Latest on MJJC

Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">lies lies lies omg and more lies <a href="https://t.co/LP0axo2zZd">https://t.co/LP0axo2zZd</a></p>&mdash; Paris-Michael K. J. (@ParisJackson) <a href="https://twitter.com/ParisJackson/status/1107008402910146560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">**** you you ****ing liars</p>&mdash; Paris-Michael K. J. (@ParisJackson) <a href="https://twitter.com/ParisJackson/status/1107009409136246784?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">&quot;HBO is clearly trying to stall the process here. But the CA Arbitration Act doesn't allow that. For the reasons stated, Estate respectfully requests that the Court grant this application &amp; advance the hearing date on the Petition to Compel Arbitration to 04/15/19.&quot;<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a></p>&mdash; TSCM (@MJJRepository) <a href="https://twitter.com/MJJRepository/status/1107178478791729152?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">ESTATE: HBO's misconduct is so glaring that a young man mentioned by name in the Film [who] falsely asserts was molested by MJ, has himself retained counsel &amp; threatened to sue HBO—shockingly, HBO &amp; its partners never even bothered to seek his comment about the Film.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a></p>&mdash; TSCM (@MJJRepository) <a href="https://twitter.com/MJJRepository/status/1107179397897965569?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Eventually many will have to do an &quot;about face&quot; over their trigger-finger decisions to remove Michael's likeness from their establishments based on a fictional TV show, which is unraveling at breakneck speed.<br><br>It'll be their own loss if they don't, not MJ's legacy.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a></p>&mdash; TSCM (@MJJRepository) <a href="https://twitter.com/MJJRepository/status/1107212069131177985?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="pt" dir="ltr">A marcha dos Soldados do Amor. Fãs austríacos de <a href="https://twitter.com/michaeljackson?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MichaelJackson</a> protestam pacificamente pela sua inocência. <a href="https://t.co/OsjNgJ2qGN">pic.twitter.com/OsjNgJ2qGN</a></p>&mdash; LoveMJJAlways (@LoveMJJAlways) <a href="https://twitter.com/LoveMJJAlways/status/1107239766859223040?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Thing Is, Michael Jackson Is Innocent.<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ProvenInnocentUK?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ProvenInnocentUK</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJFamUNITE?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJFamUNITE</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MichaelJackson?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MichaelJackson</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJTruthSquad?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJTruthSquad</a> <a href="https://t.co/RZHklwzNnQ">https://t.co/RZHklwzNnQ</a></p>&mdash; LoveMJJAlways (@LoveMJJAlways) <a href="https://twitter.com/LoveMJJAlways/status/1107227167736250368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Dear <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJFAM?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJFAM</a>,<br><br>From right NOW, Please use the hashtag <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ProvenInnocentUK?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ProvenInnocentUK</a> when tweeting <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJINNOCENT?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJINNOCENT</a> and feel free to <a href="https://twitter.com/TfL?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TFL</a> - If you're wondering why? Well here's some proof that perhaps we are all living in some kind of alternate universe <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NoIronyLost?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NoIronyLost</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AreTFL4Real?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AreTFL4Real</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/JusticeForMJ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#JusticeForMJ</a> <a href="https://t.co/eOLBknnjle">pic.twitter.com/eOLBknnjle</a></p>&mdash; Think Fathers (@SeanyOkane) <a href="https://twitter.com/SeanyOkane/status/1107204054650884101?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I just spoke with <a href="https://twitter.com/InStudioWithMJ?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@InStudioWithMJ</a> and he is very credible. Most interestingly, he says he was in studio with Michael Jackson about 300 times (likely more) &amp; there were only kids there on a handful of occasions, with Wade Robson (who claims abuse in studio) only there maybe twice. <a href="https://t.co/6t8NuJPJQk">pic.twitter.com/6t8NuJPJQk</a></p>&mdash; John Ziegler (@Zigmanfreud) <a href="https://twitter.com/Zigmanfreud/status/1107048263738220544?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">**** louis vuitton its still MJ Forever</p>&mdash; Rashaun Will (@RashaunWill) <a href="https://twitter.com/RashaunWill/status/1106464334564257792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">15. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Leaving Neverland documentary is nothing but a one sided argument between a dead person and two proven liars.</p>&mdash; Vincent Marcus (@VincentMarcus) <a href="https://twitter.com/VincentMarcus/status/1106654241551060993?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">15. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">so y’all really trying to remove and erase Michael Jackson from history all due to a one-sided documentary that can easily be debunked when it’s been proven time &amp; time again of his innocence? wow- and yet the real pedophiles in hollywood’s works are remaining untouched? i can’t- <a href="https://t.co/N1uFQT51D6">https://t.co/N1uFQT51D6</a></p>&mdash; &#119948;&#119945;&#119938;(&#119949;&#119946;&#119938;)&#8312;&#8312; (@GLOSSPHOENIX) <a href="https://twitter.com/GLOSSPHOENIX/status/1107023575331061760?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The ‘mute Michael Jackson’ campaign wasn’t attracting much support in Trafalgar Square, London, this afternoon. In fact, teenagers &amp; their parents were filming themselves partying to his music in the crowd at this street performance. <a href="https://t.co/PUeTJCsliz">pic.twitter.com/PUeTJCsliz</a></p>&mdash; Charles Thomson (@CEThomson) <a href="https://twitter.com/CEThomson/status/1106717695603552257?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I watched Leaving Neverland. I then listened to <a href="https://twitter.com/Zigmanfreud?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Zigmanfreud</a>’s interview with Brandi Jackson, who asserts she dated accuser Wade Robson for over 7 yrs (the relationship is NOT mentioned in Leaving Neverland). Deserving of a listen: <a href="https://t.co/jAKANZiEi1">https://t.co/jAKANZiEi1</a></p>&mdash; Jedediah Bila (@JedediahBila) <a href="https://twitter.com/JedediahBila/status/1107113639578947589?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Taj Jackson recently said &quot;their timeline is getting smaller and smaller&quot; and here we are. Absolutely extraordinary.<br><br>&quot;Trust in the God's of time, people!&quot; <a href="https://twitter.com/RAZ0RFIST?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@RAZ0RFIST</a> <a href="https://t.co/p5XdSU7Wfc">https://t.co/p5XdSU7Wfc</a></p>&mdash; Samar @TheMJAP (@TheMJAP) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheMJAP/status/1107248540890345475?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">He will not be muted! Tweet me when and where you hear <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MichaelJackson?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MichaelJackson</a> being played in stores, bars, clubs, TV, Radio... Anywhere. Get pics and video!! Let's prove he cannot be silenced. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LeavingNeverland?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LeavingNeverland</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJ</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MichaelJacksonIsInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MichaelJacksonIsInnocent</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJFAM?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJFAM</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJIsInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJIsInnocent</a></p>&mdash; Steven Briggs (@stevenbriggsuk) <a href="https://twitter.com/stevenbriggsuk/status/1106975568870981632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The MJ Tribute show last night saw a packed house with audiences grooving the full 90mins. Ages 5 to age 65 were in attendance and when they put up the ‘facts don’t lie...’ poster there was a deafening applause.. mute who? <a href="https://twitter.com/Oprah?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Oprah</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/Starbucks?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Starbucks</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/HBO?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@HBO</a> <a href="https://t.co/9bUNsU1oyz">pic.twitter.com/9bUNsU1oyz</a></p>&mdash; Jasmine (@Jasmine54434817) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jasmine54434817/status/1106919820124143618?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Michael Jackson has his place in music history and museums. <a href="https://t.co/iYL62ryL8x">https://t.co/iYL62ryL8x</a></p>&mdash; MJVibe (@Mjvibe) <a href="https://twitter.com/Mjvibe/status/1107181190946193408?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">My friend sent me the original <a href="https://t.co/uObahaPTHx">pic.twitter.com/uObahaPTHx</a></p>&mdash; Nicole (@nicoleslifee12) <a href="https://twitter.com/nicoleslifee12/status/1106762272892833792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Tony Robbins convention (March 16, 2019) in LA

