Latest on MJJC

Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

I think the statement from the Estate is really good. It makes me feel a bit better.
 
mano;4250354 said:
Most of the reactions on social media are ‘it’s still weird to sleep with children’. Whilst I’m thinking, if they (Michael, the parents & their children) have a good relationship, calling Michael their ‘family’ what could possibly be wrong to watch movies in a bedroom, and not sleep in the same room or bed where they’re sleeping? Any of my best friends I call my family are more then welcome to watch over my kid, and if they watch movies upsteres if it’s late for instance.. it’s just written wrong in the context, and blown up by the tabloids.
Click to expand...

I personally don’t try and argue with that. I agree that it’s weird. But then I point out there’s no evidence of criminality and plenty of evidence acccusers are seeking money and lying.

Same when people ask me if I’d let my children stay at MJs. I say ‘no I would not. Nor would I let them stay with any unrelated adult’. But I also add that I think that question is irrelevant to Michael’s innocence or guilt. Evidence strongly points to accusers lying.
 
Anna said:
I think those two are great. The Forbes article by Joe Vogel is also really good.
Click to expand...

I tried to stay as neutral as possible (I haven't posted a message this neutral before, as in I don't look like a angry person who is beyond fed up with it all) and posted the Razorfist video and Thomson link. I hope people will watch it. If anyone else wants to join the good fight.... comment here

https://youtu.be/hLVmxL0WIPc
 
MJJ2theMAX;4250383 said:
I personally don’t try and argue with that. I agree that it’s weird. But then I point out there’s no evidence of criminality and plenty of evidence acccusers are seeking money and lying.

Same when people ask me if I’d let my children stay at MJs. I say ‘no I would not. Nor would I let them stay with any unrelated adult’. But I also add that I think that question is irrelevant to Michael’s innocence or guilt. Evidence strongly points to accusers lying.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's weird at all. It's not uncommon for roommates and even friends or family members on certain occasions (and during sleepovers) to share a bed. As MJ said, people associate bed with sex too much, and the media put way too much emphasis on that. If I had kids and MJ were still alive, I'd definitely let them in his care, and I'd let them in the care of any adult I truly and fully trusted.
 
<twitter-widget class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" id="twitter-widget-0" style="position: static; visibility: visible; display: block; transform: rotate(0deg); max-width: 100%; width: 500px; min-width: 220px; margin-top: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" data-tweet-id="1107767321672761345"></twitter-widget><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="sv"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Wow.<br><br>If you really believed your witnesses were telling the truth, why would you feel the need to resort to this sort of deception to prop them up? <a href="https://t.co/eAmEpFAJpZ">https://t.co/eAmEpFAJpZ</a></p>&mdash; Charles Thomson (@CEThomson) <a href="https://twitter.com/CEThomson/status/1107767321672761345?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">18 mars 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>



<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="sv"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Michael Jackson’s lawyer claims his appearance in ‘Leaving Neverland’ is deliberately misleading <a href="https://t.co/DgEfzqISo0">https://t.co/DgEfzqISo0</a> <a href="https://t.co/nr7Hn05fGq">pic.twitter.com/nr7Hn05fGq</a></p>&mdash; NME (@NME) <a href="https://twitter.com/NME/status/1107640699351126016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">18 mars 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://www.nme.com/news/music/michael-jacksons-lawyer-claims-his-appearance-in-leaving-neverland-is-deliberately-misleading-2463377

