Latest on MJJC

Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

This is again really a GREAT video and analysis!
Very good job!

"LEAVING NEVERLAND's suspicious editing" from "Collative Learning"
8.532 views on April 19 2019


I absolutly didn't notice this myself!
 
Last edited:
john13th said:
I never said anything about the article is lying and I never meant for any second to come up with that attitude about "you're behaving just like people who think MJ is guilty", why do you think that from the first beginning? I personally state concerning Daily Mail article it is really her words they are quoting and for me it is really disturbing and very conflicting to have her involved with that dance project, she should not be there since she has those remarks. That is my statement.

What I meant was, reading that message from Alicia, I personally interpret that first as the Estate are probably thinking those are misquotations. But now as you have explained it clearer, that the Estate did not even read it before responding and tried to talk down to fans, then it is clearly wrong what the Estate is doing. As I have also said earlier, they need to address this issue with her and get rid of her.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about you. That is the attitude that was conveyed in the Estate response.
 
Cinnamon234 said:
I agree. I was really annoyed when I read that.

The article isn't lying anyway. They have direct quotes from her.

If Alicia wants to be in denial about this then that's up to her but it does not look good on the estates part to keep this woman on.

So sad how they never stand up for Michael. I'm sick of it.
Click to expand...

The MJ-Online team should at least know better than to pour petrol on a fire!

I'm reading on Twitter that fans have tweeted to Nottage, and she has blocked them. If she is 'Pulitzer prize-winning' that doesn't say much for her abilities - surely it would be easy (for an award-winning writer) to just write a few words in response - whatever she wishes her response to be.

They (MJ Online team) must realise that the worst case scenario here is that Nottage really does believe R and S. If that is the case, who's to say that she wouldn't invite them to front-row seats at the musical premiere? The whole scenario would be a mess.
 
myosotis said:
The MJ-Online team should at least know better than to pour petrol on a fire! I'm reading on Twitter that fans have tweeted to Nottage, and she has blocked them. If she is 'Pulitzer prize-winning' that doesn't say much for her abilities - surely it would be easy (for an award-winning writer) to just write a few words in response - whatever she wishes her response to be.

They (MJ Online team) must realise that the worst case scenario here is that Nottage really does believe R and S. If that is the case, who's to say that she wouldn't invite them to front-row seats at the musical premiere? The whole scenario would be a mess.
Click to expand...

Oh it could be get more worst.
Imagine Wade would DANCE and James would act in the musical!






This was a sacastic JOKE!
 
Lynn Nottage needs to go ASAP. Its quite clear to me after double reading that Daily Mail article, which has now been picked up by a big broadway website, that this woman believes Michael Jackson was a monster. We simply can't have the creative force behind this massive broadway show to not believe in Michael's innocence. How can we contact the estate so they can clarify what's going on?

I personally will never go see the broadway if this witch is running the show. She clearly has an agenda and it's aligning perfectly with the Oprah Winfrey/Gayle King/Harvey Weinstein narrative. I really don't have a good feeling about it. Time to let this woman go and get someone who actually loves MJ and believes in him.
 
As a theatre producer who has enjoyed Nottage's work, I am disappointed in her.

And I agree that the Estate needs to respond to this as soon as possible.

I am well sick and tired of people talking about how flawed Michael was. He was a human being. Of course he was flawed!!!!

And as a fan I don't need a portrayal of Michael to present him as perfect, because he was not. He was a human being. Of course he was not perfect!!!!

I hate when people look at Michael like he is some sort of specimen, metaphor, fictional character upon whom they can apply all sort of psychological theories and ideologies. Looking at you Zadie Smith and you Ms Nottage!!! If you are not going to take the time to TALK and LISTEN to people who knew Michael and just want to look at him from the outside -then GET OFF THIS RIDE. YOU ARE SLOWING US DOWN!!!!!
 
Jesus Christ we really can't have nice things anymore, can we? Not only is the Broadway show in jeopardy of potentially sucking, but the Estate is apparently gonna disregard what she said because...? I know Daily Mail is a tabloid but they should at least look into this shit.

Every time it feels like things are gonna turn around we get shit on all over again. I'm so ****ing sick of this. :(
 
I'm disgusted with the Estate right now. I was never a fan of their decision making since the beginning, but I was willing to set that aside and give them another chance to redeem themselves by seeing how they would respond to Leaving Neverland. So far their response has been pathetic. It's clear at this point that they just don't give a shit about Michael. Michael's children can't take over soon enough. I'm done with the Estate.
 
