Latest on MJJC

Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

Check out @sim_moonwalker’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/sim_moonwalker/status/1110152138573807622?s=09

Well there we go. Paul McCartney actually did say it. He didn't know about this dark side. The dude is making that conclusion on a ****ing fictional mockumentary that stars two proven liars.

Respect lost for the guy now. I don't jump to conclusions with articles, but here we hear him say it.
 
You know what infuriates me? The fact that they have BOTH said previously they weren't touched is no longer enough, because 'sexual abuse is complicated'. One said it when they were 22, not even a kid! That's more than enough to at least doubt them!

At the same time they believe Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo had no problem coming forward when they were kids. I'm just sticking to the basics now, no need to over complicate it. They've said they weren't touched, they changed their story for money when they were older.
 
could tell all of this to that person but just look at how she replies to me after I gave her the links to the two articles on The MJ Allegations site about Jason and Martinez.

Na ive already read every thing on that pro jackson website which has been put together by a Michael Jackson fan - biased much? the fact that you still think its OK that MJ paid these boys off AT ALL shows how idiotic you are

Makes me wonder if I shouldn't just ignore this one.



She is stupid. Everything on that site can be traced with FACTS. Can her site and comments be traced to facts? No. Some of these people on these site want drama. Look at Carli B. Can u believe some women were trashy her baby girl and spreading lies? See no one is exempt from these trolls. And if that woman does not like MJ why is she on any site about him? Fool. Want to trash a CREDITABLE pro MJ site yet she will embrace a LYING Anti MJ site. Sit down.
 
L.T.D said:
You know what infuriates me? The fact that they have BOTH said previously they weren't touched is no longer enough, because 'sexual abuse is complicated'. One said it when they were 22, not even a kid! That's more than enough to at least doubt them!

At the same time they believe Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo had no problem coming forward when they were kids. I'm just sticking to the basics now, no need to over complicate it. They've said they weren't touched, they changed their story for money when they were older.
Click to expand...
It is not that complicate in what they guys are claiming. IT is clear lies and make no sense. If this is the case, everybody can be accused and be viewed guilty because someone think it is complicated. NOT.
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
Sometimes I truly what went wrong for some people on Twitter. Where did they lose their minds this badly?

Just now this woman on Twitter and with a straight face (well as much as that is possible on Twitter) saying "yes they found child porn in his house. The fbi."

How I ask you? How? Logic and common sense would tell any sane person that if such a thing is found... the man would have been behind bars.
Click to expand...

Everyone has to deal with fools like this. Even Steve Harvey talked about his trolls and the lies they spread about him.
 
Hi guys. I have been lurking around here since this mess started. Much love to all fellow fans fighting for Michael in social media. I have created a twitter account just for that. Gosh, Dan Reed's twitter page is terrible. The guy is cleary obsessed with Michael Jackson. It´s very clear his hatred.
 
terrell said:
could tell all of this to that person but just look at how she replies to me after I gave her the links to the two articles on The MJ Allegations site about Jason and Martinez.

Na ive already read every thing on that pro jackson website which has been put together by a Michael Jackson fan - biased much? the fact that you still think its OK that MJ paid these boys off AT ALL shows how idiotic you are

Makes me wonder if I shouldn't just ignore this one.



She is stupid. Everything on that site can be traced with FACTS. Can her site and comments be traced to facts? No. Some of these people on these site want drama. Look at Carli B. Can u believe some women were trashy her baby girl and spreading lies? See no one is exempt from these trolls. And if that woman does not like MJ why is she on any site about him? Fool. Want to trash a CREDITABLE pro MJ site yet she will embrace a LYING Anti MJ site. Sit down.
Click to expand...

She's dead set on the "he paid families off" nonsense. Her sources are MJFacts. I think that says enough. Her Twitter banner pic says enough too, support Wade and James with photos of these fake victims too. And sure I could tell her the possible reasons why he settled with Francia but it won't matter to these kind of folks. I'm definitely ignoring people as soon as I see that kind of comments. It's easy to see when someone is willing to listen and when not.

Sadly I've only been dealing with the latter for the most part so far.

Anna said:
That's not an official account, it's a fan.
Click to expand...

Ah that's too bad :(
 
Ok, so I've got a question that I hope some of you will help me sort out. I know it's hard to get through on this forum right now, but I very much would appreciate it!

