Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

It's just unbelievable and goddamn tragic how after so many years this shit is actually still going on. All we can hope is that the judge and jurors, if it comes to that don't lack common sense, can see this for what it is.

But if not, then **** it. Mike is unbreakable. Ever since that filth aired his music is back on top, he has even more fans now and people seem to be waking up. And for those that say "where there's smoke, there's fire", these idiots have always had that mind state and they are losers.

It IS very sad though that his kids, Taj, his mother have to go through all this BS again. Boy there need to be some changes in the US law.
 
Interestingly a quite similar thing (obviously not to this extent) is happening to Johnny Depp. Story in brief: his ex-wife Amber Heard accused him very publicly with domestic violence, and she sort of made a second carrier out of being a "victim and activist" with MSM and civil right organisations stooding behind her (e.g. she became ACLU ambassador for "women's rights with a focus on gender-based violence" among others).

Now Depp is suing her for defamation, and his evidence suggests not only that he was innocent all along but also that Heard may have been the abuser herself.

Sure the outcome of the case is yet to be known, but one would think that civil right organisations always make sure that their ambassadors are provably credible in order to represent their cause the best (because it's should be the cause that matters, not celebrities associated with it).

Instead they still support Heard to the point of interfering into the proceedings: "The ACLU wants to enter the Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard defamation case in support of the actress" - quite ironic if the victim is indeed Depp instead of Heard. And of course there's not much media coverage of Depp's side either. It's almost like they invested so much into Heard being a victim that now they rather continue to support her then admit they may have been fooled.

Now don't get me wrong, the work of the ACLU is very important and mostly genuine, but cases like this can harm their credibility to some extent, because it looks like it's rather about PR and saving face than about justice - and that's a problem.

And that's exactly the problem with CSA organisations siding with R&S as well. If it's a serious organisation they should investigate the cases before backing them. If they investigate R&S they'll know they are lying - or let's phrase it more diplomatically: they'll realise R&S aren't good representatives for the cause because of their credibility issues.

That is, those supporting R&S 1) didn't investigate or 2) know they are lying but still support them because of the PR factor - both option is quite alarming and undermines the credibility of the organisation.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">We're going back into battle again <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJFam?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJFam</a>. But unlike LN, this year we know what we're up against and so many are advocating for truth and innocence. We are the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJFam?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJFam</a>, the strongest, most educated and the best advocates, and we will settle for nothing less than <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Justice4MJ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Justice4MJ</a>.</p>&mdash; andjustice4some (@andjustice4some) <a href="https://twitter.com/andjustice4some/status/1196634603877912576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">19. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">It was ALWAYS about the money. We tried to tell all of you their agenda. Wanna report the train station lie now, or Nah. <a href="https://t.co/XYHeI3Yy9r">https://t.co/XYHeI3Yy9r</a></p>&mdash; Taj Jackson (@tajjackson3) <a href="https://twitter.com/tajjackson3/status/1196570780378681344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">18. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Weitzman (TMZ): &quot;The Appellate Court's tentative ruling is not on the merits of Robson and Safechuck's allegations and the Court in no way said that these cases will go to trial.&quot;<br><br>Weitzman is confident that the cases &quot;will, once again, be dismissed as has happened before.&quot;</p>&mdash; TSCM (@MJJRepository) <a href="https://twitter.com/MJJRepository/status/1196570018286383104?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">18. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I have no doubt their lies will be exposed in court like they were last time. My fear is that the media will horribly skew the coverage like they did in 2005. They already showed this when they didn’t report Jame’s huge Train station lie. <a href="https://t.co/X4N79sMwTo">https://t.co/X4N79sMwTo</a></p>&mdash; Taj Jackson (@tajjackson3) <a href="https://twitter.com/tajjackson3/status/1196513380829319168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">18. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
why didnt Colony Capital sue Dan Reed/HBO for using their video footage of Neverland?
 
