• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Billy Lee

Banned
Aug 14, 2018
38
User Banned (1 Month): Inflammatory dismissal of sexual abuse allegations; account still in junior phase
It's a shame that this documentary has turned so many people agains MJ. All it takes is a little research to discredit these two liars.

This is what happened when these con artists went to court. But they don't mention this on the documentary. Here are the facts:

*SINCE filing their lawsuit (for hundreds of millions of dollars), both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. Wade Robson, for example, has told at least four contradictory accounts of the first time he was allegedly abused.

*In that lawsuit, Robson was caught provably lying under oath so brazenly that the judge reprimanded him. He threw out Robson's entire witness statement and agreed with the defence that no rational juror could ever believe him.

*Robson's emails had to be handed over as evidence to the court. Those emails showed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was visiting anti-Jackson websites and emailing himself links to pages which detailed other abuse allegations.

*The emails also showed he found one old tabloid story involving him and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked her whether it was true. She replied, 'Wow, none of that is true'. He then included it in his story anyway.

There is 366 pages that were released by the FBI of their ten year investigation into Michael Jackson. Clearing him of any wrongdoing including no child porn, two-thirds of those pages show MJ as the victim of extortion and threats!
https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael Jackson

MJ had to face his accuser at his molestation 2005 trial and the jury did not believe him! The jury also viewed the police tape of MJs accuser talking to police while smirking the whole time and that's why MJ was acquitted.

MJ settled a 1993 Civil suit brought by The Chandlers in 1994. For Negligence only and not for any sexual assault. It was settled because before the year 1995 in the state of California Civil trials were allowed to go forward before a criminal trial. MJ tried to push for a criminal trial to go first but was denied by a judge. So in order to protect his 5 amendment rights from double jeopardy, MJ settled. This law has since been changed due to it's unfairness. And in no way did the civil case being settled stop the criminal investigation, which was still on going 6+months after the civil case was settled. Reason for no criminal charges were because two grand juries from two different counties refused to indict MJ in 94 due to lack of evidence!

These two accusers have been trying to get money from the MJ estate for the last 5 years and have been blackmailing them but all the courts in US dismissed both cases. Robson tried his luck in Australia and that was unsuccessful. Both of them made a fortune out of Michael and was at the 2005 trial defending MJ.

Now after loosing a contract to work on the MJ ONE show in Vegas, Robson started to come up with lies and the other idiots joined.
 

Kyuuji

The Favonius Fox
Member
Nov 8, 2017
32,046
It's a shame that this documentary has turned so many people agains MJ. All it takes is a little research to discredit these two liars.

This is what happened when these con artists went to court. But they don't mention this on the documentary. Here are the facts:

*SINCE filing their lawsuit (for hundreds of millions of dollars), both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. Wade Robson, for example, has told at least four contradictory accounts of the first time he was allegedly abused.

*In that lawsuit, Robson was caught provably lying under oath so brazenly that the judge reprimanded him. He threw out Robson's entire witness statement and agreed with the defence that no rational juror could ever believe him.

*Robson's emails had to be handed over as evidence to the court. Those emails showed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was visiting anti-Jackson websites and emailing himself links to pages which detailed other abuse allegations.

*The emails also showed he found one old tabloid story involving him and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked her whether it was true. She replied, 'Wow, none of that is true'. He then included it in his story anyway.

There is 366 pages that were released by the FBI of their ten year investigation into Michael Jackson. Clearing him of any wrongdoing including no child porn, two-thirds of those pages show MJ as the victim of extortion and threats!
https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael Jackson

MJ had to face his accuser at his molestation 2005 trial and the jury did not believe him! The jury also viewed the police tape of MJs accuser talking to police while smirking the whole time and that's why MJ was acquitted.

MJ settled a 1993 Civil suit brought by The Chandlers in 1994. For Negligence only and not for any sexual assault. It was settled because before the year 1995 in the state of California Civil trials were allowed to go forward before a criminal trial. MJ tried to push for a criminal trial to go first but was denied by a judge. So in order to protect his 5 amendment rights from double jeopardy, MJ settled. This law has since been changed due to it's unfairness. And in no way did the civil case being settled stop the criminal investigation, which was still on going 6+months after the civil case was settled. Reason for no criminal charges were because two grand juries from two different counties refused to indict MJ in 94 due to lack of evidence!