So, when the allegations and the civil claims from Robson came about in May -13, alot of us felt like it was very suspicious timing, right? Given the AEGs warning/declaration in the MJ estate vs AEG, of we're going to show you some ugly stuff and reveal Mr Jackson' s deepest, darkest secrets, etc; and Robson's civil suit happening within days thereafter (don't remember the exact date right now). Even Mesereau said it looked suspicious. I also remember something about the few contracts Robson still had, were connected to AEG at the time, so given the economical and professional situation Robson was in, AEG would have had a good position to pressure Robson into suing MJ. I don't have the sources to back that last sentence up though, anyone of you remember and/or have a good source?

If that was true about the connection between AEG and Robson, it wouldn't have been too hard for them to know that Robson had shopped around for a book deal on this matter already and likely would be interested to stike a deal; if they were looking for someone to bring dirt on MJ during their trial period.

However, how does the fact that Robson first tried to sue under seal fit all this? That fact better fits with Robson wanting a settlement but not a trial, without anything reaching the public (or possible future coleages). Not really with bringing dirt on MJ at the benefit of AEG? Or am I missing something?
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
She's dead set on the "he paid families off" nonsense. Her sources are MJFacts. I think that says enough. Her Twitter banner pic says enough too, support Wade and James with photos of these fake victims too. And sure I could tell her the possible reasons why he settled with Francia but it won't matter to these kind of folks. I'm definitely ignoring people as soon as I see that kind of comments. It's easy to see when someone is willing to listen and when not.

Sadly I've only been dealing with the latter for the most part so far.



Ah that's too bad :(
Click to expand...

It does not matter what she thinks. Her thoughts proves nothing and wont change the fact MJ was innocent. She has an agenda. She maybe even someone Wade/James put up to talk. I put nothing pass the internet when some people want to ignore facts. MJ is still going strong so if she want to sit and waste their time on hatin someone, that is her stupidity. Remember their are people spreading LOVE for MJ as well. So she will stop nothing. "A wolf can hollow at the moon all it wants, the moon will still rise up even when the wolf is no longer around". She wont stop MJ.
 
Michael Skywalker said:
Ok, so I've got a question that I hope some of you will help me sort out. I know it's hard to get through on this forum right now, but I very much would appreciate it!

So, when the allegations and the civil claims from Robson came about in May -13, alot of us felt like it was very suspicious timing, right? Given the AEGs warning/declaration in the MJ estate vs AEG, of we're going to show you some ugly stuff and reveal Mr Jackson' s deepest, darkest secrets, etc; and Robson's civil suit happening within days thereafter (don't remember the exact date right now). Even Mesereau said it looked suspicious. I also remember something about the few contracts Robson still had, were connected to AEG at the time, so given the economical and professional situation Robson was in, AEG would have had a good position to pressure Robson into suing MJ. I don't have the sources to back that last sentence up though, anyone of you remember and/or have a good source?

If that was true about the connection between AEG and Robson, it wouldn't have been too hard for them to know that Robson had shopped around for a book deal on this matter already and likely would be interested to stike a deal; if they were looking for someone to bring dirt on MJ during their trial period.

However, how does the fact that Robson first tried to sue under seal fit all this? That fact better fits with Robson wanting a settlement but not a trial, without anything reaching the public (or possible future coleages). Not really with bringing dirt on MJ at the benefit of AEG? Or am I missing something?
Click to expand...
I would not be surprise. Then James jump on aboard.
 
If people are going to flag pro MJ videos for copywrite issues why don't we all flag/report the MJ videos made by haters for the same thing?
 
However, how does the fact that Robson first tried to sue under seal fit all this? That fact better fits with Robson wanting a settlement but not a trial, without anything reaching the public (or possible future coleages). Not really with bringing dirt on MJ at the benefit of AEG? Or am I missing something?
------------------

No you are correct. Filing it under seal does not support the AEG theory.the estate said they had no idea about the book deal till later so its possible aswell that AEG didnt. As lawyers circles are tight nit and many people know many others through third connections. Ie a unkept secret
 
terrell said:
It is not that complicate in what they guys are claiming. IT is clear lies and make no sense. If this is the case, everybody can be accused and be viewed guilty because someone think it is complicated. NOT.
Click to expand...

I mean, it shouldn't even have to come to that though that we have to pick out all their lies. They previously stated they weren't touched, now they're saying they are for money. That's all that needs to be said.

It's only because of the metoo movement and people saying sexual abuse is complicated that have felt the need to prove it further. When he first made the claims in 2013 my response was just, well you previously said you weren't touched in court and that's that.
 
Last edited:
I have a question about the appeal. As I understand it, the appeal is just to decide if they can proceed with a case against the estate isn't it? At this point, do you think it is more preferable for the case to proceed rather than uphold the original ruling?