So basically the sole reason for them reconsidering the lawsuits again is because of LN then? Because they got dismissed in 2017 and not a damn thing changed. Except for that filth, which contained easily provable lies, contradictions and so on. These two pieces of shit have proven they can't stick to one story, so HOW can they ever hope to win this?
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier;4274712 said:
So basically the sole reason for them reconsidering the lawsuits again is because of LN then? Because they got dismissed in 2017 and not a damn thing changed. Except for that filth, which contained easily provable lies, contradictions and so on. These two pieces of shit have proven they can't stick to one story, so HOW can they ever hope to win this?
Nope, there was a change in the law, here's a thread on it:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="hu"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">So let me explain what exactly changed in the California Code of Civil Procedure that enabled Wade Robson and James Safechuck to save their cases from being dismissed and what this means for the future.</p>&mdash; Justice for The Falsely Accused (@JuliaBerkowitz1) <a href="https://twitter.com/JuliaBerkowitz1/status/1196824416866451458?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">2019. november 19.</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1196824416866451458.html
 
So basically the sole reason for them reconsidering the lawsuits again is because of LN then? Because they got dismissed in 2017 and not a damn thing changed. Except for that filth, which contained easily provable lies, contradictions and so on. These two pieces of shit have proven they can't stick to one story, so HOW can they ever hope to win this?

L.N has nothing to do with it. Theres a new law thats why they can refile.nothing else
 
As always was for MJ. It will be 05 all over again: accusations repeated infinitely by the media and no words about how those testimonies crumbled on cross examinations. No reporting on the defence at all. They will show a virtual reality completely different from the court transcripts. If the Estate wins they will dismiss it.

They will NEVER report the truth. They invested in the lies financially and - I think even more importantly - credibility-wise. In order to report the truth, they should admit they lied to you for decades! They can't afford this.

Members of the public will only know the truth if they use common sense to begin with and then fact check and research it for themselves - so it requires work. Now compare this to the situation of those who are ready to be spoonfed by a whole industry built on defeaming MJ, how much easier it is for them (and rewarding: they will be praised for their virtue signaling, while those who defend MJ will be labelled as blinded fans in the slightest).

Shame on everyone who supports this farce and gives credibility to it. Because make no mistake they: all know W&R's are fishy.

well said ?
 
As always was for MJ. It will be 05 all over again: accusations repeated infinitely by the media and no words about how those testimonies crumbled on cross examinations. No reporting on the defence at all. They will show a virtual reality completely different from the court transcripts. If the Estate wins they will dismiss it.

They will NEVER report the truth. They invested in the lies financially and - I think even more importantly - credibility-wise. In order to report the truth, they should admit they lied to you for decades! They can't afford this.

Members of the public will only know the truth if they use common sense to begin with and then fact check and research it for themselves - so it requires work. Now compare this to the situation of those who are ready to be spoonfed by a whole industry built on defeaming MJ, how much easier it is for them (and rewarding: they will be praised for their virtue signaling, while those who defend MJ will be labelled as blinded fans in the slightest).

Shame on everyone who supports this farce and gives credibility to it. Because make no mistake they: all know W&R's are fishy.
Again, this is 2019 not 2005. This is a whole new world with social media, facebook, instragram, etc even for the media. The old way does not work no more for the media and you should see that how MJ is still played and celebrated (even the FEW stations that had MJ removed has his back on). The work fans, fair minded people, have done on social media worked and do not think for one minute it did not (that is why some tabloid media outlets/sites tried to down play fans but that did not work; even with this law suit, you can believe those who hear it is like "these guys are full of it". The media can not dismiss the Estate no matter how much they wanted to so. Oprah faced a real backlash that she is still on her PR clean up adventure and she is still being called out. So again, fans work is not unnoticed regardless if the media admit it or not.
 