These two accusers have been trying to get money from the MJ estate for the last 5 years and have been blackmailing them but all the courts in US dismissed both cases. Robson tried his luck in Australia and that was unsuccessful. Both of them made a fortune out of Michael and was at the 2005 trial defending MJ.

Now after loosing a contract to work on the MJ ONE show in Vegas, Robson started to come up with lies and the other idiots joined.

Do you believe Michael Jackson groomed and abused children?
 
Oct 27, 2017
767
Safechuck refused to defend Jackson in 2005. Why do so many of this Michael Jackson Branch Davidian thing slyly add him to that one?
 

Kyuuji

The Favonius Fox
Member
Nov 8, 2017
32,046
Safechuck refused to defend Jackson in 2005. Why do so many of this Michael Jackson Branch Davidian thing slyly add him to that one?
These are people who would have walked into a room with Michael Jackson sleeping side by side under the covers with a 5 year old boy he isn't related to and for whom his parents are away, have a conversation with Michael and then leave without thinking anything of it.

When people ask how he got away with it you need only look at this thread. It's this dangerous mindset of always viewing Michael as some sort of persecuted child that allowed it to continue for so long, and for so many to shrug it off.

We have an investigative journalist coming out saying he was so concerned about Michael sleeping with Jimmy in a hotel room, when he wasn't even going to shows with him, that he sent a note asking if Jimmy had been abducted.

Yet you still have people calling Michael Jackson a victim, picking at loose threads in a tapestry of abuse.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
10,660
It's a shame that this documentary has turned so many people agains MJ. All it takes is a little research to discredit these two liars.

This is what happened when these con artists went to court. But they don't mention this on the documentary. Here are the facts:

*SINCE filing their lawsuit (for hundreds of millions of dollars), both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. Wade Robson, for example, has told at least four contradictory accounts of the first time he was allegedly abused.

*In that lawsuit, Robson was caught provably lying under oath so brazenly that the judge reprimanded him. He threw out Robson's entire witness statement and agreed with the defence that no rational juror could ever believe him.

*Robson's emails had to be handed over as evidence to the court. Those emails showed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was visiting anti-Jackson websites and emailing himself links to pages which detailed other abuse allegations.

*The emails also showed he found one old tabloid story involving him and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked her whether it was true. She replied, 'Wow, none of that is true'. He then included it in his story anyway.

There is 366 pages that were released by the FBI of their ten year investigation into Michael Jackson. Clearing him of any wrongdoing including no child porn, two-thirds of those pages show MJ as the victim of extortion and threats!
https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael Jackson

MJ had to face his accuser at his molestation 2005 trial and the jury did not believe him! The jury also viewed the police tape of MJs accuser talking to police while smirking the whole time and that's why MJ was acquitted.

MJ settled a 1993 Civil suit brought by The Chandlers in 1994. For Negligence only and not for any sexual assault. It was settled because before the year 1995 in the state of California Civil trials were allowed to go forward before a criminal trial. MJ tried to push for a criminal trial to go first but was denied by a judge. So in order to protect his 5 amendment rights from double jeopardy, MJ settled. This law has since been changed due to it's unfairness. And in no way did the civil case being settled stop the criminal investigation, which was still on going 6+months after the civil case was settled. Reason for no criminal charges were because two grand juries from two different counties refused to indict MJ in 94 due to lack of evidence!

These two accusers have been trying to get money from the MJ estate for the last 5 years and have been blackmailing them but all the courts in US dismissed both cases. Robson tried his luck in Australia and that was unsuccessful. Both of them made a fortune out of Michael and was at the 2005 trial defending MJ.

Now after loosing a contract to work on the MJ ONE show in Vegas, Robson started to come up with lies and the other idiots joined.
You're defending a pedophile.
 
Oct 27, 2017
767
These are people who would have walked into a room with Michael Jackson sleeping side by side under the covers with a 5 year old boy he isn't related to and for whom his parents are away, have a conversation with Michael and then leave without thinking anything of it.

When people ask how he got away with it you need only look at this thread. It's this dangerous mindset of always viewing Michael as some sort of persecuted child that allowed it to continue for so long, and for so many to shrug it off.

We have an investigative journalist coming out saying he was so concerned about Michael sleeping with Jimmy in a hotel room, when he wasn't even going to shows with him, that he sent a note asking if Jimmy had been abducted.

Yet you still have people calling Michael Jackson a victim.

My new favourite line of defence is "ohh, in his emails Wade couldn't remember little details / how many days he spent at Neverland so how could he have remembered the sexual abuse?!".

