independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Fri 10th Apr 2020 12:20pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Michael Jackson sex abuse documentary coming to Sundance & HBO
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 6 of 48 « First<2345678910>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #150 posted 01/26/19 10:46am

Free2BMe

Marrk said:



phillymonster said:


I saw the doc. I am crying one day later. People defending MJ at this point come across just like Trump supporters.


Did you watch that video above your post too? For balance, I'd suggest you do. Wade's own words, own actions.



Can you imagine that if this video had been juxtaposed with the fake docu that was shown at Sundance, people would be shaking their head at the blatant lies that Wade and Safechuck told. Of course, you have those people with pedophilic fantasies who WANT these accusations to be true. Any sane, intelligent, rational
person knows that what these two claim could not be true.
Yes, I’m crying also that Michael’s name is being smeared for financial gain, and he can’t defend himself. That is why WE, the fans defend him. We have the proof and evidence. We defend him because we know he is 1000% innocent.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #151 posted 01/26/19 11:03am

Free2BMe

MotownSubdivision said:

phillymonster said:

I saw the doc. I am crying one day later. People defending MJ at this point come across just like Trump supporters.
So you fell for it? Good job.



Of course, he or she fell for it. Most people are too damn lazy to research for the truth. You really don’t have to be Einstein to know that what these fake accuser’s claim,could never actually happen. I don’t want to post the horrific details of their false allegations; but, common sense will tell you that there is no way in hell that what they said could be true. What they claimed happened , even an adult couldn’t withstand. Damn, use your common sense people!! The claims that these bastards asserted have no basis in reality. We don’t just defend Michael because we are fans, we defend him because we have evidence. These liars have no evidence. They know that a lot in the public are weak minded, gullible and easily manipulated. That’s what they are depending on. It seems that they have succeeded with that group. They know these kind of people are too lazy to research the truth and are only too eager to be led around by the nose, while digesting lies, gossip, innuendo and tabloid trash. This “docu” is trash. It is based on two liars who just lost a case to extort money from Michael’s estate.That should be enough to alert the public that Wade Robson an James Safechuck are full of shit, literally.
[Edited 1/26/19 11:06am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #152 posted 01/26/19 12:42pm

oceanblue

phillymonster said:

I saw the doc. I am crying one day later. People defending MJ at this point come across just like Trump supporters.

Or maybe crooked Hillary supporters.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #153 posted 01/26/19 1:58pm

SoulAlive

Goddess4Real said:

Read the Estate’s statement in its entirety below: “Leaving Neverland” isn’t a documentary, it is the kind of tabloid character assassination Michael Jackson endured in life, and now in death. The film takes uncorroborated allegations that supposedly happened 20 years ago and treats them as fact. These claims were the basis of lawsuits filed by these two admitted liars which were ultimately dismissed by a judge. The two accusers testified under oath that these events never occurred. They have provided no independent evidence and absolutely no proof in support of their accusations, which means the entire film hinges solely on the word of two perjurers. Tellingly, the director admitted at the Sundance Film Festival that he limited his interviews only to these accusers and their families. In doing so, he intentionally avoided interviewing numerous people over the years who spent significant time with Michael Jackson and have unambiguously stated that he treated children with respect and did nothing hurtful to them. By choosing not to include any of these independent voices who might challenge the narrative that he was determined to sell, the director neglected fact checking so he could craft a narrative so blatantly one-sided that viewers never get anything close to a balanced portrait. For 20 years, Wade Robson denied in court and in numerous interviews, including after Michael passed, that he was a victim and stated he was grateful for everything Michael had done for him. His family benefitted from Michael’s kindness, generosity and career support up until Michael’s death. Conveniently left out of Leaving Neverland was the fact that when Robson was denied a role in a Michael Jackson themed Cirque du Soleil production, his assault allegations suddenly emerged. We are extremely sympathetic to any legitimate victim of child abuse. This film, however, does those victims a disservice. Because despite all the disingenuous denials made that this is not about money, it has always been about money – millions of dollars — dating back to 2013 when both Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who share the same law firm, launched their unsuccessful claims against Michael’s Estate. Now that Michael is no longer here to defend himself, Robson, Safechuck and their lawyers continue their efforts to achieve notoriety and a payday by smearing him with the same allegations a jury found him innocent of when he was alive. – The Estate of Michael Jackson

powerful statement from the Estate

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #154 posted 01/26/19 2:00pm

Free2BMe

SoulAlive said:



