Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

[8701girl]

This is from the Roger Friedman article. I also don't know how that works, but it kind of sounds like he knows what he's talking about: "Meanwhile, Robson has started a not for profit foundation and is soliciting donations. There can be no transparency, as he’s parked his 501 c3 very cleverly under something called the Hawaii Community Foundation. That way, Robson doesn’t have to file a form 990. We’ll never know if the makers of “Leaving Neverland” have donated money to it, for example. This was done on purpose. Leonardo DiCaprio does the same thing with his Foundation. It’s hidden."

so what does all that mean

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

so what does all that mean

sounds like to me that basically wade has set up a gofundme to support his failed life and is masking it as a child abuse charity, no one can see who's donating what so all money is hidden

 

[VaNiL]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

so what does all that mean

It means they could have got paid through Wade's foundation and no one will ever know. How convenient.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Of course they are getting paid.wade owes the estate money so of course its gonna be done under the brush

 

[wednesday]

Tarana Burke, the founder of the #MeToo movement, attended the “Leaving Neverland” premiere and in an interview two days later said she was still processing the film. While she noted that her campaign has dealt with child sexual abuse — she herself is a survivor — she acknowledged that boys and men have not been at the center of the conversation.


“I think ‘Leaving Neverland’ will help shift the idea away that this just happens to women,” said Burke. “This film is going to drop like a bomb and shock a lot of people, having people questioning things they believed for so many years.”


Hours after “Leaving Neverland” debuted in Park City, Burke met with Robson and Safechuck to offer her thoughts on how to deal with the public backlash that may emerge in the coming months.


“I am in the center of a lot of that criticism on a daily basis, and as a survivor, it’s hard to hold that,” she said. “One of the things we talked about is that there’s going to be so much more support than there is criticism. They said that being here, this is one of the first times they’ve ever felt supported in their allegations.”

This is unbelievably sad. Does she know that Michael Jackson's very own flesh and blood, his daughter Paris Jackson, revealed to Rolling Stone Magazine that she was sexually abused by an adult when she was 14 years old? And now Ms. Burke is jumping on the hate train to join the mob against that poor girls' father. Disgusting

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

can't compare different trials but oj Simpson owes the Goldman family millions but claims he's broke

hid money for years so hasn't paid much to the civil suit he lost, common practice id imagine

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

tarana burke destroys the credibility of her supposed movement with her little think piece there

 

[stephenvalek]

If there was ever a time to doubt Jackson’s innocence this is not it. This is the weakest case of the three in my eyes and that is REALLY saying something.

Totally Agree.. Its total fantasy, and the allegations of disturbed minds,where belief is down to lack of common sense, and knowledge of facts already presented.

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

mirror have posted article about Jordy Chandler

includes the extortion phone call and the financial settlements Evan tried to make before going to court
includes the fact settlement didn't stop chandler testifying
misses out the fact two grand juries refused the case
includes the fact Jordy said mj was circumcised and that autopsy confirms this to be a lie

very interesting piece presented to make mj look terrible but anyone who reads it will see it doesn't add up

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Totally Agree.. Its total fantasy, and the allegations of disturbed minds,where belief is down to lack of common sense, and knowledge of facts already presented.

Safechuck was the hardest for me because he was the quieter one wade is too fame hungry and has slipped up already many times

the more I dug into it the more I realised it was a word for word copy of the pedophile gutierez book that isn't even allowed to be sold in us so says it all the guy still owes mj 2.4m

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

I've got 1000 subscribers on youtube and something like 500,000 lifetime views - good numbers but not amazing by some standards

anyway i'm putting together a video titled 'Was Michael Jackson a Pedophile?' it will detail the Chandler's, Arvizo's and now the Safechuck/Robson cases. easily digestible, short and full of evidence

hopefully another tool to share and get some traction to prove mj innocence

will post link here when done

if there's any worthwhile info to include send it over

 

[somewhereinthedark]

I think we should just ignore JCO8 from now on. I am not one to cast stones, never had an argument with anyone on this forum, but this memeber is just too much. People have tried to reason with him/her, bring arguments in support, but he/she always responds with the same speech as Wade (even the story behind is the same). It seems very strange to me.

I actually don’t believe JCO8 is a real fan. There’s just something strange that a REAL fan would ignore all the FACTS that have been presented for Michael’s total innocence. I think this person has an agenda. We have to be careful in sympathizing with “fans” like that. This forum is for defending Michael against these liars , and we can’t fall for people who have an EXCUSE to defend These extortionists and scam artists.