I don't know about the rest of you, but there's a lot I can remember from when I was that sort of age but picking out individual days or what I had for dinner isn't going to happen.
 

Kyuuji

The Favonius Fox
Member
Nov 8, 2017
32,046
I don't know about the rest of you, but there's a lot I can remember from when I was that sort of age but picking out individual days or what I had for dinner isn't going to happen.
Especially with abuse. You spend your entire life in an internal battle to rationalise how it was your fault when you feel bad, you were the one that initiated it, you're being silly, it felt good, you're friends. Every time refactoring the scenario a little to try and make sense of shame you feel inside. That's before you even recognise it was abuse to begin with.

Pointing at someone in such turmoil and saying "but you said this years ago, how can I trust you" is not only ignorant, but cruel.

To hand-wave your issues entirely to focus on someone else, implying if they didn't have their 'story straight' then you can't have been abused as a child yourself. That's reprehensible to me.
 
Last edited:

Mantrox

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,907
It's a shame that this documentary has turned so many people agains MJ. All it takes is a little research to discredit these two liars.

This is what happened when these con artists went to court. But they don't mention this on the documentary. Here are the facts:

*SINCE filing their lawsuit (for hundreds of millions of dollars), both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. Wade Robson, for example, has told at least four contradictory accounts of the first time he was allegedly abused.

*In that lawsuit, Robson was caught provably lying under oath so brazenly that the judge reprimanded him. He threw out Robson's entire witness statement and agreed with the defence that no rational juror could ever believe him.

*Robson's emails had to be handed over as evidence to the court. Those emails showed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was visiting anti-Jackson websites and emailing himself links to pages which detailed other abuse allegations.

*The emails also showed he found one old tabloid story involving him and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked her whether it was true. She replied, 'Wow, none of that is true'. He then included it in his story anyway.

There is 366 pages that were released by the FBI of their ten year investigation into Michael Jackson. Clearing him of any wrongdoing including no child porn, two-thirds of those pages show MJ as the victim of extortion and threats!
https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael Jackson

MJ had to face his accuser at his molestation 2005 trial and the jury did not believe him! The jury also viewed the police tape of MJs accuser talking to police while smirking the whole time and that's why MJ was acquitted.

MJ settled a 1993 Civil suit brought by The Chandlers in 1994. For Negligence only and not for any sexual assault. It was settled because before the year 1995 in the state of California Civil trials were allowed to go forward before a criminal trial. MJ tried to push for a criminal trial to go first but was denied by a judge. So in order to protect his 5 amendment rights from double jeopardy, MJ settled. This law has since been changed due to it's unfairness. And in no way did the civil case being settled stop the criminal investigation, which was still on going 6+months after the civil case was settled. Reason for no criminal charges were because two grand juries from two different counties refused to indict MJ in 94 due to lack of evidence!

These two accusers have been trying to get money from the MJ estate for the last 5 years and have been blackmailing them but all the courts in US dismissed both cases. Robson tried his luck in Australia and that was unsuccessful. Both of them made a fortune out of Michael and was at the 2005 trial defending MJ.

Now after loosing a contract to work on the MJ ONE show in Vegas, Robson started to come up with lies and the other idiots joined.
Victims, who had an intimate relationship with one of the most well known personalities in the world can't be confused about something as hard to process as this fucked up situation they explained in detail...?

How do you think you would cope?
Oh... nevermind, you can't, you weren't in their shoe, at 7 fucking years old!
Nor where you there when they had to carry this for the rest of their lives.

And a guy who who tried several times to rationalize on national TV why he was sleeping with young boys, unrelated to him, is the one we should be worried about?
Give me a fucking break...
Every big celebrity deals with extortion.
The more you ignore the victims pain, the more you become complicit.
 

Tiago Rodrigues

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Nov 15, 2018
5,244
I saw the first part of the documentary and it was hard to watch.
At first i was not buying Wade Robson. I mean...i know victims sometimes start by defending abusers...but something didn't click with his story. Then i actually did some research and found this:


Look at him back when he was defending MJ in 2008 and then in 2013 with an attitude much closer to the one we see in the documentary. I mean...look at his body language in both cases.
The more i watch the more i believe all this in the documentary.
 

hanmik

Editor/Writer at Popaco.dk
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
1,436
Victims, who had an intimate relationship with one of the most well known personalities in the world can't be confused about something as hard to process as this fucked up situation they explained in detail...?