Goddess4Real said:


Read the Estate’s statement in its entirety below: “Leaving Neverland” isn’t a documentary, it is the kind of tabloid character assassination Michael Jackson endured in life, and now in death. The film takes uncorroborated allegations that supposedly happened 20 years ago and treats them as fact. These claims were the basis of lawsuits filed by these two admitted liars which were ultimately dismissed by a judge. The two accusers testified under oath that these events never occurred. They have provided no independent evidence and absolutely no proof in support of their accusations, which means the entire film hinges solely on the word of two perjurers. Tellingly, the director admitted at the Sundance Film Festival that he limited his interviews only to these accusers and their families. In doing so, he intentionally avoided interviewing numerous people over the years who spent significant time with Michael Jackson and have unambiguously stated that he treated children with respect and did nothing hurtful to them. By choosing not to include any of these independent voices who might challenge the narrative that he was determined to sell, the director neglected fact checking so he could craft a narrative so blatantly one-sided that viewers never get anything close to a balanced portrait. For 20 years, Wade Robson denied in court and in numerous interviews, including after Michael passed, that he was a victim and stated he was grateful for everything Michael had done for him. His family benefitted from Michael’s kindness, generosity and career support up until Michael’s death. Conveniently left out of Leaving Neverland was the fact that when Robson was denied a role in a Michael Jackson themed Cirque du Soleil production, his assault allegations suddenly emerged. We are extremely sympathetic to any legitimate victim of child abuse. This film, however, does those victims a disservice. Because despite all the disingenuous denials made that this is not about money, it has always been about money – millions of dollars — dating back to 2013 when both Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who share the same law firm, launched their unsuccessful claims against Michael’s Estate. Now that Michael is no longer here to defend himself, Robson, Safechuck and their lawyers continue their efforts to achieve notoriety and a payday by smearing him with the same allegations a jury found him innocent of when he was alive. – The Estate of Michael Jackson




powerful statement from the Estate



Yes, the entire statement is very powerful.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #155 posted 01/26/19 2:38pm

PeteSilas

Free2BMe said:

SoulAlive said:

powerful statement from the Estate

Yes, the entire statement is very powerful.

and lets not forget, the movie is come up for everyone involved, just like it was come up for bashir who did the interview that led to michaels ultimate demise, everybody wants that come up. a fact i'm mentioning in the thread where another journalist recently tried to call prince some kind of manipulator or "groomer". that's the only way some people can make a name for themselves, by shitting on someone else.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #156 posted 01/26/19 3:06pm

Mintchip

avatar

I’ll reserve judgement until I see the film. I do agree with the reviewer from The Hollywood Reporter; it’s not for us to say how and when the victims of sexual abuse come forward. The damage is too deep. If someone lies under oath, it could be that the lie was all they had to cling too, as the truth may have been too horrible to own. The perjury, and the judges decision to throw out their lawsuit, are both easy to understand. Not so easy to understand is Robinson’s money grab; it undermines his character. Maybe that will be addressed in the doc.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #157 posted 01/26/19 3:10pm

PeteSilas

when you have that kind of fame and money it's stupid to let anyone close to you, stupid. the arvizo's certainly were not victimized and that is the trial that happened. the arvizo's were full of shit, i think we can mostly all agree on that. Mike was a fool for letting people like that close.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #158 posted 01/26/19 3:15pm

