial accusation was never fully trialed.
but look, at the end of the day.. mj would be in jail if these people didn't defend him. it's a sick truth.
You're gradually proving that you're an awful person to have a debate with. I sincerely hope one day you mature just enough to look back at these posts and go 'hmmmm, why did i never have the guts to admit one of my points had been proven wrong? Why did I keep screeching WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY to distract people from the fact I had no idea what I was talking about?'
Your nonsense arguments have been debunked, after which you'll quickly skip onto the next OR try to find an excuse to keep fuelling said nonsense. Someone has already wonderfully illustrated how you tried to drop an #epicrekt bombshell about MJ's penis, got proven wrong, and then came out with this very response.
Think out your posts before coughing up the first thing that comes to your head, done simply to keeping pushing the water wheel of misinformation & emotionally-driven argument.
Like the big thing is Corey Feldman. After swearing for decades that no, Micheal didn't touch him, he suddenly changes his tune long after the guy's dead, changing his story on what happened multiple times (I think he even ripped off his story from a book who's author was sued for libel ) and the big ! for many of MG's alleged victims is how they went to the media first instead of, well, the police
The other problem is that you have MJ as some machivellian mastermind with media sway. He's not. I mean he is (uh, was … ) rich but this changes nothing to tabloids ready to shit out unverifiable rumors. It's not like how Trump has some media outlets (Fox and friends) who will counter disinformation with disinformation - MJ's just rich, and it doesn't help that due to his vitiligo looks creepy as hell.
The first settlement for pedophile alligations in the early 90s was due to being put in a do-or-die situation - The accusers waited until he was on tour, and could either settle out of court or stop being on tour and *win the fucking lawsuit*. He chose the former, and this is a decision that would bite him in the ass to this day.
I'll link part 3 here - now for most people on the forum I'd ignore Razorfist's other videos. Him bitching about Venezuala or the like doesn't really have any bearing here. I mean I actually like the dude but I don't know a better source of someone debunking the MJ pedophile claims that's more then "Nah hah! He totally didn't do it!"
Actually I can debunk the "Sleep in the same room as MJ" thing. MJs room is the size of a 2-story house. Now if he slept in the same bed then that's different, fucked up, still not sexual in and of itself but you actually would start having a case about him being a kiddie fiddler there.
maybe i should include more use of #epikrekt in my arguments and caps lock it all.
look, we said watch it, and none of you want to. it's not a debate when your side refuses to engage in the subject matter.
and janus claims I had a pre-conceived notion that mj was a pedo and i hated him all along.
I have 9 of his fucking LPs on my shelf. I have defended him all my life to my friends and people around me. Now my whole perception has been twisted around.
I've been to parties countlessly where his music brought universal joy in an instant. But there was always this shudder when ANY mention of his relationship with children was mentioned. We shrugged it off because he never got convicted.
Now how am I supposed to feel when victims of child abuse with their families are coming out with these horrendous detailed, legitimate stories.
It is a sick betrayal and the concept of michael jackson now is dirt to me. I am sorry to scare mj fans and maybe that is why nobody really wants to see this film.
Nobody is defending MJ except his estranged family members who had no clue what was going on... really nobody.. I thought he had hundreds of close personal friends to defend him, but nobody is saying otherwise.
You keep passing this documentary off as evidence. I suppose Ancient Aliens is evidence of aliens visiting us in the past then, because they act like the stuff they're saying is the truth.
I read your posts and i just see someone who is desperately looking for every conceivable justification to back up his own predetermined judgement instead of admitting even the slightest bit of the possibility that he might be wrong.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.