So basically the sole reason for them reconsidering the lawsuits again is because of LN then? Because they got dismissed in 2017 and not a damn thing changed. Except for that filth, which contained easily provable lies, contradictions and so on. These two pieces of shit have proven they can't stick to one story, so HOW can they ever hope to win this?
Like they said, it was due to the new law, nothing else. And again, in USA, ANYONE can file a law suit even if it is stupid. Look at some vegans now want to sue Burger King over the new meatless burger (if they think it is not meatless enuf, DO NOT EAT IT) but again, it will be filed (and likely thrown out but the point is ANYONE CAN FILE A LAW SUIT but it does not mean it will go to trial nor will they win. The judges can think they are full of it but due to the new law will let reconsider filing it.)
 
ozemouze;4274714 said:
Nope, there was a change in the law, here's a thread on it:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="hu"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">So let me explain what exactly changed in the California Code of Civil Procedure that enabled Wade Robson and James Safechuck to save their cases from being dismissed and what this means for the future.</p>&mdash; Justice for The Falsely Accused (@JuliaBerkowitz1) <a href="https://twitter.com/JuliaBerkowitz1/status/1196824416866451458?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">2019. november 19.</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1196824416866451458.html

More goddamned injustice basically, what lucky assholes these two are, sigh.

elusive moonwalker;4274715 said:
L.N has nothing to do with it. Theres a new law thats why they can refile.nothing else

Thanks for letting me know.

Just now I saw a tweet and it contained a picture of some bald idiot with W&J and how he supported them and one comment was all "so happy for you guys, we all know the truth."

And I'm like, Jesus, some people are just so damn delusional. Let's just hope it gets dismissed once again, there is really no reason for it not to. In fact with all the stuff the estate has it should be even less of a problem. But we'll see.
 
Again, this is 2019 not 2005. This is a whole new world with social media, facebook, instragram, etc even for the media. The old way does not work no more for the media and you should see that how MJ is still played and celebrated (even the FEW stations that had MJ removed has his back on). The work fans, fair minded people, have done on social media worked and do not think for one minute it did not (that is why some tabloid media outlets/sites tried to down play fans but that did not work; even with this law suit, you can believe those who hear it is like "these guys are full of it". The media can not dismiss the Estate no matter how much they wanted to so. Oprah faced a real backlash that she is still on her PR clean up adventure and she is still being called out. So again, fans work is not unnoticed regardless if the media admit it or not.
I appreciate your constant optimism, I really do. :flowers:

But this neverending fight is tiring and depressing. It's like a permanent war we can never win (or at least finish). After every positive events comes something bad, almost like a scheduled counter-attack. Older fans are fighting this neverending battle for 30 years now (it's very uplifting though to see the young fans taking over and they do it amazingly!). The MSM is in decline ATM but it still the main source of information. Plus the MJ cases are complicated and require time and attention to understand dry facts, while the MSM operates with sensational headlines focusing on quick emotional impact. MJ's detractors are protected so basically untouchable. R&S can lie as blatantly and as many times as they want the US media won't expose them. Oprah may suffer a backlash from the public but it won't matter as long as she's awarded with top contracts and pushed by media moguls. There's no law protecting the dead. If R&S's lawsuits go to trial it will take years and the media will seize every opportunity to report the allegations again and again (basically they have a copy-paste narrative for years). But if the Estate wins they will spin it or dismiss it.

The MJ scam story actually is a big story that could fascinate the public and convince them of MJ's innocence. Problem is NO ONE will report it. Catch-22: we would need the very platform to expose the truth wich is invested in the lie and is holding back the truth for decades.
 
It will be up to a jury to decide how this lawsuit ends up. That’s what I think is the hardest part of all this. I mean, who hasn’t heard of LN or this lawsuit by now? And besides fans and fair-minded people, who hasn't decided Michael was guilty a long time before now?