Mintchip

avatar

Also, saying that numerous witnesses report MJ only acted respectfully toward children is kind of a straw man argument. No one is saying he didn’t publicly act respectful; of course he did. The crime they’re accusing him of would have been private, away from other adults.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #159 posted 01/26/19 3:21pm

PeteSilas

Mintchip said:

Also, saying that numerous witnesses report MJ only acted respectfully toward children is kind of a straw man argument. No one is saying he didn’t publicly act respectful; of course he did. The crime they’re accusing him of would have been private, away from other adults.

there are also some interting interviews out there like ron newt who says he was offered 200k to say mike touched his kids. if we gonna look at everything, lets look at everything.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #160 posted 01/26/19 6:15pm

Free2BMe

Mintchip said:

I’ll reserve judgement until I see the film. I do agree with the reviewer from The Hollywood Reporter; it’s not for us to say how and when the victims of sexual abuse come forward. The damage is too deep. If someone lies under oath, it could be that the lie was all they had to cling too, as the truth may have been too horrible to own. The perjury, and the judges decision to throw out their lawsuit, are both easy to understand. Not so easy to understand is Robinson’s money grab; it undermines his character. Maybe that will be addressed in the doc.


The problem with the doc is that it is based on two LIARS with not an ounce of evidence. It would be like me accusing you and only my side being presented with not an ounce of rebuttal. If you are willing to see the one sided lies of These two liars, why not see the actual proof that they are lying. Robson testified that nothing happened to him. He was telling the truth. Even after Michael’s death, he continued to praise Michael and talk about his goodness. Michael and his children were actually invited to family picnic at Robsons house. Those are not the actions of a damaged or abused man.
Wade Robson only suddenly came up with these claims when he was not hired to be choreographer for Cirque Soleil. He even told Matt Laure that this revelation was not repressed memomory. He actually claimed that he didn’t even know that he was sexually abused until he looked at his own son.Hmmmn, why was he thinking of molestation while looking at his own son? There is something very strange about that, that I think should be investigated.
Let’s not forget that this is a man who claimed that he was abused every night and he didn’t know he was being abused? Robson, who had just #@$&* Britney Spears and brokeup her relationship with Justin Timberlake, claims he didn’t know he had been sexually abused until he looked at his own son. how strange is that? Again, his SUDDEN revelation only came after he lost the job that he had been publicly bragging about. Robson is even more heinous than the grifter family who accused Michael. He waited until Michael was no longer here to defend himself. The bottomline is that Robson is a coward and would never have done this while Michael was alive. Michael’s estate didn’t fall for his and Safechuck’s extortion attempt. A judge threw out their case because it was just that ridiculous. I can guarantee
you that this is all about $$$. Fake “victims” like these two liars only undermine the plight of real victims. I sense that some of you who are judging Michael are real victims, so you want to latch on to the bullshit spewed by these liars, Robson and Safechuck,
Finally, why didn’t this so called director interview any of the other people (girls and boys) who visted Neverland? Why did he focus on the two liars who tried to extort money from Michael’s estate and case thrown out. Even a fifth grader would be smart enough to figure that out.
[Edited 1/26/19 18:27pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #161 posted 01/26/19 6:41pm

PatrickS77

avatar

PeteSilas said:

when you have that kind of fame and money it's stupid to let anyone close to you, stupid. the arvizo's certainly were not victimized and that is the trial that happened. the arvizo's were full of shit, i think we can mostly all agree on that. Mike was a fool for letting people like that close.



And what should he have done instead? Live a life in fear and in solitarity. It's easy for you to blame him for forging relationshsips when it doesn't affect you and you can do and befriend whoever the hell you want.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #162 posted 01/26/19 6:56pm

rdhull

avatar

PeteSilas said:

when you have that kind of fame and money it's stupid to let anyone close to you, stupid. the arvizo's certainly were not victimized and that is the trial that happened. the arvizo's were full of shit, i think we can mostly all agree on that. Mike was a fool for letting people like that close.

Mike was a fool for the kid sleepovers.