"His remarks at the press conference have everything to do with Jackson’s accusers"
The director of Leaving Neverland has denied claims from the lawyer who represented Michael Jackson during his 2005 trial for child molestation that footage included in the controversial documentary was taken “out of context.”
Mark Geragos appears in the controversial documentary during a section of the film that follows archive footage of a news report showing Jackson’s initial arrest in 2003.
The report immediately cuts to a press conference where Geragos appears to defend Jackson against the claims levelled by Gavin Arvizo – who alleged that he was abused by Jackson at his Neverland home. In the clip, Geragos appears to claim that Jackson’s accusers are “seeking money” and says their supporters are “living in their own Neverland.”
However, Geragos took online to argue that the clip was taken out of context.
As the entire clip shows, his comments were instead referring to Jackson’s lawsuit against Xtrajet – the private jet firm company that was found guilty of secretly filming Geragos and Jackson while they travelled onboard a flight from Las Vegas to Santa Barbara, where Jackson would hand himself into police.
Responding to a Twitter user who criticised his appearance in the documentary, Geragos said: “That press conference had nothing to do with his accusers. It was specifically directed at the two adult men who wiretapped MJ and were indicted and plead guilty and went to Federal Prison. But thanks for the heads up as maybe now I have a cause of action.”
However, Leaving Neverland director Dan Reed has since dismissed Geragos claims – adding that “his remarks at the press conference have everything to do with Jackson’s accusers”.
“The press conference in question was on November 25, 2003,” Reed told NME. “Mark Geragos is talking about the allegations’ against Michael Jackson. Later on in the press conference, he talks about ‘accusations’ in the same vein.
“These ‘accusations’ and ‘allegations’ he’s protesting about are not the ones he’s making against Xtrajet but the ones 13-year-old Gavin Arvizo made against Michael Jackson, resulting in Jackson’s arrest five days earlier. “
A Channel 4 spokesperson added: “At the time Mr Gergaros was acting for Mr Jackson in relation to both the child abuse allegation and the Xtrajet matter.
“We considered that his remarks at the press conference could fairly be interpreted as indicative of the potential legal response to allegations made about Mr Jackson. Previous press reporting took the same view.”

“Michael Jackson is not going to be abused.” said the lawyer at the press conference in question. “Michael Jackson is not going to be slammed, is not going to be a pinata for every person who has financial motives or every person who thinks that they can get – as the lawyer for the charter company said today ‘we had a lottery ticket and we thought that we were going to do something with it.”
After years of legal wrangling, Geragos eventually reached a settlement
 for $2.5 million with the owners of the now defunct Xtrajet.

Meanwhile, Jackson’s fans last week announced their plans to sue Wade Robson and James Safechuck for “sullying” the memory of Michael Jackson, after documenting their claims of sexual abuse against the star in Leaving Neverland.



<iframe scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.2e9f365dae390394eb8d923cba8c5b11.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mjjcommunity.com&settingsEndpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fsyndication.twitter.com%2Fsettings" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe"></iframe><iframe scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.2e9f365dae390394eb8d923cba8c5b11.html?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mjjcommunity.com&settingsEndpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fsyndication.twitter.com%2Fsettings" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;"></iframe>
 
Robbsaber01 said:
Joe rogan mentioned it on his podcast....
Good news is hes somewhat neutral and doesnt plan on watching it. Bad news is he believes that story that Conrad Murray said about MJ being "chemically castrated". The other guy in his podcast did atleast bring up that Wade and Safechuck both said at the trial that nothing happened and Joe responded "Well, isnt that perjury? cant they get sued? You cant lie under oath either way".
Click to expand...

Guys, his podcast (Joe Rogan Experience) is really big. An episode can get 1 million + views on youtube in less than a week. He nearly has 5 million followers on twitter (@joerogan). How can we get him to interview John Ziegler, Brandi or Taj ?
 
Word Smith Sr said:
Guys, his podcast (Joe Rogan Experience) is really big. An episode can get 1 million + views on youtube in less than a week. He nearly has 5 million followers on twitter (@joerogan). How can we get him to interview John Ziegler, Brandi or Taj ?
Click to expand...

John Ziegler maybe, he would eat Taj up.. Not because of factual reasons just his personality can be fairly ruthless and insenstive.. Taj does not do well with people like that - he's too nice of a guy for Joe!
 
I wonder if TMez would go on Joe Rogan.
If he gets to know all the ins and outs of the inconsistencies and stuff.
 