How do you think you would cope?
Oh... nevermind, you can't, you weren't in their shoe, at 7 fucking years old!
Nor where you there when they had to carry this for the rest of their lives.

And a guy who who tried several times to rationalize on national TV why he was sleeping with young boys, unrelated to him, is the one we should be worried about?
Give me a fucking break...
Every big celebrity deals with extortion.
The more you ignore the victims pain, the more you become complicit.

Don't even bother with people like that.. He is now banned, and he had 23 post. 2 in this thread.. and then this one.
mwRqizM.png


It is sad that those people try to defend the "legacy" of a dead singer.
 

Solo

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
15,744
It's a shame that this documentary has turned so many people agains MJ. All it takes is a little research to discredit these two liars.

This is what happened when these con artists went to court. But they don't mention this on the documentary. Here are the facts:

*SINCE filing their lawsuit (for hundreds of millions of dollars), both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. Wade Robson, for example, has told at least four contradictory accounts of the first time he was allegedly abused.

*In that lawsuit, Robson was caught provably lying under oath so brazenly that the judge reprimanded him. He threw out Robson's entire witness statement and agreed with the defence that no rational juror could ever believe him.

*Robson's emails had to be handed over as evidence to the court. Those emails showed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was visiting anti-Jackson websites and emailing himself links to pages which detailed other abuse allegations.

*The emails also showed he found one old tabloid story involving him and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked her whether it was true. She replied, 'Wow, none of that is true'. He then included it in his story anyway.

There is 366 pages that were released by the FBI of their ten year investigation into Michael Jackson. Clearing him of any wrongdoing including no child porn, two-thirds of those pages show MJ as the victim of extortion and threats!
https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael Jackson

MJ had to face his accuser at his molestation 2005 trial and the jury did not believe him! The jury also viewed the police tape of MJs accuser talking to police while smirking the whole time and that's why MJ was acquitted.

MJ settled a 1993 Civil suit brought by The Chandlers in 1994. For Negligence only and not for any sexual assault. It was settled because before the year 1995 in the state of California Civil trials were allowed to go forward before a criminal trial. MJ tried to push for a criminal trial to go first but was denied by a judge. So in order to protect his 5 amendment rights from double jeopardy, MJ settled. This law has since been changed due to it's unfairness. And in no way did the civil case being settled stop the criminal investigation, which was still on going 6+months after the civil case was settled. Reason for no criminal charges were because two grand juries from two different counties refused to indict MJ in 94 due to lack of evidence!

These two accusers have been trying to get money from the MJ estate for the last 5 years and have been blackmailing them but all the courts in US dismissed both cases. Robson tried his luck in Australia and that was unsuccessful. Both of them made a fortune out of Michael and was at the 2005 trial defending MJ.

Now after loosing a contract to work on the MJ ONE show in Vegas, Robson started to come up with lies and the other idiots joined.

Seek help during your ban.
 

OG Kush

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,690
MJ settled a 1993 Civil suit brought by The Chandlers in 1994. For Negligence only and not for any sexual assault. It was settled because before the year 1995 in the state of California Civil trials were allowed to go forward before a criminal trial. MJ tried to push for a criminal trial to go first but was denied by a judge. So in order to protect his 5 amendment rights from double jeopardy, MJ settled. This law has since been changed due to it's unfairness. And in no way did the civil case being settled stop the criminal investigation, which was still on going 6+months after the civil case was settled. Reason for no criminal charges were because two grand juries from two different counties refused to indict MJ in 94 due to lack of evidence!
Can anyone explain this?
 

Pitchfork

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,686
England
Caught up on Channel 4. Extremely difficult to watch and listen too.. I hope the whole truth is fully brought to light and the victims receive as much help and support as possible.

MJ can join the ranks of other scumbag celebrities who deserve to rot in hell
 

Aiii

何これ
Member
Oct 24, 2017
8,182
Can anyone explain this?
Sexual assault is very hard to prove unless the assaulter is caught in the act.

That is before raising the question on whether (very popular) celebrities should even be allowed to be tried by jury, given how their idolization might influence the justice being carried out.
 

OG Kush

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,690
Sexual assault is very hard to prove unless the assaulter is caught in the act.

That is before raising the question on whether (very popular) celebrities should even be allowed to be tried by jury, given how their idolization might influence the justice being carried out.
Thanks but I mean more of what the difference between a civil trail and a criminal trail is and how ita ffects someone's 5 amendment rights?
 