"Climb in my fur."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #163 posted 01/26/19 7:22pm

happinessinits
uncutform

Dont consider myself a fan. And always remained more on the “I don’t know.” side when it came to his innocence. Never followed his 2005 trial, never cared that much to.
But I will say this - you can’t call this a “documentary” if it is as one-sided as this is. It’s making serious accusations with no evidence.
Not to undermine any actual victims of sexual crime out there and their psychological damage...but the reviews of ‘Leaving Neverland’ so far sounds like this so-called “chilling/credible piece” is made up of nothing but ‘emotional’ storytelling strategies seeking for sympathy or approval.
In that regard I’ll just add one more thing- when the hell do you start to take responsibilities? If these two’s claims were actually true, as adults they still made a gulty man walk and other “victims” suffer that much more. Perjury isn’t a joke, or something that should always be excused when people shout ‘trauma’ or ‘mentally unstable at the time’.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #164 posted 01/26/19 7:23pm

rogifan

MJ fans need to brace themselves...this is what’s out there.

https://www.indiewire.com...202038317/

The eloquent and straightforward “Leaving Neverland” was made for no other reason than to give shape to a nebulous cloud of rumors, many of which were floated in public before they were silenced behind settlements, and none of which a jury was able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. In the wake of Reed’s film and the shattering interview footage that it exists to share with us, there’s no longer a reasonable doubt. There’s no longer any doubt at all. Not only do the documentary’s two main subjects perfectly corroborate their separate accounts in all of the most tragic of ways, but they do so with a degree of vulnerability that denies any room for skepticism.
Paisley Park is in your heart
#PrinceForever 💜
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #165 posted 01/26/19 7:24pm

Free2BMe

Mintchip said:

Also, saying that numerous witnesses report MJ only acted respectfully toward children is kind of a straw man argument. No one is saying he didn’t publicly act respectful; of course he did. The crime they’re accusing him of would have been private, away from other adults.


You have it all wrong. We are saying that Robson, said and testified that Michael had never molested him. This was a 27 year old man who could have had Michael put in jail IF he had actually been abused as he claimed Michael did to him. There is no way in hell that if you had been abused as Robson claimed, you would not know it. This is why defenders of Michael know that Robson is a liar. The crime he is accusing Michael of is something that no kid could hide from a parent. Robson was not even around Michael when he claimed this happened. Joy Robson, his mother, would call and leave messages for Michael to help Robson with his dance career. Michael wouldn’t be at Neverland, so many many times he never responded to her.
She even admitted that she and her children didn’t see Michael as much as THEY wanted to. Therefore, how can Wade claim he was molested every night from the time he was 7-10 years old? If you had been molested that many times, would you not know that you had been abused? As I have stated, these accusations are bullshit and you don’t have to be a genius to know that. The only people who believe these two liars are people who WANT this to be true.
[Edited 1/26/19 19:34pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #166 posted 01/26/19 7:28pm

Free2BMe

rdhull said:



PeteSilas said:


when you have that kind of fame and money it's stupid to let anyone close to you, stupid. the arvizo's certainly were not victimized and that is the trial that happened. the arvizo's were full of shit, i think we can mostly all agree on that. Mike was a fool for letting people like that close.



Mike was a fool for the kid sleepovers.



Michael didn’t have kid sleepovers, he had FAMILIES visiting Neverland. That is not a sleepover.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #167 posted 01/26/19 7:30pm

rdhull

avatar

Free2BMe said:

rdhull said:

Mike was a fool for the kid sleepovers.

Michael didn’t have kid sleepovers, he had FAMILIES visiting Neverland. That is not a sleepover.

OK chief lol

"Climb in my fur."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #168 posted 01/26/19 7:36pm

Goddess4Real

avatar

Michael Jackson Criminal Defense Lawyer Thomas Mesereau Is “Shocked” By Claims Made By Wade Robson: “He was adamant that nothing had happened to him. So were his mother and sister” https://www.showbiz411.co...and-sister

EXCLUSIVE This morning I spoke with Thomas Mesereau, Michael Jackson’s brilliant criminal defense lawyer in his 2005 child molestation and conspiracy trial. Michael was found not guilty on all counts.