I’m sorry. But I blame the media for a lot of this mess.They should’ve been objective about Michael all along. Their overly negative reporting on him is the reason that fans are constantly being attacked And dismissed even though Fans make very valid points in Michael’s defense. The debate about his innocence would have been much less severe if The media had been unbiased from the start especially about the 1994 settlement. I think the media distorted The facts of what went into that and got the ball rolling to where we are now. Everybody has an opinion and most of the time, it is negative. And there are people making excuses for these men doing what they’re doing like these men are such saints even with all the changes in their stories and the glaring problems with LN. And these same people accuse Michael’s supporters of being biased, trying to “justify his behavior” and\or worshipping him like a god just because they don't believe the accusations. So give me a fake-rake’n’ break. Although, I wish I could say that I don’t blame Michael's detractors since the media has given them a negatively slanted image of him for years, IMO. I just hate that the chances of people finding out what this whole mess-fest saga has really been about is less than none.
 
Last edited:
I appreciate your constant optimism, I really do. :flowers:

But this neverending fight is tiring and depressing. It's like a permanent war we can never win (or at least finish). After every positive events comes something bad, almost like a scheduled counter-attack. Older fans are fighting this neverending battle for 30 years now (it's very uplifting though to see the young fans taking over and they do it amazingly!). The MSM is in decline ATM but it still the main source of information. Plus the MJ cases are complicated and require time and attention to understand dry facts, while the MSM operates with sensational headlines focusing on quick emotional impact. MJ's detractors are protected so basically untouchable. R&S can lie as blatantly and as many times as they want the US media won't expose them. Oprah may suffer a backlash from the public but it won't matter as long as she's awarded with top contracts and pushed by media moguls. There's no law protecting the dead. If R&S's lawsuits go to trial it will take years and the media will seize every opportunity to report the allegations again and again (basically they have a copy-paste narrative for years). But if the Estate wins they will spin it or dismiss it.

The MJ scam story actually is a big story that could fascinate the public and convince them of MJ's innocence. Problem is NO ONE will report it. Catch-22: we would need the very platform to expose the truth wich is invested in the lie and is holding back the truth for decades.
Because I see this kind of stuff every other week (MJ is just the biggest and get the most headlines and more $$$ involved). People lie in court everyday. Again, the media has power but it is not like it use to be. I still see good people can see through BS. And I do not care who these fools get (Anthony Edwards-who clearly do not know a thing about these fools- heck Jussie Smollett had people defending him until they now look stupid when all the facts started coming out about his fraud. There are always going to be people like that in these situations. Someone needs to send Mr. Anthony Edwards the photos of Wade and his WIFE at the Ranch in 2007. How many CSA people have he dealt with wo did that? NONE). people can see through this nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Returning to Neverland: why has Michael Jackson been unmuted?

It is eight months since "Leaving Neverland." In this feature, we ask if its shocking revelations have been forgotten.

TEN days after Halloween a video went viral on Twitter.

It showed elderly residents at a nursing home in Utah performing their version of a recognisable dance. The video has nearly 150,000 likes and 30,000 retweets.

&#8220;This gives me life,&#8221; replied @elenakoshkaxoxo. @LucieMcInernay agreed: &#8220;This is amazing!&#8221;

The song the residents dance to is Michael Jackson&#8217;s Thriller, a track that made its annual rounds in shopping centres, party playlists and karaoke nights at Halloween.

Had Halloween been six months ago, it is hard to imagine Thriller enjoying its usual annual spike in popularity.

In March, the documentary Leaving Neverland was broadcast on Channel 4 in the UK and HBO in the United States. It contained allegations of two men claiming to have been sexually abused by Jackson as children.

Intensely controversial, the documentary prompted a backlash against the late singer and radio stations to pull Jackson&#8217;s music.

And yet sales of that music increased, while the Jackson estate dismissed Leaving Neverland as &#8220;one-sided&#8221; and pursued an ongoing court case against U.S. TV network HBO.