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TheMJCastEp97?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TheMJCastEp97</a> - Bill Whitfield Special<br><br>Season 5 is here! <a href="https://twitter.com/JamonBull?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JamonBull</a> &amp; <a href="https://twitter.com/damienshields?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@DamienShields</a> interview <a href="https://twitter.com/MJBODYGUARDS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MJBodyguards</a>. We discuss MJ the man, the father, the artist and what it was like to protect him. J.<br><br>&#128242; <a href="https://t.co/M3cYJlv2Qr">https://t.co/M3cYJlv2Qr</a><br>&#128224; <a href="https://t.co/I4hoszp3fY">https://t.co/I4hoszp3fY</a><br>&#128214; <a href="https://t.co/czSkVsx0pE">https://t.co/czSkVsx0pE</a> <a href="https://t.co/AEpjD2GukF">pic.twitter.com/AEpjD2GukF</a></p>&mdash; The MJCast (@TheMJCast) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheMJCast/status/1106916351757541377?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">i am defending him, in my own way. you’re a really smart guyyyyyyyy</p>&mdash; Paris-Michael K. J. (@ParisJackson) <a href="https://twitter.com/ParisJackson/status/1106751463689064448?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
A new, detailed and helpful article from TheMichaelJacksonAllegations

NOTE: This article includes lots of screencaps of legal docs, photos and links which don't appear below.

Differences Between Leaving Neverland/interviews and the Robson/Safechuck lawsuits
Posted on March 17, 2019

While the story in &#8220;Leaving Neverland&#8221; is based on Wade Robson and James Safechuck&#8217;s lawsuits, there are some differences between the film, their interviews during the promotional campaign of the film and their complaints. Here I will post a list of those differences:

1) In the film Wade Robson makes the allegation that Michael Jackson made him get rid of a bloody underwear after attempting to anally penetrate him when Wade was 14.

Robson does claim the anal penetration attempt in the court filing, but does not claim anything about a bloody underwear and Jackson allegedly making him get rid of it. This is all that is alleged in the complaint about the alleged anal penetration [1]:


Is this yet another example of Wade Robson&#8217;s ever evolving &#8220;memories&#8221;?

2) In interviews during the promotional campaign of the film, James Safechuck made an allegation that Jackson supposedly made a video tape of their alleged sex acts. Safechuck, conveniently, alleges that Jackson then destroyed this evidence.

&#8220;Both men claim Jackson never wore condoms during their sex acts. They allege he often plied them with alcohol and pornography before molesting them, and even recorded one of his sexual encounters with Safechuck.

&#8220;He immediately freaked out when he realized what he just did and taped over it,&#8221; Safechuck says. Although he was aware Jackson was filming, &#8220;it was fun at the time, and when you&#8217;re having fun, (Jackson) isn&#8217;t thinking about it. But later, he&#8217;s like, &#8216;Wait a minute. I just documented this.&#8217; He was very careful, but that was his one sort of slip.&#8220; [2]

This claim was neither in his complaint, nor in the film. It was first alleged during the promotional interviews of &#8220;Leaving Neverland&#8221;. There is no evidence of Jackson ever making or having such tapes. Keep in mind that his premises were raided and thoroughly searched in both 1993 and 2003 and also that he was a disorganized hoarder. No sex tape was ever found in his possession either with Safechuck or any other child.

(Maybe we should take a mental note of the fact that when Safechuck first started claiming this, the R. Kelly case, that heavily features sex tapes, was very prominent in the media.)

3) James Safechuck alleges in his court filings that Jackson showed him child pornography &#8211; movies in which children were masturbating [3].


Safechuck made the claim in the film that Jackson showed him pornography, but there was no mention of movies with children masturbating in it or any kind of child pornography.

There is no evidence of Jackson ever having such movies. No such movies were ever found at his premises during the extensive house searches in both 1993 and 2003.

4) In the film Wade Robson alleges that what finally convinced him of protecting Jackson in Court in 2005 was a dinner that they had together before Wade&#8217;s testimony where Jackson looked very sick and Wade felt sorry for his children and was worried for them that they would be left without a parent if Jackson went to jail. Wade tells about this in a dramatic tone where he attempts to seem compassionate for Jackson&#8217;s children.