 

[VaNiL]

I know it was posted here before, but it's always refreshing.

Tony Safechuck (James' cousin) in 2013 just AFTER Wade started his allegations but BEFORE his cousin jumped on the bandwagon:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="es"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/possiblytully?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@possiblytully</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/EllisMate?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@EllisMate</a> my cuz/I were 2 of the kids that used 2 hang out with him! Great person, it&#39;s all bullshit, no settlement happened</p>&mdash; TONY SAFECHUCK (@SHOWTIME16) <a href="https://twitter.com/SHOWTIME16/status/390562076542119936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16 de octubre de 2013</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[somewhereinthedark]

Safechuck was the hardest for me because he was the quieter one wade is too fame hungry and has slipped up already many times

the more I dug into it the more I realised it was a word for word copy of the pedophile gutierez book that isn't even allowed to be sold in us so says it all the guy still owes mj 2.4m

We need to point out every chance we get that Safechuck&#8217;s scripted lies are word for word from a pedophile/NAMBLA member, Victor Guiterrez. This needs to be really emphasized.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Burke by name burke by nature. Shows up the intentions of me too when shes obviously so biast when it comes to any claims no matter how full of s#$/ they are. Someone on twitter please educate this person. Me too are becoming the peta of human rights!

 

[ILoveHIStory]

Guys, I have seen it posted many times that the stories of Safechuck and Robson are very similar to stories in the Victor Gutierrez book, BUT I haven't seen any proof of that. People want to believe the Safechuck/Robson stories and to fight that, we need to provide proof. Sadly R&S get free reign to say whatever they like without challenge but we need PROOF.

In the unlikely scenario that somebody has access to that book then we need to read the book, compare it to the legal documents and then provide references. We need page numbers. Better yet, we need scans of the relevant pages from the book so that we can PROVE beyond doubt that the stories are taken from that book.

IF we can provide scans of pages from the book, together with pages from legal documents, then people cannot deny the stories are fraudulent!

I looked on the net and there is one copy in the UK but it costs £100 - too much for me.
There is copy in the USA selling for £56 but it would take too long to get here.

(a copy sold in the USA for only £12 earlier this month!)


Does anybody have access to the book?

Respect77 is preparing analyses of the book, afaik, the book is illegal in the USA, but not in the other parts of the world, and we can bet the book is the source of the filthy mockumentary

By Respect77

For example (it is from an article I am working on about Safechuck):

He claims that Jackson showed him heterosexual adult magazines, pornographic books (not just artistic books with nudity) AND on top of that &#8220;movies in which children were masturbating&#8221;. (SAC p 18, para 60) Safechuck claimed that the &#8220;pornographic books&#8221; were &#8220;foreign books&#8221;.

Here we have to note that no movies with children masturbating or any kind of child pornography has ever been found in Jackson&#8217;s possession. There is no evidence supporting the claim that Jackson ever had such material and his premises were thoroughly searched in both 1993 and in 2003. No other child &#8211; accuser or not &#8211; ever claimed such a thing, either.

While the child pornography claim of Safechuck does not have a precedent by Jackson&#8217;s other accusers, but it does have a precedent elsewhere, namely in Victor Gutierrez&#8217;s book, Michael Jackson Was My Lover. There Gutierrez claims that Jackson watched movies where children "ran around naked and masturbating" [4; page 57-58]. Compare that to Safechuck's allegation! Gutierrez also claimed that these were &#8220;foreign films&#8221;. In Safechuck&#8217;s complaint we have &#8220;foreign books&#8221;.

Sex acts right out of Gutierrez&#8217;s book

In his complaint, among other things, Safechuck alleges that Jackson inserted his finger into his anus. Safechuck claims he told Jackson to stop and he did, although he later did it again (SAC p 13-14, para 38). This is a very similar story that we find in Gutierrez&#8217;s book, only the protagonists are Jordan Chandler and Brett Barnes (page 79). If Safechuck attempted to establish a certain pattern by Jackson with this story, he failed, because Jordan Chandler never actually has alleged such a thing. When making his allegations Jordan specifically denied any anal contact ever taking place with Jackson (Gardner interview). And Barnes has always denied any sexual abuse. This story is, once again, nothing but Gutierrez&#8217;s disturbing, child pornographic fantasy, so it is interesting that it found its way to Safechuck&#8217;s complaint.