Jackson&#8217;s guilt or innocence aside, the documentary might have been another landmark moment in the #MeToo movement, which continues to affect the music industry.

Singer R. Kelly, who pleads not guilty to sex abuse charges, awaits a second trial. Pop star Kesha, who first sued Dr. Luke for sexual assault and battery in 2014, is in a legal battle against the producer.

The Jackson case raises the question of why some figures in the entertainment business, partly or universally disgraced, appear forgiven through continued enjoyment of their work.

Can you separate art from the artist?

Peter Ward, 26, was a fan of former Welsh rock group lostprophets long before singer Ian Watkins was convicted of child sex offences in 2013.

Peter still listens to lostprophets. He said: &#8220;They were definitely my favourite band for a while, I&#8217;m not sure why, I just loved their music.

&#8220;When those allegations started coming out &#8211; not really because of that, but because my taste started changing and their music started changing &#8211; I slowly stopped listening to them &#8211; but I do still listen to them.

&#8220;When I do, it does come into my head and obviously I don&#8217;t talk about listening to them because a lot of people have that association.

&#8220;But I wouldn&#8217;t say that when I listen to a song, I specifically think &#8216;I don&#8217;t like it any more&#8217; because he did this, or anything like that. I still just enjoy the music.&#8221;

In the film industry, many notable figures have been accused of sexual misconduct.

One is actor Kevin Spacey, who has had some cases against his name dropped, but a London -based investigation is ongoing and Netflix cut ties with him long ago.

Douglas Fleming, 25, still enjoys Spacey&#8217;s work. He said: &#8220;I&#8217;m aware that when you&#8217;re watching his films, there&#8217;s so many people involved in the making of those films. He&#8217;s kind of just a piece of the puzzle.

&#8220;A film like Se7en, which he&#8217;s quite heavily involved in, I like it more because I like the director of the film, David Fincher.

&#8220;It&#8217;s easier to dismiss, I think, when they&#8217;ve had a smaller role in the art.&#8221;

There is no question that Michael Jackson&#8217;s role in Thriller and his catalogue of hits is anything but small.

And yet Jackson&#8217;s loyal fans do not have trouble dismissing the allegations against him. They remain enamoured by the once King of Pop and his music.

Line Caes, a social psychology lecturer at Stirling University, believes it is human nature to idolise figures like Jackson to such an unwavering degree.

She said: &#8220;I think it&#8217;s because they really want somebody to look up to.

&#8220;They want an example, and I think it is easy for somebody who is very popular and has quite a lot of influence to be the person they pick, even if they have never met them before.

&#8220;It&#8217;s to do with the basic human need of working through emotions and feeling happy. Music lends itself quite well to that.&#8221;

Watching those care-home residents moving in time to Thriller, with their painted faces and curly black wigs, there can be little doubt over the uplifting power of music.

Michael Jackson may never be found guilty, and if not, his songs will not be going anywhere.

It will be up to us to decide if we want to listen to them.

https://brignews.com/2019/11/20/returning-to-neverland-why-has-michael-jackson-been-unmuted/
 
myosotis;4274772 said:
And yet Jackson&#8217;s loyal fans do not have trouble dismissing the allegations against him. They remain enamoured by the once King of Pop and his music.
[...]
Line Caes, a social psychology lecturer at Stirling University, believes it is human nature to idolise figures like Jackson to such an unwavering degree.
https://brignews.com/2019/11/20/returning-to-neverland-why-has-michael-jackson-been-unmuted/
This article isn't just incredibly stupid but insulting as well. I don't dismiss the allegations and I don't idolise anyone. I've just read the court documents of several cases - something this writer and the "social psychology lecturer" failed to do.

All of this babbling without ever considering checking the actual facts of the case you gave "lecture" about resulting in building your whole argument on a false premise. But I guess we're supposed to believe it and take it seriously because of appeal to authority (another argumentative fallacy BTW). SMH.
 