If it is upheld then the narrative in the media will undoubtedly be that these so-called victims will have been denied justice due to a technicality. If it proceeds to a full hearing then at least all evidence (or lack of it) will be heard.
 
Bink said:
I have a question about the appeal. As I understand it, the appeal is just to decide if they can proceed with a case against the estate isn't it? At this point, do you think it is more preferable for the case to proceed rather than uphold the original ruling?

If it is upheld then the narrative in the media will undoubtedly be that these so-called victims will have been denied justice due to a technicality. If it proceeds to a full hearing then at least all evidence (or lack of it) will be heard.
Click to expand...

It does not matter, either way, it was not suppose to be about money for these fools. The fact that an "appeal" is happening (some still do not know they have this appeal) and they are suing for money is an eye opener for most people (again, I do not care about haters). Logical people know the deal along with these guys history.
 
They are trying to sue the companies. The estate one was thrown out already. I understand your point but if theres a trial as normal there will be totally one sided reporting. It wont be a way of getting the trith out there as no one will no about it but us due the mainstrem medias refusal to report on anything that isnt anti mj. If you think the stress and negativity is bad now.... the best thing is for the claim to be killed off once and for all and the estate to go after them for money. Any trial will push anyone else thinking of making a quick buck to make a claim.

The medias narrative will always be anti mj. So it goes to trial and the companies only won cause they can afford the best lawyers etc etc... you cant beat their agenda
 
I can't deny that I'm just disappointed in Paul McCartney. Yes he likely is still a little cranky about the catalog but that's no reason to basically say... "I had no idea about this dark side." clearly based on LN, basically saying he had no idea he was a child molester. Especially when he has defended him in the past. I recall him calling MJ a man/boy child after his passing and he never tried to shed any doubt on his innocence.

What the **** Paul? Is he really just that gullible? Diana Ross is able to look at this and see that it isn't reminiscent of Michael at all and Paul is like... "guilty." sad.
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
I can't deny that I'm just disappointed in Paul McCartney. Yes he likely is still a little cranky about the catalog but that's no reason to basically say... "I had no idea about this dark side." clearly based on LN, basically saying he had no idea he was a child molester. Especially when he has defended him in the past. I recall him calling MJ a man/boy child after his passing and he never tried to shed any doubt on his innocence.

What the **** Paul? Is he really just that gullible? Diana Ross is able to look at this and see that it isn't reminiscent of Michael at all and Paul is like... "guilty." sad.
Click to expand...

He is simply ego and thinks about his own Legacy after he has the rights of the beatles song back and how he can finally surpass Michael now.
When the estaste still would own the songs I guess he would be quiet now cause they could make the use of the songs very expensive for him as a revange.
But now he is free, without fear that someone would do this to him, his family and legacy one day when he is gone what they do now to MJ with a powerful wordwide airing documantery, cause he is white.

Here is ouer frind again in
I THOUGHT HE WAS GUILTY Part 3:

 
Last edited:
So the media has very little to say about Jussies charges being dropped? this is the weak sh** they do..
 
KOPV said:
So the media has very little to say about Jussies charges being dropped? this is the weak sh** they do..
Click to expand...

I liked the quote by his solicitors and wish people would pay attention to that

"Jussie and many others were hurt by these unfair and unwarranted actions. The entire situation is a reminder that there should never be an attempt to prove a case in the court of public opinion."
 
KOPV;4252016 said:
So the media has very little to say about Jussies charges being dropped? this is the weak sh** they do..
Click to expand...
I’m still confused about that entire situation, but the signs were there to me when they stopped the 24 hr. coverage.
I don’t know how many times people can get embarrassed before they realize to actually THINK and VERIFY before jumping to conclusions.
Stop letting your emotions get in the way before making your opinion.
I don’t understand how people can not do research (and not biased research) before making their opinions.
 
Well guys it's been about 3.5 weeks since this horrible documentary aired. I notice the past 100+ pages have just been nattering, analyzing celebrity and Twitter quotes, bashing Dan Reed, etc. Which tells me the storm is over.... While many in the media have claimed MJ has been muted and his career shaken, etc, I simply disagree. As discussed at length by Rolling Stone last week, the reality is that this documentary COULD have been much worse. The extreme negative reaction has been mostly limited to the precious snowflake METOO sub culture, as well as the media elite at the top. So here are where things stand now

THE BAD:

-Michael Jackson's music has been dropped from only a handful of radio stations around the world. The media has spun this to be a very bad thing, but in reality 99.99999% of stations did NOT ban MJ.