Hey Moonwalkers! Long time fan here. New to being official on the forum. I have a new podcast that I do with two of my buddies from college. The three of us record remotely in three different cities. In our latest episode I speak on Leaving Neverland and go back to explain MJ’s past. I have researched a lot but am nowhere near as well versed as some of you. But I think my friends learned a lot. Check it out if you have time. This is in two parts. Part 1 MJ topics start maybe about 25 to 30 minutes.

www.soundcloud.com/goodcallout/michaelpart1

(Explicit language. Just a heads up.)
 
Anna said:
Story from a family who knew Michael - https://www.facebook.com/roslyn.witzcohen/posts/10155925370701837

(via https://twitter.com/VanjaJackson/status/1107820772406579200)
Click to expand...


Roslyn Witz Cohen
DO NOT BELIEVE THE LIES
My family met Michael Jackson at Sun City resort in 1997 and we remained friends with him up until his very tragic and untimely death. My sons were 12 and 10 years old at the time. During those years Michael spent many times at our house and we went to Neverland and in all those years I can honestly say that Michael never ever spent time alone with my two sons.
Everything that Grace Rwaramba has said is absolutely true. There were always so many people at Neverland that it would have been absolutely impossible for Michael to have "lured" boys to his room without anyone noticing it. Every room in the main house was always open to the guests and we never saw Michael's bedroom door closed. Michael had nothing to hide. He was open and transparent.
My husband and I were included in every arrangement. There was never even a hint of a suggestion of him wanting to spend time alone with my sons. They never slept in his bedroom at Neverland. We all slept in the guest cottages. As responsible parents had he suggested anything that we felt uncomfortable with we would have packed our bags and gone home immediately.
Michael never moved on to "younger boys" as claimed by Wade Robson. If he did why are they not making the same disgusting allegations? Why didn't the director speak to them? He knows they exist and where to find them. Michael was friends with families and their children from all over the world and everyone knows that including the director!
The reason the director did not speak to them is because they will all tell the truth which is Michael is 100% innocent of every allegation levelled against him so instead he chose two perjurers desperate for money in order to make this so-called documentary.
I believe that the reason Michael did not want to remain friends with Wade Robson or James Safechuck anymore is probably because they asked him for money at some stage and he did not give in to their requests so hence they took their revenge after he died. All Michael ever wanted to do was to help children which he did. To label him a paedophile is just beyond belief. He was truly the kindest and most honest person I have ever met.
What Wade Robson testified about Michael in the court trial when he said Michael never did anything inappropriate to him is the truth and nothing but the truth. Wade Robson's bitterness from not getting funding from the estate for a project he wanted to do turned him into a compulsive liar for the sake of money.
He is a perjurer and now people believe his lies. I shudder to think what this documentary has done to Prince, Paris and Blanket.Now they have to live with the lies about their father. What kind of world are we living in where people are prepared to destroy innocent children for fame and fortune?
My question is why did these two liars wait until Michael died to make false accusations against him? They had plenty of time to lay a charge against him before he died. My family and I will fight for Michael's innocence in every way we can until the day we die because his innocence is worth fighting for.
I see that these two perjurers claimed that they reason they did this documentary was so that this does not happen to other boys in the future. What nonsense! In my opinion all they have done is open up a door for anyone to accuse a celebrity of molesting them in order to get money out of them.
Nowadays when you admit to being molested, whether it is true or not, you become a hero to the public. I am quite sure that in the near future there will be many allegations coming out of boys being molested by celebrities as it is a very easy way to make a quick buck and get a moment of fame. My family could have done the same for fame and fortune but we are honest people.
Michael taught me many things but one of the most important things he taught me is don't believe what you read in the tabloids until you see it for yourself and I know the absolute truth and I saw it for myself that Michael Jackson was not a paedophile!
We miss Michael every single day of our lives and are thankful and grateful for the times that we spent with him. We had the best times of our lives with Michael. We are all devastated by the disgusting lies in this documentary as we know the truth.
What I found really disturbing in the documentary is the two mothers who really didn't seem to be angry about what their sons allege Michael did to them. If my sons had been molested I would have no fond memories of the molester at all no matter how famous, wealthy and kind he was to my family.
I would only have hate and resentment regardless of how kind and generous the molester was to my family and I certainly wouldn't keep any mementoes from him. I would want to see him rot in jail for the rest of his life and no amount of money in the world would make me back down if I knew for sure my sons had been molested, as per the first false allegation where money was taken by the father, and we all know how he ended up.
I would be fuming and angry and crying hysterically during the interview and have absolutely nothing nice to say about the molester yet these mothers spoke very fondly about Michael and certainly didn't seem upset in my view. Even more disturbing is that Wade Robson at the age of 22 did not realise he had been "molested." This so-called documentary is just downright disgusting and anyone who believes these lies is just plain stupid!