Mind you, the only accusers to ever claim anal penetration with Jackson are Robson and Safechuck, represented by the same lawyers. Robson is the only accuser ever claiming that Jackson anally penetrated him with his penis and Safechuck claims digital penetration.

The description of the relationship as a &#8220;marriage&#8221; and a romance

Safechuck claims in his complaint that Jackson called their relationship a "faux committed relationship" and they even had a fake &#8220;marriage ceremony&#8221;. (SAC 16, para 50) (SAC 17, para 54) No other accuser ever claimed any such thing, however in his fantasy tale about Jordan Chandler and Michael Jackson's alleged relationship, Gutierrez described them almost like a married couple. At one point in his story he has Jordan saying it felt like they were on a "honeymoon" (page 50).

Gutierrez makes it out to be a love story between MJ and Jordan, lo and behold Robson and Safechuck describe their relationship with MJ as a "love story" ("we were in love with him").

The description of Jackson as a woman-hater

Safechuck alleges in his complaint that Jackson was jealous when he had a crush on the star's background singer, Sheryl Crow and told him that he should not like her. He also claims that Jackson consistently talked about women in a negative manner. [SAC 14, 39) This too echoes Gutierrez who portrays Jackson as a woman-hater.

Safechuck also alleges that when he was in fourth grade and had a girlfriend, Jackson told him that he could only have a relationship with him. [SAC 16, para 50) This echoes another story from Gutierrez&#8217;s book in which Jordan Chandler has a crush on one of the sisters of Albert von Thurn und Taxis and he gets mad at him for it (page 40) and the royal family even has to leave Neverland because of it. On contrary to this tale by Gutierrez, Elisabeth von Thurn und Taxis talked about her memories of Jackson after the singer&#8217;s death and had nothing but nice things to say about him. Needles to say, no such incident as what is described in Gutierrez&#8217;s book ever happened.

Safechuck claims Jackson gave him alcohol

Safechuck claimed that Jackson served him "pink wine" while watching pornographic movies with him in his Los Angeles condo (SAC 18, 60). Now, this is again an interesting claim, because the only other accuser that claimed that Jackson gave him alcohol was Gavin Arvizo. It is through his allegations that the &#8220;Jesus Juice&#8221; myth entered public consciousness. However, like with the other claims of the Arvizos, this was a never proven allegation by an accuser with a heavily compromised credibility. Jackson was acquitted of this charge at the end of his trial, like of all other charges.

No other accuser of Jackson ever alleged that Jackson gave them alcohol. In actuality, when Wade Robson talked about the last time he had met Jackson before his death, in Las Vegas in 2008 (when Robson was 26 years old), he expressed surprise about Jackson drinking and wanting alcohol: "So, I remember talking about that saying, yeah, let us just bring some food, and Michael being really -- he just kept asking me to make sure I bring alcohol, which was also a really new, as far as to me, like, for him to talk about that and want that."

However, Gutierrez did claim in his fantasy book that Jackson frequently gave boys alcohol. (page 80)

The whole idea of romanticizing child sexual abuse, saying that boys were in love with an adult man while having an "emotionally and sexually fulfilling relationship" with him, is totally VG's message. He is likely a pedophile and this is actually NAMBLA propaganda.

 

[MJTruth]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

I've got 1000 subscribers on youtube and something like 500,000 lifetime views - good numbers but not amazing by some standards

anyway i'm putting together a video titled 'Was Michael Jackson a Pedophile?' it will detail the Chandler's, Arvizo's and now the Safechuck/Robson cases. easily digestible, short and full of evidence

hopefully another tool to share and get some traction to prove mj innocence

will post link here when done

if there's any worthwhile info to include send it over

Yes thank you for your efforts. I hope your video and others like it are spread far wide across the internet. MJ fans need to share them repeatedly.
flood the comments pages. Flood the news editors' inbox.

I have started celebrities who have supported MJ in the past (and who happen to have many millions of followers) in the hope that they retweet.
The way to get our message out there is through the support of influential figure. If only one of those celebrities tweets something positive it can have a MASSIVE impact compared to us bitching and moaning on an MJ fan forum.

 

[MJTruth]

I actually don&#8217;t believe JCO8 is a real fan. There&#8217;s just something strange that a REAL fan would ignore all the FACTS that have been presented for Michael&#8217;s total innocence. I think this person has an agenda. We have to be careful in sympathizing with &#8220;fans&#8221; like that. This forum is for defending Michael against these liars , and we can&#8217;t fall for people who have an EXCUSE to defend These extortionists and scam artists.