Last edited:
This article isn't just incredibly stupid but insulting as well. I don't dismiss the allegations and I don't idolise anyone.

bbb.jpg
 
elusive moonwalker;4274775 said:
Thats all theyve got. They cant argue the facts. You have to pity them

This is very true. It&#8217;s the classic &#8220;argumentum ad personam&#8221;, as described by Schopenhauer as the last trick, if all else fails.

&#8220;A last trick is to become personal, insulting, rude, as soon as you perceive that your opponent has the upper hand, and that you are going to come off worst. It consists in passing from the subject of dispute, as from a lost game, to the disputant himself, and in some way attacking his person. It may be called the argumentum ad personam, to distinguish it from the argumentum ad hominem, which passes from the objective discussion of the subject pure and simple to the statements or admissions which your opponent has made in regard to it. But in becoming personal you leave the subject altogether, and turn your attack to his person, by remarks of an offensive and spiteful character. It is an appeal from the virtues of the intellect to the virtues of the body, or to mere animalism. This is a very popular trick, because every one is able to carry it into effect; and so it is of frequent application.&#8221;

http://coolhaus.de/art-of-controversy/erist38.htm

It only shows how weak our opponent actually is.
 
why didnt Colony Capital sue Dan Reed/HBO for using their video footage of Neverland?

I have no idea but I know the guy who took the drone shots said he would explore legal action. As far as I know it never happened either.
I would have loved for the LN promo train to have been hit by reports of their stolen footage.
 
So basically the sole reason for them reconsidering the lawsuits again is because of LN then? Because they got dismissed in 2017 and not a damn thing changed. Except for that filth, which contained easily provable lies, contradictions and so on. These two pieces of shit have proven they can't stick to one story, so HOW can they ever hope to win this?

If anything the film and their promotional interviews for it further damaged their credibility and gave the MJ Estate legal team more ammunition to fire at them!
BUT the film was a good PR move for them. It may have have tarnished any future jury pool or judge etc. I blame the media for that. If the media did their job properly they would have properly reported all the lies, contradictions, changing stories, stolen footage, misleading press conference footage, unethical editing of audio etc. They didn't need to "victim blame" or support a "pedo". Being accurate and impartial means not supporting one side or the other. Their accurate reports would have told the public all they needed to know - that the accusers are liars, the director is a crook, and the film cannot be taken at face value or trusted.
 
I appreciate your constant optimism, I really do. :flowers:

But this neverending fight is tiring and depressing. It's like a permanent war we can never win (or at least finish). After every positive events comes something bad, almost like a scheduled counter-attack. Older fans are fighting this neverending battle for 30 years now (it's very uplifting though to see the young fans taking over and they do it amazingly!). The MSM is in decline ATM but it still the main source of information. Plus the MJ cases are complicated and require time and attention to understand dry facts, while the MSM operates with sensational headlines focusing on quick emotional impact. MJ's detractors are protected so basically untouchable. R&S can lie as blatantly and as many times as they want the US media won't expose them. Oprah may suffer a backlash from the public but it won't matter as long as she's awarded with top contracts and pushed by media moguls. There's no law protecting the dead. If R&S's lawsuits go to trial it will take years and the media will seize every opportunity to report the allegations again and again (basically they have a copy-paste narrative for years). But if the Estate wins they will spin it or dismiss it.

The MJ scam story actually is a big story that could fascinate the public and convince them of MJ's innocence. Problem is NO ONE will report it. Catch-22: we would need the very platform to expose the truth wich is invested in the lie and is holding back the truth for decades.