Here you can watch that part: https://streamable.com/bkqkd

In his complaint this was never mentioned as a motive for him to testify the way he did. There his reason was Jackson&#8217;s alleged role playing of him on the phone and him not understanding that he was abused [1]:


Moreover, Michael Jackson&#8217;s nephew, Taj Jackson claims that Robson is definitely lying in this clip as this dinner actually took place AFTER Wade Robson already had testified. Taj was there, along with other witnesses, such as the Barnes family. [4]


5) Although Robson in the film mentioned Jackson calling him on the phone before his 2005 testimony, but he leaves out the part where Jackson told him: &#8220;They are making up all these lies about you and me, saying that we did all this disgusting sexual stuff.&#8221;

Probably because &#8211; although Robson now, in the hindsight tries to characterize this as some sort of &#8220;role play&#8221; -, it actually looks like something that an innocent man would say, not an abuser to his victim. Jackson calls the allegations &#8220;made up&#8221; and &#8220;lies&#8221;, and calls them &#8220;disgusting sexual stuff&#8221;. Not love. Not romance. Not a beautiful thing.

It defies Wade&#8217;s claim of him believing it was love until 2012, because he was allegedly brainwashed into that by Jackson. Here he quotes Jackson himself telling him that such acts would be &#8220;disgusting sexual stuff&#8221;, so how would that not, at least, ring a bell to an adult man, like Wade was in 2005, that something was wrong with the &#8220;love&#8221; angle, after all?

6) In the film the narrative is that these two men protected Jackson for so long because they were brainwashed to be &#8220;in love&#8221; with him. However, in their lawsuit there are other angles that are omitted from the film &#8211; possibly because they would contradict the &#8220;in love&#8221; narrative.

For example, in Safechuck&#8217;s complaint there is also a strong narrative of alleged constant intimidation and threats by Jackson. In a declaration he claims that Jackson constantly checked on him over the years by calling him once or twice a year and reminded him to keep his mouth shut or else his &#8220;life would be over&#8221;.

This narrative in his complaint was used to support an equitable estoppel argument. Equitable estoppel is a legal doctrine that prevents that someone could take advantage of his wrongdoings in court. For example, in relation to statutes of limitations, if a claimant or plaintiff fails to file a timely claim because the defendant threatened or intimidated him, then equitable estoppel can be invoked and in that case claimant&#8217;s/plaintiff&#8217;s complaint would not be dismissed even if statutes of limitations have already run.

For this argument and to get around the statutes of limitations Safechuck needed to establish ongoing threats and intimidation by Jackson, so he filed a declaration in which, next to the &#8220;love&#8221; narrative, he is also going on and on and on about alleged threats and intimidation by Jackson, although the exact nature of it remains vague. He writes:

&#8220;During the entire time I knew [Michael Jackson], he continued to intimidate and threaten me in a manner that can be described as subtle only in the sense that he did not threaten actual physical violence &#8211; but his intimidation and threats were no less real and effective. He told me over and over again that my life would be finished if anyone found out about what he/we had done, and I believed him. I had no reason not to, because he trained me to believe that and I had no reason to doubt or question what he said. And because of who [Michael Jackson] was &#8211; his power, his iconic status around the world, his fame and fortune &#8211; I knew that he could see to it that my life would be over if what happened ever came out.&#8221; [5]

Let us note here, that there is no record of Jackson being a vengeful, threatening, intimidating character who would &#8220;see to it&#8221; that people&#8217;s life were over if they crossed his path. On the contrary, he was a pretty meek guy. But Safechuck needed to claim intimidation and threats for an equitable estoppel argument to try to get around statutes of limitations, so he claimed intimidation and threats.

7) A LOT is left out of the film about the legal proceedings of both Robson and Safechuck. In actuality, the fact that they are both suing Jacskon&#8217;s entities (Estate and companies) for a monetary compensation is only mentioned fleetingly. It is mentioned in the film that the lawsuit was dismissed &#8220;based on technical grounds and not merit&#8221;, but it fails to explain the legal background to that and that the ruling does include implicit judgements about the truthfulness of some of their claims.

For example, to get around statutes of limitations, Robson claimed that he did not know about the administration of the Michael Jackson Estate before March 4, 2013, which proved to be a blatant lie &#8211; and that under oath.

Safechuck&#8217;s complaint never even got past the demurrer phase, because, unlike Robson, he was never even employed by Jackson&#8217;s companies during the time he claims sexual abuse. To be able to even sue, he needed to make up a very contrived theory about how the fact that he danced with Jackson (and other children) on stage during the Bad Tour was somehow &#8220;employment&#8221; by Jackson&#8217;s companies.

Considering that they claim this is not about about money, it is interesting that they both go lengths to get to that money in Court, even if they have to lie or twist things for that.

Both men&#8217;s lawsuits allege that Jackson&#8217;s companies, MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures, were &#8220;the most sophisticated public child sexual abuse procurement and facilitation organization the world has known&#8221; that knowingly and deliberately &#8220;facilitated&#8221; their alleged abuse.

They make up contrived ways to try to blame their alleged abuse on the companies just to be able to sue them, calling Jackson&#8217;s personal assistant at the time, Norma Staikos a &#8220;madam&#8221; or &#8220;procurer&#8221; of child sexual abuse victims for Michael Jackson&#8221;, all the while never mentioning their own parents&#8217; responsibility in their lawsuit.

While doing this, they make several false claims which were inadvertently destroyed by Wade&#8217;s own mother, Joy Robson in her 2016 deposition.

For a detailed discussion of Robson&#8217;s civil lawsuit see this article (like mentioned, Safechuck&#8217;s lawsuit never even got to this stage, but he made similar allegations about the companies as Robson).


To be continued&#8230;
 
PoP said:
Now Louis Vuitton is about 50/50 on this. It was the CEO who wanted to pull the MJ menswear, but the designer defends the menswear.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/louis-vuitton-michael-jackson-menswear-show-1.5057945
Click to expand...
I am glad the desinger is standing his ground. The line is a success and the CEO wants to pull because of what 2 proven liars said in a doc which is being shown each day to be lies? I keep saying this is bigger than MJ. This all will come back to bit all of us in the @$$. So this mean now someone can say something and what u work for will be moved. No, that is wrong.
 