The first witness Mesereau put on the stand in Jackson’s defense was Wade Robson, who now claims Jackson molested him when he was a child. In 2005, Robson, Mesereau says, was “adamant” that Jackson had never done anything wrong to him. Robson’s mother and sister also took the stand and said the same thing.

The Robsons flew in from Australia for the trial. They stayed at Neverland. Mesereau interviewed them extensively.

Mesereau told me: “I found Wade articulate and likeable. But he staunchly defended Michael. His mother and sister supported him in their statements. On the stand, Wade was then subjected to a withering prosecutor. I’m shocked that he’s taken a position contrary to what he told me, and what he testified to in court.”

Mesereau hasn’t seen the documentary “Leaving Neverland” but he is very surprised. And this is a man who has examined and cross examined some of the toughest witnesses ever.

One important thing Mesereau agreed with me on. Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon, now deceased, thoroughly investigated Jackson twice, over a 10 year period. He looked ceaselessly for young boys who might have been abused by Jackson. Sneddon was obsessed with tagging Jackson. It was Sneddon who slid his card on the door of the Arvizo family after he saw them on TV, and crafted an unsuccessful prosecution against Jackson using their crazy testimony.

Sneddon knew the names of Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck, the two men who claim in the documentary to have been molested. If Sneddon had thought there was any real story there, he’d have gone after it. He never did.

Meanwhile, Robson has started a not for profit foundation and is soliciting donations. There can be no transparency, as he’s parked his 501 c3 very cleverly under something called the Hawaii Community Foundation. That way, Robson doesn’t have to file a form 990. We’ll never know if the makers of “Leaving Neverland” have donated money to it, for example. This was done on purpose. Leonardo DiCaprio does the same thing with his Foundation. It’s hidden.

Safechuck, meantime, is accused by Jackson fans of creating his story from a very disgusting book published years ago by a man named Victor Guitierrez. Jackson sued Guitierrez and won a $2.7 million judgement against. The writer has never paid up, and now lives in Chile. I threw my copy out a long time; I didn’t want it in my house.

“Leaving Neverland” can’t be taken seriously, and I’m surprised the press in Sundance– who didn’t cover Jackson — was so swayed by it. The movie offers no independent evidence, or third parties, just the claims of Robson and Safechuck. Just because it’s graphic, doesn’t mean it’s true. The rush to judgement here is alarming, and dangerous.

Keep Calm & Listen To Prince
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #169 posted 01/26/19 7:46pm

Goddess4Real

avatar

Free2BMe said:

Mintchip said:
I’ll reserve judgement until I see the film. I do agree with the reviewer from The Hollywood Reporter; it’s not for us to say how and when the victims of sexual abuse come forward. The damage is too deep. If someone lies under oath, it could be that the lie was all they had to cling too, as the truth may have been too horrible to own. The perjury, and the judges decision to throw out their lawsuit, are both easy to understand. Not so easy to understand is Robinson’s money grab; it undermines his character. Maybe that will be addressed in the doc.
The problem with the doc is that it is based on two LIARS with not an ounce of evidence. It would be like me accusing you and only my side being presented with not an ounce of rebuttal. If you are willing to see the one sided lies of These two liars, why not see the actual proof that they are lying. Robson testified that nothing happened to him. He was telling the truth. Even after Michael’s death, he continued to praise Michael and talk about his goodness. Michael and his children were actually invited to family picnic at Robsons house. Those are not the actions of a damaged or abused man. Wade Robson only suddenly came up with these claims when he was not hired to be choreographer for Cirque Soleil. He even told Matt Laure that this revelation was not repressed memomory. He actually claimed that he didn’t even know that he was sexually abused until he looked at his own son.Hmmmn, why was he thinking of molestation while looking at his own son? There is something very strange about that, that I think should be investigated. Let’s not forget that this is a man who claimed that he was abused every night and he didn’t know he was being abused? Robson, who had just #@$&* Britney Spears and brokeup her relationship with Justin Timberlake, claims he didn’t know he had been sexually abused until he looked at his own son. how strange is that? Again, his SUDDEN revelation only came after he lost the job that he had been publicly bragging about. Robson is even more heinous than the grifter family who accused Michael. He waited until Michael was no longer here to defend himself. The bottomline is that Robson is a coward and would never have done this while Michael was alive. Michael’s estate didn’t fall for his and Safechuck’s extortion attempt. A judge threw out their case because it was just that ridiculous. I can guarantee you that this is all about $$$. Fake “victims” like these two liars only undermine the plight of real victims. I sense that some of you who are judging Michael are real victims, so you want to latch on to the bullshit spewed by these liars, Robson and Safechuck, Finally, why didn’t this so called director interview any of the other people (girls and boys) who visted Neverland? Why did he focus on the two liars who tried to extort money from Michael’s estate and case thrown out. Even a fifth grader would be smart enough to figure that out. [Edited 1/26/19 18:27pm]