All these familys should go in contact with Taj!
 
Last edited:
I saw on Twitter that Reed is following Paris. Hopefully she will block him.
 
Appearently Dan Reed wants to do another doc about the 2005 trial but only if the Arvisos cooperate. I really hope that never happens. He has some nerve even following Paris on Twitter.
 
Great statements by the cohens. thank you Remember mj going to the sons barmitzvah in south africa. He spent alot of time with them

"We are especially proud of Michael’s fans and those who continue to stand up for him by pointing out the numerous inconsistencies and flaws in the film."

What do they expect as they have hardly taken the role
 
Robbsaber01 said:
Appearently Dan Reed wants to do another doc about the 2005 trial but only if the Arvisos cooperate. I really hope that never happens. He has some nerve even following Paris on Twitter.
Click to expand...

For real??? Gosh this bullshit will never stop
 
New video from Michael Jackson Innocent Project:

"Keep on fighting for Michael - We are Winning"
1.844 views on March 19 2019


And a simular video from them uploaded a week ago


Very good reaction video to LN!!!

 
So Tyson changed his opinion about and now talk about money for Robson and Safeshuck. And he said I love MJ.. ok seen.
 
Ramona122003 said:
Gross. Why was he allowed air time?
Click to expand...

Initially I gave Reed the benefit of the doubt, thinking he may have been duped but now I am fully convinced he is a weazle and at this point I consider him 100% complicit based on his continued defence of his work in spite of a ever growing mass of evidence to discredit. It is outrageous. Despite claiming he doesn't keep an eye on social media, his approach has clearly been to keep a very close eye on what the fans are saying ON SOCIAL MEDIA(!) in an attempt to debunk the fans' claims publicly as they appear. Often his rebuttals are partially or completely fictitious.

His claims that fans' objections are "non-factual" are clearly laughable, and any legitimate journalist keeping an eye on what we've been saying SHOULD have been able to expose his lies within seconds but that didn't happen.

The only time he was properly questioned he was clearly shaken and made a point of having a spat with Piers Morgan on Twitter.
 
SmoothGangsta;4250439 said:
Probably because of the stupid censorship that's in place on this website.
Click to expand...

It is censorship of some words and specific spelling that seems to be happening since the site moved to https.
That being said, I don't know why "MJ Vibe" was censored in that specific link, as it's an innocuous term.

In any case, here's the update from the Estate in its entirety, copied from MJ Vibe.

The Estate of Michael Jackson:

We want to start by again thanking all of Michael&#8217;s fans and acknowledge and thank Michael&#8217;s nephew, Taj, his niece, Brandi, and his brothers, Jackie, Marlon and Tito, Grace Rwaramba, Aaron Carter, Brett Barnes, Stephanie Mills and all of the other individuals around the world who have spoken out on his behalf. We also want to acknowledge those in the media who have done their job as journalists by reviewing the facts, noting how they were ignored in Leaving Neverland because it didn&#8217;t fit into the filmmaker&#8217;s one-sided agenda of denigrating Michael&#8217;s legacy.

We also want to provide a brief update on our efforts, as well as share some thoughts with you from the past two weeks. We share your frustration and anger that a man who was found innocent in a court of law in life is being attacked, financially exploited and smeared by corporations and individuals who are only making claims now because he is no longer here to defend himself.