My new You Tube accound is now again blocked after two days!!!
I can't really understand it!!!
They say in their e-mail, I have transgress against the user rules because of froud, spam and DECEPTIVE advertising.

I have only posted less then 20 posts with this account and only shared 5 links to MJyoutube videos with longer comments.
No froud, its not spam for me, and not deceptive advertising.

I am not allowed to make any new account now.
I can make a formal objection against this.
But I think it will not help.
I have at this moment no posibilty to defend Michael because I am not a member of any other social network.

So we are making now deceptive advertising in trying to educate people about the truth and saying these three accuserers are liars!!!!
Interesting!!!
 
Last edited:
Doggone;4250144 said:
Stop acting like a biatch and respect other people’s opinion. Who tf are you to doubt that she is not a fan? Damn, you are pathetic.
Click to expand...
But apparently it's okay for you to insult me for having an opinion? Disgusting. Grow up.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A moron, because there have been 4 (not 6), of which, one was found not credible by a jury &amp; two testified FOR him. A complete moron because you have 0 idea what Paris Jackson did or why. If she did try to commit suicide it could have been due to idiotic media coverage like yours <a href="https://t.co/VGRg48egyC">https://t.co/VGRg48egyC</a></p>&mdash; John Ziegler (@Zigmanfreud) <a href="https://twitter.com/Zigmanfreud/status/1107060657470332929?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">LMAO you aren’t an accuser of someone like Jackson if you have never sued, testified or even done a damn public interview. You can’t seriously be nearly this dumb!</p>&mdash; John Ziegler (@Zigmanfreud) <a href="https://twitter.com/Zigmanfreud/status/1107062397175422977?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">John you’ve just made my night! &#129315;on a serious note tho, thank you for taking the time to defend fact and truth, it’s just such a shame that they’re aren’t more journalists with your integrity <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/FactsDontLiePeopleDo?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#FactsDontLiePeopleDo</a></p>&mdash; Nicola Pryce (@npryce) <a href="https://twitter.com/npryce/status/1107062451802124288?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

could'nt agree more !!!
 
ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona said:
My new You Tube accound is now again blocked after two days!!!
I can't really understand it!!!
They say in their e-mail, I have transgress against the user rules because of froud, spam and DECEPTIVE advertising.

I have only posted less then 20 posts with this account and only shared 5 links to MJyoutube videos with longer comments.
No froud, its not spam for me, and not deceptive advertising.

I am not allowed to make any new account now.
I can make a formal objection against this.
But I think it will not help.
I have at this moment no posibilty to defend Michael because I am not a member of any other social network.

So we are making now deceptive advertising in trying to educate people about the truth and saying these three accuserers are liars!!!!
Interesting!!!
Click to expand...

Ive been dealing with the same thing for weeks, I just keep making new ones and continue.. It sucks!! and when it's suspended all your comments no longer show so it's all erased..
 
You could try just telling them the title of the video to search for instead of putting links in your comments.
 
^ They are being suspended not because of the links.. I personally never really share links on yotube but Ive been suspended 4 times since the doc aired.

Haters are either reporting us or youtube is doing it intentionally - my appeal was denied to unsuspend my main acct.
 
KOPV said:
^ They are being suspended not because of the links.. I personally never really share links on yotube but Ive been suspended 4 times since the doc aired.

Haters are either reporting us or youtube is doing it intentionally - my appeal was denied to unsuspend my main acct.
Click to expand...

It's haters. YouTube is way, way too big to manually handle comment reports, they use bots.
 
Sorry i have no experinces with online tranlater so I share this information in German.

Pro7 bringt eigene Sendung zur Jackson-Doku „Leaving Neverland“

Der Münchner Privatsender Pro7 will am Tag der Ausstrahlung von „Leaving Neverland“ (6. April, 20.15 Uhr) in einer eigenen Sendung Fragen stellen, die die umstrittene US-Doku über Michael Jackson nicht stellt. Es geht auch darum, wie die neuerlichen Missbrauchsvorwürfe die Sicht auf das Gesamtwerk Jacksons verändern

Manche hören seine Musik nach den neuesten Anschuldigungen nicht mehr: Michael Jackson, als er am 2. März 2005 zu seinem Prozess wegen des Verdachts des Kindesmissbrauch beim Santa Barbara County Superior Court eintraf.Quelle:*Michael A. Mariant/AP

München

Pro7*begleitet die US-Dokumentation „Leaving Neverland“ über den Popstar*Michael Jackson*am 6. April mit einer eigenen*Sendung. Sie beschäftigt sich etwa damit, warum treue Fans den ehemaligen Superstar noch immer verteidigen und wie die Familie*Jackson*auf „Leaving Neverland“ reagiert, wie der Sender am Mittwoch mitteilte. Unter dem Titel „Leaving Neverland“: Das*Pro7*Spezial“ sollen ab 19.05 Uhr Opfer, Wegbegleiter, Fans, Freunde und Kritiker*Jacksons*zu Wort kommen.

„In unserem Pro7-Spezial stellen wir Fragen, die die Doku nicht stellt“, so ProSieben-Chefredakteur*Stefan Vaupel. Es gehe auch darum, wie die neuen Vorwürfe den Blick auf das Gesamtwerk von*Michael Jackson*veränderten. Der Privatsender zeigt „Leaving Neverland“ ab 20.15 Uhr. Die Doku hatte in den*USA*geteilte Reaktionen zur Folge.