Amaya;4255628 said:
Jesus Christ we really can't have nice things anymore, can we? Not only is the Broadway show in jeopardy of potentially sucking, but the Estate is apparently gonna disregard what she said because...? I know Daily Mail is a tabloid but they should at least look into this shit.

Every time it feels like things are gonna turn around we get shit on all over again. I'm so ****ing sick of this. :(
Click to expand...

I've read Alicia's response, and I'm just appalled. Why hasn't Nottage responded yet? Many MJ fans incl. Aden Branson have informed her of her alleged statement, shown her evidence 'Leaving Neverland' is all a lie, she is very well-informed of the situation, will not respond, and Alicia's statement is far from reassuring; is the Daily Mail interview real or fictional? The Estate must demand she publicly explain herself right now OR fire her.

If she honestly believes or only thinks ROBson & SafeCHECK are telling the truth, then she has no business writing that musical, a musical backed by Michael Jackson's very own estate! It's ridiculous! The Estate and the whole MJ brand are now becoming a laughing stock!

Lynn Nottage reportedly believes Jackson to be that vicious, maniacal child rapist, but she still wants to profit from his name and music. On a related note, Bill Whitfield has confirmed again that photo from 'Leaving Neverland' was indeed doctored since the Safechucks were not there that night.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">It&#8217;s a Fake picture....they weren&#8217;t there that night!</p>&mdash; Bill Whitfield (@MJBODYGUARDS) <a href="https://twitter.com/MJBODYGUARDS/status/1119319078097711104?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe>
 
Last edited:
Arckangel said:
I've read Alicia's response, and I'm just appalled. Why hasn't Nottage responded yet? Many MJ fans incl. Aden Branson have informed her of her alleged statement, shown her evidence 'Leaving Neverland' is all a lie, she is very well-informed of the situation, will not respond, and Alicia's statement is far from reassuring; is the Daily Mail interview real or fictional? The Estate must demand she publicly explain herself right now OR fire her.

If she honestly believes or only thinks ROBson & SafeCHECK are telling the truth, then she has no business writing that musical, a musical backed by Michael Jackson's very own estate! It's ridiculous! The Estate and the whole MJ brand are now becoming a laughing stock!

Lynn Nottage reportedly believes Jackson to be that vicious, maniacal child rapist, but she still wants to profit from his name and music. On a related note, Bill Whitfield has confirmed again that photo from 'Leaving Neverland' was indeed doctored since the Safechuck were not there that night.
Click to expand...

I agree with you about the Estate.

Whitfield however doesn't know what he is talking about. He didn't work for Michael back then. The picture is real and the Safechuck's were also with Michael the same week in New York at the Phantom of The Opera.
 
That response from Alicia is strangely hostile and inappropriate. You'd have to say that the DM made up all those quotes Lynn said, which I doubt. And she meant something different when she said Michael was "deeply flawed"? No, I think I can read between the lines there. The Estate does want fans to support their projects don't they? Even setting Lynn's quotes aside, I think her connections to HBO and Harpo should be enough to get rid of her anyway. Yeah, why don't we hire Dan Reed for this Broadway show while we're at it :doh:
 
WildStyle said:
I agree with you about the Estate.

Whitfield however doesn't know what he is talking about. He didn't work for Michael back then. The picture is real and the Safechuck's were also with Michael the same week in New York at the Phantom of The Opera.
Click to expand...

Do you have evidence the picture is real and they were there that very night? I understand your response, but he is certain they were not at that very event.
 
Arckangel said:
Do you have evidence the picture is real and they were there that very night? I understand your response, but he is certain they were not at that very event.
Click to expand...

Whitfield wasn't working with Michael in that time, he can't confirm it's photoshoped/no.
 
Arckangel said:
Do you have evidence the picture is real and they were there that very night? I understand your response, but he is certain they were not at that very event.
Click to expand...

He was a decade and a half away from working for Michael so he wouldn't know. I can't remember all the dates now but that photo was from March 1988 in New York and this photo was from the same week (maybe even the next night) at the Phantom Of The Opera on Broadway. So they were definitely in New York visiting with him during this time.

gallery_8_890_2390.jpg
 
Ha Faker and thief Dan Greed also edited this footage.




He used the original Bad audio which is uploaded on youtube from this concert and tryed to make it match with Wades footage.
But it didn't really match!
And when filmquality gets so worst in the middle of the footage the audio stays in the same quality.

And why should Wades parents somtimes film the audience when Wade is on stage?