El Bombastico

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
36,030
It's a shame that this documentary has turned so many people agains MJ. All it takes is a little research to discredit these two liars.

This is what happened when these con artists went to court. But they don't mention this on the documentary. Here are the facts:

*SINCE filing their lawsuit (for hundreds of millions of dollars), both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. Wade Robson, for example, has told at least four contradictory accounts of the first time he was allegedly abused.

*In that lawsuit, Robson was caught provably lying under oath so brazenly that the judge reprimanded him. He threw out Robson's entire witness statement and agreed with the defence that no rational juror could ever believe him.

*Robson's emails had to be handed over as evidence to the court. Those emails showed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was visiting anti-Jackson websites and emailing himself links to pages which detailed other abuse allegations.

*The emails also showed he found one old tabloid story involving him and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked her whether it was true. She replied, 'Wow, none of that is true'. He then included it in his story anyway.

There is 366 pages that were released by the FBI of their ten year investigation into Michael Jackson. Clearing him of any wrongdoing including no child porn, two-thirds of those pages show MJ as the victim of extortion and threats!
https://vault.fbi.gov/Michael Jackson

MJ had to face his accuser at his molestation 2005 trial and the jury did not believe him! The jury also viewed the police tape of MJs accuser talking to police while smirking the whole time and that's why MJ was acquitted.

MJ settled a 1993 Civil suit brought by The Chandlers in 1994. For Negligence only and not for any sexual assault. It was settled because before the year 1995 in the state of California Civil trials were allowed to go forward before a criminal trial. MJ tried to push for a criminal trial to go first but was denied by a judge. So in order to protect his 5 amendment rights from double jeopardy, MJ settled. This law has since been changed due to it's unfairness. And in no way did the civil case being settled stop the criminal investigation, which was still on going 6+months after the civil case was settled. Reason for no criminal charges were because two grand juries from two different counties refused to indict MJ in 94 due to lack of evidence!

These two accusers have been trying to get money from the MJ estate for the last 5 years and have been blackmailing them but all the courts in US dismissed both cases. Robson tried his luck in Australia and that was unsuccessful. Both of them made a fortune out of Michael and was at the 2005 trial defending MJ.

Now after loosing a contract to work on the MJ ONE show in Vegas, Robson started to come up with lies and the other idiots joined.

I swear u losers are reading from a script.
 

Aiii

何これ
Member
Oct 24, 2017
8,182
Thanks but I mean more of what the difference between a civil trail and a criminal trail is and how ita ffects someone's 5 amendment rights?

Oh, well this is the amendment:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

And this is what they mean with double jeopardy:
"The Double Jeopardy Clause aims to protect against the harassment of an individual through successive prosecutions of the same alleged act, to ensure the significance of an acquittal, and to prevent the state from putting the defendant through the emotional, psychological, physical, and financial troubles that would accompany multiple trials for the same alleged offense. Courts have interpreted the Double Jeopardy Clause as accomplishing these goals by providing the following three distinct rights: a guarantee that a defendant will not face a second prosecution after an acquittal, a guarantee that a defendant will not face a second prosecution after a conviction, and a guarantee that a defendant will not receive multiple punishments for the same offense. Courts, however, have not interpreted the Double Jeopardy Clause as either prohibiting the state from seeking review of a sentence or restricting a sentence's length on rehearing after a defendant's successful appeal.

Jeopardy refers to the danger of conviction. Thus, jeopardy does not attach unless a risk of the determination of guilt exists. If some event or circumstance prompts the trial court to declare a mistrial, jeopardy has not attached if the mistrial only results in minimal delay and the government does not receive added opportunity to strengthen its case."
 

hombremalo

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,959
Reading the responses to Louis tweet I wonder if that people deep inside know they are defending a child predator or really are that away from reality
 

Ebullientprism

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,529
Watching MJ run in and out of limos holding the hand of some 9 year old kid like celebrity couples do all the time is just insane to see. Its crazy to think for decades people just went "yeah thats pretty normal".
 

hanmik

Editor/Writer at Popaco.dk
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
1,436
Thanks but I mean more of what the difference between a civil trail and a criminal trail is and how ita ffects someone's 5 amendment rights?

that was just BS from the now banned poster..

Here is a vital page from the settlement..
8gHECLI.gif


"The parties acknowledge that Jackson is a public figure and that his name, image and likeness have commercial value and are an important element of his earning capacity. The Parties acknowledge that Jackson claims that he has elected to settle the claims in the Action in view of the impact the Action has had and could have in the future on his earnings and potential income."