Von RND/dpa
 
This may be a bit off, but this is a direct translation of above from google translate:

He Munich Private Broadcaster Pro7 wants to ask questions on the Day "Leaving Neverland" airs (April 6, 8:15 P.m.) in a broadcast of his own That the controversial U.S. documentary about Michael Jackson does not ask. It's also about how the renewed Allegations Of abuse are changing The View of Jackson'S Overall Body of Work
Some no longer listen to his Music after the latest Allegations: Michael Jackson when he arrived at Santa Barbara County Superior Court for his Trial on suspicion of Child abuse on March 2, 2005. Source: * Michael A. Mariant/AP
Munich
Pro7*begleitet the US documentary "Leaving Neverland" about the Pop Star * Michael Jackson * On April 6 with a * Broadcast of his own. She deals, for example, with why loyal Fans are still defending the former Superstar and how the Family * Jackson * is responding to "Leaving Neverland," the Station announced Wednesday. Titled ' Leaving Neverland ': Das*Pro7*Spezial ', victims, Companions, F
 
ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona;4250177 said:
Unter dem Titel „Leaving Neverland“: Das*Pro7*Spezial“ sollen ab 19.05 Uhr Opfer, Wegbegleiter, Fans, Freunde und Kritiker*Jacksons*zu Wort kommen.
Click to expand...

That they are saying there that "Opfer" -means victims are part of the show scares me cause I think the victim can be Jacobshagen.
How can they give him a stage?
 
ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona;4250177 said:
Sorry i have no experinces with online tranlater so I share this information in German.

Pro7 bringt eigene Sendung zur Jackson-Doku &#8222;Leaving Neverland&#8220;

Der Münchner Privatsender Pro7 will am Tag der Ausstrahlung von &#8222;Leaving Neverland&#8220; (6. April, 20.15 Uhr) in einer eigenen Sendung Fragen stellen, die die umstrittene US-Doku über Michael Jackson nicht stellt. Es geht auch darum, wie die neuerlichen Missbrauchsvorwürfe die Sicht auf das Gesamtwerk Jacksons verändern

Manche hören seine Musik nach den neuesten Anschuldigungen nicht mehr: Michael Jackson, als er am 2. März 2005 zu seinem Prozess wegen des Verdachts des Kindesmissbrauch beim Santa Barbara County Superior Court eintraf.Quelle:*Michael A. Mariant/AP

München

Pro7*begleitet die US-Dokumentation &#8222;Leaving Neverland&#8220; über den Popstar*Michael Jackson*am 6. April mit einer eigenen*Sendung. Sie beschäftigt sich etwa damit, warum treue Fans den ehemaligen Superstar noch immer verteidigen und wie die Familie*Jackson*auf &#8222;Leaving Neverland&#8220; reagiert, wie der Sender am Mittwoch mitteilte. Unter dem Titel &#8222;Leaving Neverland&#8220;: Das*Pro7*Spezial&#8220; sollen ab 19.05 Uhr Opfer, Wegbegleiter, Fans, Freunde und Kritiker*Jacksons*zu Wort kommen.

&#8222;In unserem Pro7-Spezial stellen wir Fragen, die die Doku nicht stellt&#8220;, so ProSieben-Chefredakteur*Stefan Vaupel. Es gehe auch darum, wie die neuen Vorwürfe den Blick auf das Gesamtwerk von*Michael Jackson*veränderten. Der Privatsender zeigt &#8222;Leaving Neverland&#8220; ab 20.15 Uhr. Die Doku hatte in den*USA*geteilte Reaktionen zur Folge.

Von RND/dpa
Click to expand...



In short:

German TV channel Pro7 will have a talkshow special about LN aired before the actual film. (Film starts prime time 8pm CET).

The show will give a platform for "victims (?!), people who knew Michael, fans, friends and critics".



I really hope they DO invite Jacobshaven as a "victim"... it's easy to expose him, and he has the charisma of a conman douchebag that he is.
 
Last edited:
pierpinto1;4250145 said:
UK SALES - Week Ending 14 March
In the first full week since the damning four-hour documentary Leaving Neverland was screened on Channel 4, sales of Michael Jackson albums have increased considerably. 2003 compilation Number Ones jumps 61-28 (2,770 sales) to achieve its highest chart position for 106 weeks, while 2005 compilation The Essential climbs 168-97 (1,252 sales). 1987 studio set Bad and 1982&#8217;s Thriller return to the Top 200, at No.110 (1,147 Sales) and No.141 (978 sales) respectively. Overall sales of Jackson albums last week increased 210.21% to 21,389. In stark contrast, radio is turning away from Jackson. In the four weeks leading up to the screening of the documentary, the 423 stations tracked by Radio Monitor aired an average of 4,174 tracks by Jackson every week (4,214, 4,151, 4,254 and 4,076). That fell to 1,989 in the week the programme was screened, and to just 221 in the latest frame &#8211; just 5.29% of the average for those four weeks.

Source ; OCC

Huge sales increase! Sales tripled compared to prior week.
Click to expand...

I loooooooove this and I really didn't expect this at all. No way can this only be fans doing this, no way! But I wonder how that happens? I mean surely everyone in this world has heard his music by now, or perhaps some people that watched it didn't know his music all that well and heard some of his music during the mockumentary (this is just me guessing, haven't seen the shit) and thought "oh damn, I gots to check me some of that music now." :)
 
MJ's entire legal team from Geragos to Mesereau, Ross, Yu & his PA Tavasci likely have strong grounds to sue Wade & James on multiple fronts, as well as the director & networks.

They allege that these parties directly participated in witness intimidation & bullying.

#MJInnocent https://t.co/aP9Uwe9vU7
 
myosotis;4250164 said:
A new, detailed and helpful article from TheMichaelJacksonAllegations

NOTE: This article includes lots of screencaps of legal docs, photos and links which don't appear below.

Differences Between Leaving Neverland/interviews and the Robson/Safechuck lawsuits
Posted on March 17, 2019

While the story in &#8220;Leaving Neverland&#8221; is based on Wade Robson and James Safechuck&#8217;s lawsuits, there are some differences between the film, their interviews during the promotional campaign of the film and their complaints. Here I will post a list of those differences:

1) In the film Wade Robson makes the allegation that Michael Jackson made him get rid of a bloody underwear after attempting to anally penetrate him when Wade was 14.

Robson does claim the anal penetration attempt in the court filing, but does not claim anything about a bloody underwear and Jackson allegedly making him get rid of it. This is all that is alleged in the complaint about the alleged anal penetration [1]:


Is this yet another example of Wade Robson&#8217;s ever evolving &#8220;memories&#8221;?