As long as a person is not blatantly trolling then we must welcome them. We criticise the trolls on news pages for being keeping their minds closed and not researching enough before forming their opinions. JC08 appears to be asking questions in order to form their own opinion and I welcome that. EVERYBODY should keep an open mind and make educated decisions. Besides, questions that challenge our standard arguments can only benefit those arguments in the long run.

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

MJ told us to keep an open mind himself

we must not combat hate with hate only love

 

[VaNiL]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

I've just noticed Frank Cascio has deleted his Twitter account. He just posted this two or three days ago:

Now his account is suspended. WEIRD.

 

[dam2040]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

I actually think it's hilarious Mr Reed stated, in his own words, he didn't interview anyone else because it didn't fit the story he was trying to tell.

He was never out for justice, he was out for innocent blood.

 

[volitional]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Maybe we should contact him and tip him off?

I wouldn't trust Piers Morgan. He's more likely to go the other way.

 

[ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

As long as a person is not blatantly trolling then we must welcome them. We criticise the trolls on news pages for being keeping their minds closed and not researching enough before forming their opinions. JC08 appears to be asking questions in order to form their own opinion and I welcome that. EVERYBODY should keep an open mind and make educated decisions. Besides, questions that challenge our standard arguments can only benefit those arguments in the long run.

I think its better to separate the people with doubts and the responts to them from this thread and bring it into the thread "Doubts" in the Trail and Tribulation forum cause this kind of discuisson is not really helpful for this threat when people want simply follow what happens because of this documentery, our activity, where they want to bring their ideas in.
The tread gets longer and longer and its difficult for people who start maybe reading it to now to get so much information as possible, to do it til the end when this kind of discussions without informations blows it up.
Sorry I belive I could express it better but english is not my first language!

 

[volitional]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

I think she believes any accuser first and foremost. It's gotten to the point where due process has gone out of the window along with fact checking.

What gets me the most are that people are so stupid in understanding this is only portraying one version and the director deliberately avoided Michael's side of the story.

 

[volitional]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Jermaine Jackson: 'No truth' to allegations in Michael documentary
40 minutes ago

Jermaine Jackson: "We're living in a time where people can say anything and it's taken as truth."
Jermaine Jackson has said there is "no truth" to allegations in a controversial new documentary about his brother Michael.

In Leaving Neverland, James Safechuck and Wade Robson claim they were abused by the singer as children.

Mr Robson acted as a main witness for Michael Jackson at his 2005 trial, but has now changed his story.

Jermaine told ITV's Good Morning Britain: "Michael was tried by a jury of his peers and he was acquitted."

He added: "There was no real evidence, there was nothing there and I will say this - our family are tired."

The four-hour documentary premiered at the Sundance Film Festival last week and was seen to be so shocking that audiences were offered emotional support in the interval.

Mr Robson and Mr Safechuck were aged seven and 10 when the singer befriended them and their families.

Mr Robson said under oath in 2005 that the pop star never abused him, but has now rowed back on this.

Jackson's estate has previously condemned the film, saying it is "an outrageous and pathetic attempt to exploit and cash in" on the singer, who died in 2009 at the age of 50.

Jackson died in 2009 at the age of 50
The film's director Dan Reed defended the documentary, saying he believed what the men were alleging in the film.

"Neither Wade, James or any members of their families were paid for their participation in the film, directly or indirectly," he told Rolling Stone.

"This is not a story about Michael Jackson. It's a story about child sexual abuse that happened to two families whose lives intersected with Jackson. The fact that the abuser is Michael Jackson gives the film a reach and a relevance that I welcome."

'Let this man rest'

Jermaine Jackson maintained Michael's innocence during his interview on Wednesday.

"There were slumber parties, there were girls there with their parents watching movies and eating cookies...

"Let this man rest. He did a lot for the world, let him rest. I'll just say this, there is no truth to this documentary...

"We're living in a time where people can say anything and it's taken as truth.

"Under oath he [Mr Robson] said what he said, they would rather believe a documentary than looking at what was said under oath, under a judge, jury, everything."

I wish they would emphasise the FBI investigation on Michael and how nothing was found and the length of the investigation. They need to be stronger in their rebuttal.

 

[TheChosenOne]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

The one-sided nature of the documentary is very upsetting and should raise red flags. The fact that it does not, and that some people are proclaiming it convincing is something we should all be concerned about. It shows that as humans we are failing to use/apply our critical thinking skills.