Yes my thoughts exactly. I have been saying this since the 03 allegations!
As you say though, the press has invested so much time and effort in printing nonsense reports about MJ being guilty that they can't simply turn around and start reporting the other side with enthusiasm - to expose the scam exposes themselves as inaccurate and unreliable sources of information/news!! They'd be shooting themselves in the foot. To be fair, SOME outlets were willing to give some limited coverage to the LN accusers' credibility issues earlier this year. Trouble was when they decided to print those stories they were very weak. Even in those stories they tended to give the benefit of the doubt to the accusers and caveated those stories with statements that these were fan "theories" etc. Most outlets dismissed fans' objections as being purely based on adoration, a fondness for MJ's music, or just a strange/desperate interpretation of the available information. they made out we were spinning the matter in our favour. Overlooking "facts". Ignoring "facts". Treated us like conspiracy nut jobs. In reality, and as is usual, it was the MJ fans going to great lengths to reference the court documents and evidence. Using verifiable photo evidence, video evidence, planning documents, staff testimony, as well as testimonies from Wade and his family. Far from ignoring facts, fans were the ONLY people using facts! It was the media ignoring the facts they were being provided. It was the media refusing to read the court documents, or at least refusing to report them!

People have an expectation that the news should be there to report the facts. The facts are that Wade and James have lied repeatedly in their civil claim against MJ Estate. I'm not even talking about more open ended issues, such as whether or not the Neverland meal happened before or after Wade's testimony - one could choose to believe either side is telling the truth about the timing. I'm talking about Wade's knowledge of the MJ Estate, or Wade's knowledge of which publishers saw his book drafts, or the false story he knowingly included - all provable lies. then there are the constantly changing and contradictory stories. Again, these are not about interpretation, these are provable facts. If the media were honest it could report all of these things alongside the allegations to provide the reader/viewed with a informed view to make their own opinion. They can do that without casting judgement on one side or the other, and I'm sure the public would accept and appreciate that stance.
 
I've been out of the loop for a while now due to private things in my life. Wtf is happening now? And why is this even allowed? It's about a person that is long gone, also didn't these two assholes owe the estate quite a bit of money? What happened to that?

On the other hand, the estate can now introduce all the proof, facts and evidence, right? Like the many times Wade was defending MJ, was on Neverland ranch in 2007 filming stuff with his wife, having lots of fun, surely his "I didn't remember/realize it was abuse" BS isn't gonna work here. The note he had to present to the judge that said he was doing this to be relevant and relatable again, the conversation he had with Taj in a messenger how he wanted to hang with Mike's kids and Taj again, and so much more.

Surely estate can present all that, right? And surely they won't settle? That would be disastrous. These criminals should be behind bars. This world man.

Yes the MJ Estate can use videos of Wade at Neverland in 2007, or any of the many times he praised MJ profusely over the years, or the MJ Opus tribute. They can use any of that, BUT the media and the public give alleged victims of CSA a HUGE amount wriggle room. We've learned from the reporting on LN that literally any inaccuracy in their stories, no matter how devestating to their case it should be in a rational world, can be dismissed as the effect of trauma.
 
As always was for MJ. It will be 05 all over again: accusations repeated infinitely by the media and no words about how those testimonies crumbled on cross examinations. No reporting on the defence at all. They will show a virtual reality completely different from the court transcripts. If the Estate wins they will dismiss it.

They will NEVER report the truth. They invested in the lies financially and - I think even more importantly - credibility-wise. In order to report the truth, they should admit they lied to you for decades! They can't afford this.

Members of the public will only know the truth if they use common sense to begin with and then fact check and research it for themselves - so it requires work. Now compare this to the situation of those who are ready to be spoonfed by a whole industry built on defeaming MJ, how much easier it is for them (and rewarding: they will be praised for their virtue signaling, while those who defend MJ will be labelled as blinded fans in the slightest).

Shame on everyone who supports this farce and gives credibility to it. Because make no mistake they: all know W&R's are fishy.


Yes. It doesn't matter what happens in court. The media will report what they want and the public will be misinformed. again.
It happened in 93/94, 03-03, and again this year with LN.