-Airplay is down about 30-50% in the US, which isn't surprising. Companies are scared to blast MJ during such heightened times with the MeToo culture. My guess is that airplay will slowly creep back up in the coming weeks and months.

-SOME companies have dropped being associated with MJ like Starbucks, H&M, The Simpsons, a few random record stores, that museum in Indianapolis, the bus campaign in London, etc. All small potatoes though in the reality of things.

-A few celebrities have sided with the victims, 99% have simply remained silent though with not much to say in either direction


And that's about it really. If you read the media, you will be led to believe this is detrimental and horrible. The truth is.... it's small potatoes.

THE GOOD:

-While radio play has dropped, actual SALES of Michael Jackson albums, as well as online streaming has actually increased in almost every market around the world since this documentary has launched.

-Michael Jackson's official Youtube channel has gained almost 1 million followers since the beginning of March, and his official videos have had an astounding 170 MILLION additional views since March 1st.

-While the media likes to dwell on the small irrelevant boycots/muting of MJ, they are missing the big picture here. MJ's Cirque Du Soleil show remains in operation and is selling very well. The Broadway musical remains in production to debut in 2020, all of MJ's licensing deals remain in tact ranging from clothing to casino slot machines, to many other deals.

-Sony Music is sticking by Michael Jackson, which means that they are confident there is a future for his music. R Kelly was tossed by his label, but not Michael! This is probably the most important piece of information that would show what direction Michael Jackson's reputation is going in.

-The general public are not nearly as sold on this documentary as the media elites. Based on the media's reviews of Leaving Neverland I was seriously concerned that Michael's legacy could have been shattered. The response was so dramatic and damming that I will admit... I was concerned. But the public simply isn't buying into it. Most polls show the masses favouring Michael Jackson and questioning both accusers.

- Ratings for Leaving Neverland were pretty crappy. Whether it was in the US, UK, France, Italy, Germany, or Canada.... the numbers simply didn't measure up to the hype.


MOVING FORWARD

-My personal opinion is that this will continue to die down, and the general public will slowly forget. In todays hyperactive news cycle, the public often has a short attention span. Most of the bans on his music will be lifted, and radio will slowly increase spins of MJ's songs.

-Hopefully the court cases against HBO and Wade/James will be successful and help solidify our truth that Michael was indeed innocent. A few legal victories would certainly help the narrative and put the wind back in our sails.

-Michael Jackson will again get big amounts of press in June due to the 10 year anniversary of his death. Unfortunately that will give the media another platform to drill into the publics mind about Leaving Neverland, but it will also promote his music and legacy as well. Based on the fallout from this doc, I am guessing MJ's sales will rise again in June as the masses stream and buy the music.

-Overall lets move forward thinking optimistically. These past two months have been horrible for us fans BUT Im telling you..... things could have been worse. MJ survived this, battered and bruised yes.... but he will heal. Keep streaming his music and voicing support to companies that embrace him. I personally have been listening to the HISTORY album lots these past few weeks. I bought it on vinyl.

This whole fiasco simply proved that Michael Jackson is too big to take down.
 
Last edited:
KOPV said:
So the media has very little to say about Jussies charges being dropped? this is the weak sh** they do..
Click to expand...

I want to know who is paying USATODAY to keep printing MJ's stories. Now, they got a story about why our idols need to cancel MJ? I am at work and can not use my facebook for the comment section or to write that dumb writer but I will be as soon as I get home. They want to keep the story going to clearly make $$$$.
 
And someone needs to tell USATODAY writer, @#$% if u want "idol" to cancel MJ (that aint going to happen. Even DL Hugley said "I will never stop playing MJ music.). If this writer wants that to happen, then 99.% of movie actors, other singers (including the idols), politicans, regular folks, tv actors, sports stars, etc all need to be cancelled due to being accused. Even Oprah was accused of something.
 
Last edited:
All this stuff is so exhausting. I can't imagine how Michael felt dealing with it most of life day in and day out. I've managed to persuade a couple of friends of mine that Michael is innocent via YouTube videos. One of them who previously said he believed the two guys now completely dismisses it and messaged me saying he was listening to Invincible he's not like a big massive fan like i am but just a casual fan. It's a waste of time arguing with ignorant people, i mostly just try and argue the case with people I know personally, not some randomer on the internet.
 
Had my appearance insulted on Twitter twice now, that's what I get for using a real picture I suppose ??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top