2) In interviews during the promotional campaign of the film, James Safechuck made an allegation that Jackson supposedly made a video tape of their alleged sex acts. Safechuck, conveniently, alleges that Jackson then destroyed this evidence.

&#8220;Both men claim Jackson never wore condoms during their sex acts. They allege he often plied them with alcohol and pornography before molesting them, and even recorded one of his sexual encounters with Safechuck.

&#8220;He immediately freaked out when he realized what he just did and taped over it,&#8221; Safechuck says. Although he was aware Jackson was filming, &#8220;it was fun at the time, and when you&#8217;re having fun, (Jackson) isn&#8217;t thinking about it. But later, he&#8217;s like, &#8216;Wait a minute. I just documented this.&#8217; He was very careful, but that was his one sort of slip.&#8220; [2]

This claim was neither in his complaint, nor in the film. It was first alleged during the promotional interviews of &#8220;Leaving Neverland&#8221;. There is no evidence of Jackson ever making or having such tapes. Keep in mind that his premises were raided and thoroughly searched in both 1993 and 2003 and also that he was a disorganized hoarder. No sex tape was ever found in his possession either with Safechuck or any other child.

(Maybe we should take a mental note of the fact that when Safechuck first started claiming this, the R. Kelly case, that heavily features sex tapes, was very prominent in the media.)

3) James Safechuck alleges in his court filings that Jackson showed him child pornography &#8211; movies in which children were masturbating [3].


Safechuck made the claim in the film that Jackson showed him pornography, but there was no mention of movies with children masturbating in it or any kind of child pornography.

There is no evidence of Jackson ever having such movies. No such movies were ever found at his premises during the extensive house searches in both 1993 and 2003.

4) In the film Wade Robson alleges that what finally convinced him of protecting Jackson in Court in 2005 was a dinner that they had together before Wade&#8217;s testimony where Jackson looked very sick and Wade felt sorry for his children and was worried for them that they would be left without a parent if Jackson went to jail. Wade tells about this in a dramatic tone where he attempts to seem compassionate for Jackson&#8217;s children.

Here you can watch that part: https://streamable.com/bkqkd

In his complaint this was never mentioned as a motive for him to testify the way he did. There his reason was Jackson&#8217;s alleged role playing of him on the phone and him not understanding that he was abused [1]:


Moreover, Michael Jackson&#8217;s nephew, Taj Jackson claims that Robson is definitely lying in this clip as this dinner actually took place AFTER Wade Robson already had testified. Taj was there, along with other witnesses, such as the Barnes family. [4]


5) Although Robson in the film mentioned Jackson calling him on the phone before his 2005 testimony, but he leaves out the part where Jackson told him: &#8220;They are making up all these lies about you and me, saying that we did all this disgusting sexual stuff.&#8221;

Probably because &#8211; although Robson now, in the hindsight tries to characterize this as some sort of &#8220;role play&#8221; -, it actually looks like something that an innocent man would say, not an abuser to his victim. Jackson calls the allegations &#8220;made up&#8221; and &#8220;lies&#8221;, and calls them &#8220;disgusting sexual stuff&#8221;. Not love. Not romance. Not a beautiful thing.

It defies Wade&#8217;s claim of him believing it was love until 2012, because he was allegedly brainwashed into that by Jackson. Here he quotes Jackson himself telling him that such acts would be &#8220;disgusting sexual stuff&#8221;, so how would that not, at least, ring a bell to an adult man, like Wade was in 2005, that something was wrong with the &#8220;love&#8221; angle, after all?

6) In the film the narrative is that these two men protected Jackson for so long because they were brainwashed to be &#8220;in love&#8221; with him. However, in their lawsuit there are other angles that are omitted from the film &#8211; possibly because they would contradict the &#8220;in love&#8221; narrative.

For example, in Safechuck&#8217;s complaint there is also a strong narrative of alleged constant intimidation and threats by Jackson. In a declaration he claims that Jackson constantly checked on him over the years by calling him once or twice a year and reminded him to keep his mouth shut or else his &#8220;life would be over&#8221;.

This narrative in his complaint was used to support an equitable estoppel argument. Equitable estoppel is a legal doctrine that prevents that someone could take advantage of his wrongdoings in court. For example, in relation to statutes of limitations, if a claimant or plaintiff fails to file a timely claim because the defendant threatened or intimidated him, then equitable estoppel can be invoked and in that case claimant&#8217;s/plaintiff&#8217;s complaint would not be dismissed even if statutes of limitations have already run.

For this argument and to get around the statutes of limitations Safechuck needed to establish ongoing threats and intimidation by Jackson, so he filed a declaration in which, next to the &#8220;love&#8221; narrative, he is also going on and on and on about alleged threats and intimidation by Jackson, although the exact nature of it remains vague. He writes:

&#8220;During the entire time I knew [Michael Jackson], he continued to intimidate and threaten me in a manner that can be described as subtle only in the sense that he did not threaten actual physical violence &#8211; but his intimidation and threats were no less real and effective. He told me over and over again that my life would be finished if anyone found out about what he/we had done, and I believed him. I had no reason not to, because he trained me to believe that and I had no reason to doubt or question what he said. And because of who [Michael Jackson] was &#8211; his power, his iconic status around the world, his fame and fortune &#8211; I knew that he could see to it that my life would be over if what happened ever came out.&#8221; [5]

Let us note here, that there is no record of Jackson being a vengeful, threatening, intimidating character who would &#8220;see to it&#8221; that people&#8217;s life were over if they crossed his path. On the contrary, he was a pretty meek guy. But Safechuck needed to claim intimidation and threats for an equitable estoppel argument to try to get around statutes of limitations, so he claimed intimidation and threats.

7) A LOT is left out of the film about the legal proceedings of both Robson and Safechuck. In actuality, the fact that they are both suing Jacskon&#8217;s entities (Estate and companies) for a monetary compensation is only mentioned fleetingly. It is mentioned in the film that the lawsuit was dismissed &#8220;based on technical grounds and not merit&#8221;, but it fails to explain the legal background to that and that the ruling does include implicit judgements about the truthfulness of some of their claims.