The only time the media behaved in a half way decent fashion was between 2013 and 2017 when Wade's case was largely ignored or dismissed as a scam. I was amazed then that the media wasn't all over it. Suddenly a film arrives that offers no additional proof and ignores all the evidence of their case's weaknesses and the media are suddenly all over it like it's the most sensational story ever. It's nonsense. Harvery at TMZ actually came out and stated confidently on film it was a scam before LN. Since LN he's been strongly supporting the LN lynch mob. It's a corrupt business alright.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Today's hearing took place a short walk from Los Angeles Union Station, which this year celebrated its 80th anniversary. This means Safechuck now knows what it's like to be near a train station that was operating from 1988 to 1992. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LiesOfLeavingNeverland?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LiesOfLeavingNeverland</a> <a href="https://t.co/owLfqiRNBu">pic.twitter.com/owLfqiRNBu</a></p>&mdash; Leaving Neverland Facts (@NeverlandFacts) <a href="https://twitter.com/NeverlandFacts/status/1196688916922810373?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">19. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">As noted by <a href="https://twitter.com/andjustice4some?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@andjustice4some</a>, the appeals court has scheduled a due date to file the panel's opinion for February 3, 2020.<br><br>So we have a window of time to look toward. assuming their tentative ruling stands in this opinion (most likely), the cases will be remanded back to court.</p>&mdash; TSCM (@MJJRepository) <a href="https://twitter.com/MJJRepository/status/1196989252468461568?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">20. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="und" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a> <a href="https://t.co/ItSgIebyTm">pic.twitter.com/ItSgIebyTm</a></p>&mdash; daniela (@daniela85273031) <a href="https://twitter.com/daniela85273031/status/1196890449010741250?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">19. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Media coverage of LN perfectly exemplified everything that has gone wrong with journalism in the last decade. Every disease to have infected the profession - laziness, copy &amp; paste, virtue-signalling, budget cuts, lack of investigation, over-reliance on opinion - was represented.</p>&mdash; Charles Thomson (@CEThomson) <a href="https://twitter.com/CEThomson/status/1196119169244241920?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">17. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">So <a href="https://twitter.com/tajjackson3?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@tajjackson3</a>, as a victim of CSA yourself, have you referred to any of your friends who have also sadly shared in that tragedy as your &quot;brother in trauma and triumph&quot;, while also posing for the camera with a smug smile?<br><br>This really does make the blood boil. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJFam?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJFam</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a> <a href="https://t.co/zA40VvJVQJ">pic.twitter.com/zA40VvJVQJ</a></p>&mdash; R.D. Smith (@MindofSmithy) <a href="https://twitter.com/MindofSmithy/status/1196932462305333254?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">19. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">2/ short of breathtaking. Had everyone in the courtroom known it was an act, there would have been spontaneous shouts of &quot;bravo!&quot; and &quot;hurrah!&quot; and the jury would have given him a standing ovation. How dared the Oscars committee deny him a gong. <br><br>Or maybe it was the plain truth.</p>&mdash; &#127465;avid &#127462;ppleby &#11088; (@ybelppa) <a href="https://twitter.com/ybelppa/status/1196778337961742336?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">19. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">So which do we believe now; the 2005 &quot;liar&quot;: calm, confident, highly persuasive to a critical jury; or the 2019 &quot;truth-teller&quot;: twitchy, flat, monotone &amp; stilted?<br><br>Which one is acting?</p>&mdash; &#127465;avid &#127462;ppleby &#11088; (@ybelppa) <a href="https://twitter.com/ybelppa/status/1197153088555159552?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">20. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Ummm actually U R referring 2 a “interview” from 15 yrs ago, that was heavily edited and taken out of context 2 Giv U the answer U just summarized. Look at the “Journalist” doin the “interview” coincidentally happens 2 B the same guy that had his own “special” on that week.</p>&mdash; Corey Feldman (@Corey_Feldman) <a href="https://twitter.com/Corey_Feldman/status/1196639986604339201?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">19. November 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Back
Top