Here is Wade Robson, at rehearsal for the MJ tribute at the VMA in 2009. He was desperate to be part of the show.

Jo • CaledonianKitty Retweeted 13june2005

Poor Janet, she probably thought she was doing a good thing inc Wade in her MJ tribute. How was she to know at that time, years later that he would try all different schemes to make money out of Michael

Keep Calm & Listen To Prince
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #170 posted 01/26/19 7:51pm

happinessinits
uncutform

Goddess4Real said:

Michael Jackson Criminal Defense Lawyer Thomas Mesereau Is “Shocked” By Claims Made By Wade Robson:

“Leaving Neverland” can’t be taken seriously, and I’m surprised the press in Sundance– who didn’t cover Jackson — was so swayed by it. The movie offers no independent evidence, or third parties, just the claims of Robson and Safechuck. Just because it’s graphic, doesn’t mean it’s true. The rush to judgement here is alarming, and dangerous.




“Just because its graphic doesn’t mean it’s true. Rush to judgement here is alarming and dangerous.”
This is very true. The average information literacy of the public has gone down to the level of naive teenagers. No one cares to fact-check, no one cares about the credibility or actual evidence...people are so quick to believe any well-marketed story or provocative stuff that’s a tearjerker. And somehow anyone who presents themselves as a “victim” is a hero these days...way to go humanity...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #171 posted 01/26/19 8:20pm

CynicKill

I have a serious question about this trashy tabliod spectacle:

If it was good enough for Joan Crawford (Mommie Dearest) and R Kelly (Surviving R Kelly) then is it not good enough for Michael Jackson?

I haven't seen "Surviving.." for this reason. And I'm not negating the validity of its claims. I just choose not to participate.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #172 posted 01/27/19 2:06am

PeteSilas

PatrickS77 said:

PeteSilas said:

when you have that kind of fame and money it's stupid to let anyone close to you, stupid. the arvizo's certainly were not victimized and that is the trial that happened. the arvizo's were full of shit, i think we can mostly all agree on that. Mike was a fool for letting people like that close.

And what should he have done instead? Live a life in fear and in solitarity. It's easy for you to blame him for forging relationshsips when it doesn't affect you and you can do and befriend whoever the hell you want.

I don't like people, i don't hardly even talk to my closest friends and family, all they bring is drama. I'm unusual, I know, so I wasn't the average person you thought of when you said that. again, i don't like people, think they are vile, deceptive and manipulative. I trust my cats.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #173 posted 01/27/19 2:13am

PeteSilas

and did anyone else find robsons claim that he was molested "everyday" silly? I mean, even a freak wouldn't do something everyday. I wouldn't even screw fine women everyday even if i could.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #174 posted 01/27/19 2:14am

ChocolateBox31
21

avatar

CynicKill said:

I have a serious question about this trashy tabliod spectacle:


If it was good enough for Joan Crawford (Mommie Dearest) and R Kelly (Surviving R Kelly) then is it not good enough for Michael Jackson?