For example, to get around statutes of limitations, Robson claimed that he did not know about the administration of the Michael Jackson Estate before March 4, 2013, which proved to be a blatant lie &#8211; and that under oath.

Safechuck&#8217;s complaint never even got past the demurrer phase, because, unlike Robson, he was never even employed by Jackson&#8217;s companies during the time he claims sexual abuse. To be able to even sue, he needed to make up a very contrived theory about how the fact that he danced with Jackson (and other children) on stage during the Bad Tour was somehow &#8220;employment&#8221; by Jackson&#8217;s companies.

Considering that they claim this is not about about money, it is interesting that they both go lengths to get to that money in Court, even if they have to lie or twist things for that.

Both men&#8217;s lawsuits allege that Jackson&#8217;s companies, MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures, were &#8220;the most sophisticated public child sexual abuse procurement and facilitation organization the world has known&#8221; that knowingly and deliberately &#8220;facilitated&#8221; their alleged abuse.

They make up contrived ways to try to blame their alleged abuse on the companies just to be able to sue them, calling Jackson&#8217;s personal assistant at the time, Norma Staikos a &#8220;madam&#8221; or &#8220;procurer&#8221; of child sexual abuse victims for Michael Jackson&#8221;, all the while never mentioning their own parents&#8217; responsibility in their lawsuit.

While doing this, they make several false claims which were inadvertently destroyed by Wade&#8217;s own mother, Joy Robson in her 2016 deposition.

For a detailed discussion of Robson&#8217;s civil lawsuit see this article (like mentioned, Safechuck&#8217;s lawsuit never even got to this stage, but he made similar allegations about the companies as Robson).


To be continued&#8230;
Click to expand...



I wished this site have a different name. I would inked everyone to their site when Michael's innocent is questionable since they put all the information in one place, but everyone thinks it a pro-Michael site and therefore bias because of the name.
 
Last edited:
I think this was not already been shared.
Its an facebook article from Charles Reed (has nothing to do with Dan Reed, who witnessed Wades testimony in 2005:

It’s very strange how the Universe works; I mean, I’ve been avoiding at all costs to speak on this Michael Jackson documentary, I had turned Facebook off in January, I wanted to avoid all of the commentary on this topic. It’s something that I have been listening to since 1993, after a while you just get drained with the whole thing. But, like most of you who know me, Michael Jackson was a very important figure in my life, he has been since before I could learn how to walk and say my first words, so I felt it was time to say something. This morning while preparing to walk out the door to head to class, I stumbled upon this court pass from May 5, 2005. At that time Michael was on trial, and I was able to get in a handful of times and listen to some of the testimony. On that particular day was the testimony of Wade Robson, one of the men who is now speaking out against MJ and alleging sexual abuse in this recent film “Leaving Neverland.” I was sitting in the third row of the courtroom, right next to Maureen Orth, of Vanity Fair, and behind Jermaine Jackson, Michaels older brother. This guy for several hours was under very aggressive direct and cross examination from Both Michaels defense attorney and the prosecution. He was asked very specific questions about his moments with Michael, which in his recent film made it seem like they were inseparable and Michael was obsessed with him, and in the trial he spoke of the opposite. Now I am paraphrasing what I learned from his testimony as well as his mother’s testimony (that I witnessed a day later) , and I’m not speaking as if im a fly on the wall during the course of his life and friendship with Michael. During the time he was introduced to him, Michael was in the middle of his first world tour in the late 80s, they had kept some form of contact, but there was no close friendship that came about upon first meeting each other. Michaels tour had finished almost two years later, and he started to prepare for a new album and world tour that would follow. Michael made no contact with this man and his family, it was the boys mother who persistently sent letters, photos, and videos of her son to Michael in order to establish some sort of contact with him. A few years later, during the recording of Michaels Dangerous album, Michael would eventually help sponsor this man and his family to move to America from Australia, so that he could he help him jumpstart his professional career in music and dance. Michael was in the process of establishing his own record label venture under Sony music, which Wade would later become one of the first artists signed to the label. How did this happen? Wades mother, Joy Robson, testified that she left everything behind in Australia to bring Wade to Los Angeles to help push his career in show business. Wade was no older than 9 or 10 years old at the time , and through the help of Michael’s representatives, she was pushing for Michael to include Wade in some of Michaels own personal projects from his music videos as well as stage performances. The boys family had no consistent communication with MJ since they first met in Australia a few years prior, but her persistence would eventually lead to another meeting with Michael after she immigrated to the states. She portrayed herself on the stand to be very adamant about jump starting Wades career, and By her own personal requests, Michael would help furnish and pay for their housing, food, transportation, and additional living expenses. These were not all gestures that Michael just volunteered on his own, they were requests made by Joy Robson through Michaels reps, and she also testified to this in court. Now, make a long story short, the sexual allegations that are coming out now are very confusing to me. What I stated earlier about the questioning this man has gone under, was very specific questioning. Anyone who has experienced sitting on a trial, there are specific questions that have to be asked in order to be admitted as evidence and testimony to be ruled for a verdict. He was asked if he was ever innappropriately touched, kissed, fondled, had he ever seen Michael nude, had he ever watched pornographic materials with Michael etc This man ten years after Michaels death, comes out and says in a documentary that he never knew that he was molested and he didn’t know that the things Michael were doing to him is the biggest crock of horse shit that could ever be revealed to man. At the time of his testimony, he was in his mid-20s, engaged to be married, and still making a good living as a choreographer. (A career that was also jump-started by the man he alleges abused him). A year prior to Wade bringing out these accusations, he was making proposals with Michael Jackson’s estate to become the director/choreographer for the Michael Jackson Cirque Du Soleil project and he was turned down by Michaels estate. A year later, he comes out with accusations of abuse? I really want to speak on the aftermath of this documentary. It is very common in today’s society to have this knee jerk reaction to everything that happens. We are so quick to come to judgment and crucify someone without knowing all of the information. Michael Jackson’s life has been on trial for most of his life, not just starting in 1993 when accusations were brought against him, but most of his career. He was arrested, he was charged, he went through the court process like everyone else. He was under investigation by the FBI for over a decade, the district attorneys office in both Santa Barbara and Los Angeles county used millions of dollars in resources, investigating alleged victims from children he came in contact with not only in America, but in other parts of the world. He was acquitted by a jury of his peers in a court system where almost everyone in that courtroom Have admitted in the aftermath that they all at one point thought of him to be guilty of the crime, and the evidence and testimony presented in that process proved that he was not. (Charles Reed auf Facebook, 6. März 2019)
 
ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona;4250188 said:
I think this was not already been shared.
Its an facebook article from Charles Reed (has nothing to do with Dan Reed, who witnessed Wades testimony in 2005:

It&#8217;s very strange how the Universe works; I mean, I&#8217;ve been avoiding at all costs to speak on this Michael Jackson documentary, I had turned Facebook off in January, I wanted to avoid all of the commentary on this topic. It&#8217;s something that I have been listening to since 1993, after a while you just get drained with the whole thing. But, like most of you who know me, Michael Jackson was a very important figure in my life, he has been since before I could learn how to walk and say my first words, so I felt it was time to say something. This morning while preparing to walk out the door to head to class, I stumbled upon this court pass from May 5, 2005. At that time Michael was on trial, and I was able to get in a handful of times and listen to some of the testimony. On that particular day was the testimony of Wade Robson, one of the men who is now speaking out against MJ and alleging sexual abuse in this recent film &#8220;Leaving Neverland.&#8221; I was sitting in the third row of the courtroom, right next to Maureen Orth, of Vanity Fair, and behind Jermaine Jackson, Michaels older brother. This guy for several hours was under very aggressive direct and cross examination from Both Michaels defense attorney and the prosecution. He was asked very specific questions about his moments with Michael, which in his recent film made it seem like they were inseparable and Michael was obsessed with him, and in the trial he spoke of the opposite. Now I am paraphrasing what I learned from his testimony as well as his mother&#8217;s testimony (that I witnessed a day later) , and I&#8217;m not speaking as if im a fly on the wall during the course of his life and friendship with Michael. During the time he was introduced to him, Michael was in the middle of his first world tour in the late 80s, they had kept some form of contact, but there was no close friendship that came about upon first meeting each other. Michaels tour had finished almost two years later, and he started to prepare for a new album and world tour that would follow. Michael made no contact with this man and his family, it was the boys mother who persistently sent letters, photos, and videos of her son to Michael in order to establish some sort of contact with him. A few years later, during the recording of Michaels Dangerous album, Michael would eventually help sponsor this man and his family to move to America from Australia, so that he could he help him jumpstart his professional career in music and dance. Michael was in the process of establishing his own record label venture under Sony music, which Wade would later become one of the first artists signed to the label. How did this happen? Wades mother, Joy Robson, testified that she left everything behind in Australia to bring Wade to Los Angeles to help push his career in show business. Wade was no older than 9 or 10 years old at the time , and through the help of Michael&#8217;s representatives, she was pushing for Michael to include Wade in some of Michaels own personal projects from his music videos as well as stage performances. The boys family had no consistent communication with MJ since they first met in Australia a few years prior, but her persistence would eventually lead to another meeting with Michael after she immigrated to the states. She portrayed herself on the stand to be very adamant about jump starting Wades career, and By her own personal requests, Michael would help furnish and pay for their housing, food, transportation, and additional living expenses. These were not all gestures that Michael just volunteered on his own, they were requests made by Joy Robson through Michaels reps, and she also testified to this in court. Now, make a long story short, the sexual allegations that are coming out now are very confusing to me. What I stated earlier about the questioning this man has gone under, was very specific questioning. Anyone who has experienced sitting on a trial, there are specific questions that have to be asked in order to be admitted as evidence and testimony to be ruled for a verdict. He was asked if he was ever innappropriately touched, kissed, fondled, had he ever seen Michael nude, had he ever watched pornographic materials with Michael etc This man ten years after Michaels death, comes out and says in a documentary that he never knew that he was molested and he didn&#8217;t know that the things Michael were doing to him is the biggest crock of horse shit that could ever be revealed to man. At the time of his testimony, he was in his mid-20s, engaged to be married, and still making a good living as a choreographer. (A career that was also jump-started by the man he alleges abused him). A year prior to Wade bringing out these accusations, he was making proposals with Michael Jackson&#8217;s estate to become the director/choreographer for the Michael Jackson Cirque Du Soleil project and he was turned down by Michaels estate. A year later, he comes out with accusations of abuse? I really want to speak on the aftermath of this documentary. It is very common in today&#8217;s society to have this knee jerk reaction to everything that happens. We are so quick to come to judgment and crucify someone without knowing all of the information. Michael Jackson&#8217;s life has been on trial for most of his life, not just starting in 1993 when accusations were brought against him, but most of his career. He was arrested, he was charged, he went through the court process like everyone else. He was under investigation by the FBI for over a decade, the district attorneys office in both Santa Barbara and Los Angeles county used millions of dollars in resources, investigating alleged victims from children he came in contact with not only in America, but in other parts of the world. He was acquitted by a jury of his peers in a court system where almost everyone in that courtroom Have admitted in the aftermath that they all at one point thought of him to be guilty of the crime, and the evidence and testimony presented in that process proved that he was not. (Charles Reed auf Facebook, 6. März 2019)
Click to expand...


We all know that. Now Joy claims MJ begged her to leave Wade with him for a year but she said no. Go figure.
 
The video about Jacobshagen is good but do we really need to spread it? Last weekend I messaged Razorfist about it and said if he was planning on adding that chump to one of his three videos and he said he's not worth it. And that not even haters bring up his name.
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
The video about Jacobshagen is good but do we really need to spread it? Last weekend I messaged Razorfist about it and said if he was planning on adding that chump to one of his three videos and he said he's not worth it. And that not even haters bring up his name.
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly. Let's not give Jacobshagen any attention. We know he's full of it and like you said, even most haters aren't talking about him.

He's a non story.

We need to keep the focus on James and Wade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top