This is why he settled...
 

shnurgleton

Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,864
Boston
how people are still stanning for this disgusting person even after his death is pathetic. MJ groomed not only his victims, but his audience
 

Ebullientprism

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,529
Where can I watch the Martin Basheer documentary?

they almost always start with "I am not even a fan of his music, BUT.........."

Look I havent seen the documentary yet but if abuse really happened, where is the proof? Is there any video (preferably HD) that shows MJ abusing these kids?

I am not even a fan. Just asking questions.
 

Meows

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,399
The Michael Jackson stans are nuts. They find any video on YouTube or any celebrity or any random person on the internet and swarm them and attack en masse.
 

Wackamole

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,932
I have no idea what is true in this case (i can only hope he never did anything to harm kids because if he did he should have been dead way earlier). But i do think MJ fans (well, "fans" in general) are scary.
Fan stands for fanatical and that's what it seems. It seems like people lose all rational and reasonable parts of their thinking.
Scary stuff.
 

nemoral

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,081
Fiddler's Green
Almost seems like an astro-turfing campaign. I must have seen the same copy/pasta on twitter with MJ truth facts a million times.
People don't want it to be true, so they go looking for someone to tell them it's not true, which is easy on the internet, and then they adopt those arguments. It's the same way every discussion happens on the internet. People who know nothing about the subject, backfilling their reasoning with someone else's arguments.
 

Jadentheman

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,207
User Banned (2 Days) Inflammatory generalizations and antagonizing other members
Seems like most of ERA made their judgement. I won't anything more of the matter but the lynch mob mentality of this site can be insane sometimes. But reactions are consistent.

I can't say much but from what I gather are we for sure can have a definite verdict on MJ?
 

Kyuuji

The Favonius Fox
Member
Nov 8, 2017
32,046
Seems like most of ERA made their judgement. I won't anything more of the matter but the lynch mob mentality of this site can be insane sometimes. But reactions are consistent.
Tolerance and downplaying of child abuse and hand-waving victims of it shouldn't be tolerated. Unless you feel Michael Jackson didn't groom or abuse children I don't see the point in referring to Era as a lynch mob for rebuking people dismissing it and it's victims out of hand.
 

Telpis

Banned
Jan 17, 2018
1,319
Macaulay Culkin, do we think he was a victim but won't come forward? risk losing his career?
 

Air

User-Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,262
Macaulay Culkin, do we think he was a victim but won't come forward? risk losing his career?

Macauley Culkin has stood by his claims since the beginning. He did corroborate MJ's security system, but has said nothing has happened. Who knows if it will change in the futur, but as of now he claims it was an ordinary friendship
 

Foffy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,378
After watching it, it's quite clear he hurt children. I do wonder where his malice of women came into play. Perhaps he was abused as a child and blames his mother for not saving him? His fixation on children wasn't just sexual but also experiential in regards to his interests and hobbies. This speaks more to a "lost" part of him that he did everything possible to capture and reclaim, as it teetered more on obsession than anything else.

And as often is the case, tragically, those who are abused end up becoming the abuser, and the cycle repeats in that respect. A tremendously troubled man who used his power and fame to help and harm people, perhaps even in the same breath. Similarly to gurus that have harmed others, you're going to see a sea of devotees and worshippers spin it and proclaim apologetics about it, but in the end, he did hurt others and his ascribed authority is what allowed him to not only do it, but influence others to get away with it.
 

Jadentheman

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,207
Fuck off using a term steeped in racism

Woah sorry, didn't mean to. I understand, I was just trying to see if there is a consensus on MJ. I like his music and I always believe the victims first but I also want the facts just in case. Lots of conflicting stories around that's all.

Btw I'm black, I mean that really holds no relevance to the conversation, but didn't know that word was bad to use
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,466
Woah sorry, didn't mean to. I understand, I was just trying to see if there is a consensus on MJ. I like his music and I always believe the victims first but I also want the facts just in case. Lots of conflicting stories around that's all.

Btw I'm black
He said in an interview that he loved sleeping with little boys. We know he slept in the same bed with little boys because he admitted it and the boys admitted it. We know he paid the parents of those boys a lot of money (in the form of cash, gifts and even houses) to have access to their boys. What more evidence do you need that what he was doing was awful? Who else could do those things and you'd still be asking for more evidence of a problem?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.