I haven't seen "Surviving.." for this reason. And I'm not negating the validity of its claims. I just choose not to participate.







prince
[Edited 2/9/19 19:55pm]
"4 all of us, life is death without adventure,& adventure only comes 2 those who are willing 2 b daring & take chances."prince 1985
Well, eye can't b played a person tryna play me, plays themselves prince 1998
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #175 posted 01/27/19 3:51am

ItsLetoyaBaby

I'm afraid thia will be the end of MJ. Those two guys denied ever having been molested under oath. Now they come back with deliberately shocking claims, full of shockvalue descriptions to arise sympathy. As a MJ fan I'm simply tired. I don't know if I can continue with thia draining effort.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #176 posted 01/27/19 4:23am

ItsLetoyaBaby

Another boy comes forward: Michael Jacobs-Hagen. Says he now realizes he has been abused by MJ. Jesus. A shitstorm is insuring and Michael isn't even here to defend himself.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #177 posted 01/27/19 6:24am

PatrickS77

avatar

ItsLetoyaBaby said:

Another boy comes forward: Michael Jacobs-Hagen. Says he now realizes he has been abused by MJ. Jesus. A shitstorm is insuring and Michael isn't even here to defend himself.

Another proven liar. I was there in Munich, when he was 14 and first met Michael in '98. We talked to him before and after he got to visit Michael's suite. His mother was interviewed on german televesion. Come 15 years later he is peddling his book "Will you be my friend", claiming he already met Michael the first time in '95 in Disneyland and accompanied him on the HIStory tour. I've been on 21 shows on that tour I and no one saw him on that tour. As he wasn't there as both he and his mother told us that he met Michael for the first time in '98. But despite the embellishments, he was singing Michael's praises. Until yesterday or whenever yesterday's story was written. Before that he was selling fraud MJ memorabilia, swindling people out of thousands of dollars. German authorities are investigating him. There have been charges filed and there are convictions against him. He's another low life liar, oportunist and quite frankly, sociopath, seizing the moment. Total scum.
[Edited 1/27/19 6:25am]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #178 posted 01/27/19 6:29am

PatrickS77

avatar

PeteSilas said:


I don't like people, i don't hardly even talk to my closest friends and family, all they bring is drama. I'm unusual, I know, so I wasn't the average person you thought of when you said that. again, i don't like people, think they are vile, deceptive and manipulative. I trust my cats.



Well. Michael wasn't like that. He saw the good in everyone. Or at least tried to at one point. It's not really fair to blame him for the fact there are rotten people in this world.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #179 posted 01/27/19 6:45am

Free2BMe

PeteSilas said:

and did anyone else find robsons claim that he was molested "everyday" silly? I mean, even a freak wouldn't do something everyday. I wouldn't even screw fine women everyday even if i could.



Exactly! This is the kind of thing that people need to pick up on. There is no way in hell that could be true. Remember this punk ass bitch, Wade Fobson claimed that he didn’t know what sexual abuse was? Anyone who was molested everyday would know.

I have been saying this same thing in my posts. Thank you for being aware and intelligent enough, to see this bulls hit for what it is. These liars were not molested and the NAMBLA member and director of this trash doc, Dan Reeves, knows they are are liars. All of this salacious trash comes directly from a book by another NAMBLA member,Victor Guitierrez. Michael sued this bastard and won a 2.7 million settlement against him. Gutierrez fled to Chile and never paid up. Guiterrez wrote these lies and Robson and Safechuck are using his book as a script. Everything they are claiming is basically word for word from a pedophile, Victor Vuiterrez.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 6 of 48 « First<2345678910>Last »
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Music: Non-Prince > Michael Jackson sex abuse documentary coming to Sundance & HBO