If people apply those skills and still think Michael is guilty, then I would have to respect that (grudgingly). But without the critical thinking, people are no more than the sheep they accuse us of being.

 

[ILoveHIStory]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="sk"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">So none of Gutierrez&#39;s anal fantasies is backed up by any evidence<br>but in Safechuck&#39;s lawsuit there something that Gutierrez would be more than capable to envision <br><br>Do you really believe Jackson did this?<br><br>Or it&#39;s more likely to be fiction delivered by a certain NAMBLA member? <a href="https://t.co/fKiRP3zMhX">pic.twitter.com/fKiRP3zMhX</a></p>&mdash; Hammer (@Hammertonhal) <a href="https://twitter.com/Hammertonhal/status/1085638103790948353?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. januára 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

What a coincidence the same medallion is also mentioned in Gutierrez's book on page 135!

In the book Jackson gave the medallion to Wade Robson.
In Safechuck's lawsuit Jackson gave the medallion to Safechuck.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="sk"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The exact same lie is in Safechuck&#39;s lawsuit. Here&#39;s Safechuck says Jackson showed him &quot;foreign books&quot;. In Gutierrez&#39;s book it&#39;s &quot;foreign themes&quot; movies. <br><br>Coincidence? <a href="https://t.co/6JCQg1kmrQ">pic.twitter.com/6JCQg1kmrQ</a></p>&mdash; Hammer (@Hammertonhal) <a href="https://twitter.com/Hammertonhal/status/1085639756699049984?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. januára 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Lightbringer]

Some more quotes from Jermaine. I think Jermaine did fairly well. Its not easy to defend Michael shortly.

"Appearing on Good Morning Britain, Jermaine Jackson hit back at the documentary – pointing out how Wade Robson previously defended Michael in court when the popstar was on trial in 2005, where he was acquitted.

Speaking on the show, Jermaine said: ‘What has happened people don’t know is Wade changed his story that he maintained before and after Michael’s death. He tried to go out and shop a book deal, no publisher would touch it. ‘He even sued the estate $1.5 billion, it was tossed out of court. He wanted to go for the head choreography part of Cirque du Soleil, he was turned down from that. So what was left for him to do was to do a documentary, so he gets in front of a camera with a bunch of people and spews out all these nonsense statements.

That’s when everything changed when he was turned down from the choreography part.’ Piers asked how sure Jermaine Jackson can be Michael is innocent considering he wasn’t there, which sparked a particularly emotional response. ‘Piers I am a thousand per cent sure because Michael was tried by a jury of his peers and he was acquitted on all of this because there was no real evidence,’ Jermaine said. ‘There was nothing there. And I will say this, our family are tired. We’re very tired.

‘Let this man rest. He did a lot for the world, let him rest. I’ll just say this, there is no truth to this documentary. You look at the series of events of Wade shopping book deals, the lawsuit and, not to say it, but he was very close to the family. He even went out with two of my nieces.’ He added: ‘We’re living in a time where people can say anything and it’s taken as truth. Under oath he said what he said, they would rather believe a documentary than looking at what was said under oath, under a judge, jury, everything.’

Jermaine also stated Wade was a close family friend who ‘took part in barbecues’ with them. Asked if he’ll be taking legal action against the documentary, Jermaine replied: ‘That’s something for the estate. And at the same time, we lost Michael, we lost our father, we’re still mourning. We lost a lot. Just leave us alone. Leave him alone. Let him rest. Please. ‘Let him rest. He deserves to rest.’

 

[Staffordshire Bullterrier]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

I've just noticed Frank Cascio has deleted his Twitter account. He just posted this two or three days ago:

Now his account is suspended. WEIRD.

That sure is strange. He could have done that himself, but why? And if he didn't want the tweet to be visible for some reason he could have deleted it. Odd.

 

[ILoveHIStory]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="sk"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Looking at this does anyone have any doubt Safechuck fabricated his allegations by copying that disgusting pro pedophilia book? who would even think such a thing? Is this what <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/metoo?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#metoo</a> now supports? <a href="https://twitter.com/HBO?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@HBO</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/Channel4?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Channel4</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/TaranaBurke?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TaranaBurke</a> <a href="https://t.co/ogxuNDafnW">pic.twitter.com/ogxuNDafnW</a></p>&mdash; Hammer (@Hammertonhal) <a href="https://twitter.com/Hammertonhal/status/1089950122157453312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">28. januára 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>