Yeah this edit should cover up the fakeing.
They are also showing THREE different crowds in this momemt. Not the same people.
Impossible to film this from one point where you are standing in a concert.
I have the impression that sometimes the crowed is filmed from the stage.
You will also notice a little cut after Michael camed back to Wade.
 
Last edited:
I have read the full LN transscript this morning, without being convinced by it for any second, and I wondering which hotel Wade claims that happened with the penetration and the bloody underwear that cames from it? Is it confirmed Michael did his History Tour rehearsals in Hollywood/LA in 1996? If so, did anyone in the rehersal staff witness seeing Wade there?

Edit: Ok I had to watch this small video segment to see what Wade was refering to in the transscript when it came to this dance rehearsal. I get the picture now where you see Michael rehearsing with what appears to be Lavelle and Travis. But was it Wade who filmed this clip?

hwt-bow-rehearsal1.png
 
Last edited:
WildStyle said:
He was a decade and a half away from working for Michael so he wouldn't know. I can't remember all the dates now but that photo was from March 1988 in New York and this photo was from the same week (maybe even the next night) at the Phantom Of The Opera on Broadway. So they were definitely in New York visiting with him during this time.

gallery_8_890_2390.jpg
Click to expand...

This picture is from the phantom of the opera on March 09 1988

http://mjjgallery.free.fr/bad/various/phantom/phantom.html

The united Negro event was on March 10 1988

http://www.aparchive.com/metadata/U...ael-Jackson-/c34755a988e8643a467419314cd62a99

So it is very possible that the MJ and the Safchucks met each other AFTER or BEFORE the united Negro event (I think in the hotel).
But the safechucks were not with Michael at the United Negro Event.
You can watch all the videofootage and pictures from the event back and forth and will not find the Safechucks anywhere!
I think the Safechucks visited anouther event on this evening and then they met Michael back in the hotel where they made this private picture with michael, cause the picture is nowhere to find and the backround is nowhere to find on the United Negro event.
James also didn't mention this event in his complaints.

James wears the same dress he also wears in London at the guide hall event and and he wears the grey trousers at the Phantom of the opera one day before by the way.
 
Last edited:
If it's not possible to be 100% sure that pic was doctored, it is not possible to be 100% sure that pic was not doctored neither. I do think it was photoshopped (though I can't be 100% sure of that).

If ROBson, SafeCHECK, some of their family members and gREED had no qualms about fabricating stories about those kids "having sex" with MJ, MJ masturbating to their anuses, raping, grooming them, abusing them, etc., I would not put doctoring and editing photos and videos past them. Some audio recordings were even shortened to make it sound like Michael only wanted to see the kids.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">But this is photpshopped to show that he was always with MJ. I do Photoshop &amp; including my bro I asked from lot ppl who do Photoshop professionally in all platforms, they said this is poorly photoshopped haha &amp; they said a real pic always gives real scene to not feel suspicious. <a href="https://t.co/IDpmfSLsy3">pic.twitter.com/IDpmfSLsy3</a></p>&mdash; Mikey Applehead &#10084;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533; (@PumpiLiya) <a href="https://twitter.com/PumpiLiya/status/1119450101167087617?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe>
 
Arckangel;4255658 said:
If it's not possible to be 100% sure that pic was doctored, it is not possible to be 100% sure that pic was not doctored neither. I do think it was photoshopped (though I can't be 100% sure of that).

If ROBson, SafeCHECK, some of their family members and gREED had no qualms about fabricating stories about those kids "having sex" with MJ, MJ masturbating to their anuses, raping, grooming them, abusing them, etc., I would not put doctoring and editing photos and videos past them. Some audio recordings were even shortened to make it sound like Michael only wanted to see the kids.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">But this is photpshopped to show that he was always with MJ. I do Photoshop &amp; including my bro I asked from lot ppl who do Photoshop professionally in all platforms, they said this is poorly photoshopped haha &amp; they said a real pic always gives real scene to not feel suspicious. <a href="https://t.co/IDpmfSLsy3">pic.twitter.com/IDpmfSLsy3</a></p>&mdash; Mikey Applehead &#10084;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533;&#65533; (@PumpiLiya) <a href="https://twitter.com/PumpiLiya/status/1119450101167087617?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

What's the point in fabricating this picture? There is nothing incriminating about it and it's already been proven that they saw MJ in New York during that week. There is nothing reasonably suspicious about the picture. Anybody that has experience with photography and photo editing will tell you there is nothing that sticks out as being unrealistic in the photo. The resolution and exposure play the biggest part in why people are questioning it. At the end of the day the discussion around it is pointless.

<iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.2e9f365dae390394eb8d923cba8c5b11.htm l?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mjjcommunity.com&settin gsEndpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fsyndication.twitter.com%2 Fsettings" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" title="Twitter analytics iframe" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets/widget_iframe.2e9f365dae390394eb8d923cba8c5b11.htm l?origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mjjcommunity.com&settin gsEndpoint=https%3A%2F%2Fsyndication.twitter.com%2 Fsettings" title="Twitter settings iframe" style="display: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe>
<iframe scrolling="no" 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;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" title="Twitter analytics iframe" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: none;" frameborder="0"></iframe><iframe scrolling="no" 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;" frameborder="0"></iframe>
 
Two after-thoughts about Nottage:

1. Apparently she is a former National Press Officer for Amnesty International - so she should be very aware of the repercussions of anything she says (or implies) in a press interview. And also how to correct any misinterpretations that may occur, regarding anything the press reports about her.


2. Her reported words in the DM interview clearly disparage MJ. If that is not corrected, then HBO will surely be able to respond to the Estates' 'non-disparagement' legal case by saying 'Well, your own contracted author is OK to disparage MJ when talking about the book for the musical she is writing, so why should we not say exactly the same thing in a film?
 
myosotis said:
Two after-thoughts about Nottage:

1. Apparently she is a former National Press Officer for Amnesty International - so she should be very aware of the repercussions of anything she says (or implies) in a press interview. And also how to correct any misinterpretations that may occur, regarding anything the press reports about her.


2. Her reported words in the DM interview clearly disparage MJ. If that is not corrected, then HBO will surely be able to respond to the Estates' 'non-disparagement' legal case by saying 'Well, your own contracted author is OK to disparage MJ when talking about the book for the musical she is writing, so why should we not say exactly the same thing in a film?
Click to expand...

HBO can't argue with this woman.
HBO have clauses with MJ.
We don't know if the Estate have this type of clause with Nottage. And even if there's this clause, the two contracts are separated.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">So the egg has come out of hibernation to revel in <a href="https://twitter.com/Lynnbrooklyn?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Lynnbrooklyn</a>&#8217;s disgusting comments! Calls her&#8220;highly respected,So just because she is &#8220;highly respected&#8221;that means her opinion is that gospel? She&#8217;s a hypocritical snake in the grass and not respected by the michael Jackson fans <a href="https://t.co/ntRZWCJYNI">pic.twitter.com/ntRZWCJYNI</a></p>&mdash; Michael #MJInnocent (@Mike_dropUK) <a href="https://twitter.com/Mike_dropUK/status/1119564970964992000?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

So, Alicia and them others at the Estate are gonna let all of that slide?!
<iframe id="rufous-sandbox" scrolling="no" allowtransparency="true" allowfullscreen="true" style="position: absolute; visibility: hidden; display: none; width: 0px; height: 0px; padding: 0px; border: medium none;" title="Twitter analytics iframe" frameborder="0"></iframe>
 
The estate does not have mj's interest at heart. I am sure they have been awarded contracts through their other businesses to make up for any personal losses they will incur from LV and that's the reason why they r willfully incompetent. Even Sony executives were discussing among each other that Branca's involvement in all that shitty catalogue business constituted a conflict of interest. Branca is a partner in the biggest entertainment law firm in the US. Does anyone in their right mind believe for a minute he will risk losing revenue from a giant like Warner time for the sake of effectively defending MJ's personal life? He will do like he did with the AEG case, send messages that he is neutral and willing to do deals. HBO lawsuit will be used to do deals. He will never push it enough to expose anything of value. He is not a civil rights advocates. All he cares about is maintaining his position in the industry and that would be much less guaranteed if he went against the big heads behind LV. The incompetency of the estate in relation to LV is willful don't let anyone convince u otherwise.
 
Last edited:
It is no longer the unknown losers Wade and Safe chuck. It is now Warner Time. Wake up please and be realistic. Branca is not a man of principles he will do anything to profit financially even if that means to hire someone who believes mj was a monster to write a 'celebratory play' of his life if this is something which will pile his pockets. He has already sold most of the assets anyway and got his share. He will dispose of MJ's catalogue before the kids get to be in charge of anything. Watch and see.

BTW, she did not say anything which Weizman did not say. He actually was MJ's lawyer in 1993 and got on national TV in 2005 as someone from mj's camp to tell everyone that he as his lawyer did not know whether he was innocent in 1993. At least the woman did not know MJ on a personal level nor was she involved in the cases. He was also seen laughing and being cozy with Wade and Safe chuck's previous legal representatives who were calling MJ every name under the sun inside and outside the court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top