In addition to our public statements regarding our position on Leaving Neverland, our legal efforts continue. While it would not be prudent to publicly divulge our strategy and list our efforts, rest assured we are committed to holding HBO and Channel 4 accountable for their egregious, uncorroborated smear of Michael&#8217;s legacy. Many of you have asked why we are seeking open arbitration. The answer is simple: we believe the public deserves to know how Leaving Neverland really came about, why no counter opinion was ever sought, why so many facts were ignored and why individuals were smeared who should have at a minimum been contacted to get the other side of the story. It is outrageous that such a one-sided smear was ever allowed on the air without challenge. We all know that if Michael was still alive it would never have been aired.

We also have other non-legal initiatives that we will disclose at the appropriate time. What is important for us, and always has been, is that we continue to take the long view as we have over the last decade. That means not doing anything rash that would give HBO, Channel 4, the film&#8217;s director and, especially, the subjects of the film, what they most crave now. They want to engage in a way that focuses more attention on a film that has no doubt underperformed given that the media did everything in its power to sell this film to viewers. But given the enormous attention and free publicity the media gave this film, the numbers have clearly not matched the hype in the markets where it has aired, with many viewers opting to stop watching after the first part.

We recognize that the press often magnifies each affront related to this film. But from our view the actual impact of this documentary on the public and their behavior has not been as significant as the media want people to think. While some would like you to think otherwise, we can confirm that the consumption of Michael&#8217;s music has not declined and his streaming numbers have not decreased in the wake of this documentary. This tells us that in addition to those of us who know the truth about Michael, those who may not understand Michael&#8217;s eccentricities and the way he chose to live his life outside of society&#8217;s norms are still choosing to appreciate and enjoy the art he created. We have licensees worldwide who are proudly selling Michael Jackson merchandise. We have insight into a significant amount of data that the fans do not see and we are working 24/7 behind the scenes to synthesize all that information and act accordingly.

We are also seeing a sharp disconnect between the reception of the film by everyday viewers and the mainstream media. Despite being outright propaganda, many viewers see through the one-sidedness, the over-the-top salacious claims, the staged dialogue and other dramatizations. They see that what Leaving Neverland boils down to is a sales job aimed at convincing viewers Michael Jackson isn&#8217;t the man millions of people know and love, including the two subjects of the film and their families until they chose to sue for hundreds of millions of dollars. As people have had time to digest Leaving Neverland and review the facts, many are recognizing they can&#8217;t take it at face value. We are especially proud of Michael&#8217;s fans and those who continue to stand up for him by pointing out the numerous inconsistencies and flaws in the film. Numerous individuals who have studied every facet of these cases has poked numerous holes in the stories of the two subjects. Some critics and individuals are now courageously admitting publicly that, having studied the facts, their view of the film changed 180 degrees.

Michael Jackson cannot be silenced, and neither can his fans, whether it is those who proudly play his music in public squares to show their support, the coffee shop owner in New Zealand who played his songs all day long in protest of Leaving Neverland or those who put posters and signs around cities proclaiming his innocence. As Michael predicted 25 years ago, the truth will be his salvation.

The Estate of Michael Jackson


SOURCE: The Official Online Team of The Michael Jackson Estate&#8482;
 
So I watched the video by that music reviewer Anthony Fantano. Basically he keeps going back to the sharing of the bed, how it's not normal, how it was very wrong back then already, how it could also give children the wrong impression, even if everyone in the bed lies neatly on their own side. It's not good for the personal space of children etc. He made it clear how Michael had relationships with several boys and so on.

Not once did he say he thought he was guilty, he kinda keeps it like, anything could have happened. And he ends the segment with MJ during that interview while the trial was going on and again saying there's nothing wrong with it.
 
1nn5 said:
And why not ?
If he convinced people with his film !
Click to expand...

That's why he needs to be stopped. We don't know what is going on behind the scenes but I sure hope one of them is suing the shit out of Reed. Not only is he using footage of Michael and also music, he also flat out deceives people with the Mark Geragos footage and just has these two losers lying through their teeth about MJ.

Has Reed been bringing this up again then about a new mockumentary? Or is this just what he said two weeks ago? Because in that case it's nothing new. Also, is Gavin allowed to even do that?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top