I didn't follwed the Me too movement much but as far as I understood it, MJ is the first and only dead (absolutly defeceless) man who is accused of a sexual crime since this movement exists.
Or were there other dead men who were accused since the movement existed?
Its also intresting that MJ was accused since 2013 puplicly from Wade (and James) before the movement even existed and had its name.
I didn't follwed the Me too movement much but as far as I understood it, MJ is the first and only dead (absolutly defeceless) man who is accused of a sexual crime since this movement exists.
Or were there other dead men who were accused since the movement exists?
Its also interesting that MJ was accused since 2013 puplicly from Wade (and James) before the movement even existed and had its name.
Hm..... I think you the person above absolutly understood my post wrong or the point I wanted to make.If you are replying to my post then please go back and read it again. There has been TONS of men who have been accused of all kinds of thing due to the #MeToo movement. Some are legit accusations, I'm sure, but I have seen a LOT of EXTREMELY RIDICILOUS cases, which have sadly lead to people losing their jobs and their reputations being destroyed anyhow. I am for JUSTICE, period. And that includes men's rights too. Their right to be protected from ANY random person being allowed to make any kind of ridicilous claims, often untrue claims, and destroying their careers and reputations. That is making bullying and extortion acceptable and I won't stand for it. In Michael's case the difference is that he is dead and unable to defend himself. And that he is more famous than anyone else on this planet, so there is a huge public interest in anything MJ related, the more scandalous, the better. I would never defend anyone if there was evidence that they harmed another person. There has been not ONE piece of evidence to prove MJ did anything wrong. And I've been around since 1987. I've done my research. There's nothing. There is however a lot of evidence against the accusers showing how unreliable and shady they are.
The rebuttle documentary will help for sure, while there will be people that say its bias.The majority will see the non family members speak, evidence will actually be presented and will squash any "story".
When Dan Reed presents a note as a molestation grooming tool and others show the same note sent to them and wasnt sexual at all.. it will only highlight that THEY lied.
Taj explained it yesterday in the long episode of the MJcast (which more people should listen to) why they want to make this documentery themself.
They simply won't trust any journalist!
In the past when the family gave interviews for the tv or documenterys the jounalysts mostly edited the interviews, twisted their words and in 99 percent the MJDocumentery turned out to be a bad one which was not suportive for MJ or his legecy.
Last year I watched many of the documenterys which camed out in the last years and I didn't like a single one cause they always seamed to make MJ look bad as much as possible and to carry on the strange picture in some kind of way the media always tried to crate of MJ.
I really can understand the family and I am glad that they do the documentery on their own.
This documentery is very important and they can't risk to give it in hands which turned out to be the wrong ones like it was in 2003 with Bashit!
Imagine something like this whould happen now again!
I think the documentary should deifinetely include this as well because I think atleast some people think it was credible because the 2005 case went to trial and they were not interested enough to check it up for them self.Theres enough evidence on sneddon from back during the mjjf days when they did several interviews with gary dunlop dr sundaram. Two sisters that were set up by sneddon and a couple of other men also several independent witness who heard sneddon making several racist comments about mj and what he was going to do to him during a political fundraiser.
Back in the day matt tiabi (sp) who worked at i think nbc was planning on doing a big investigational peice (documentry) on sneddon. Not just concerning mj but all the other people he has persecuted in santa B. The big wigs at the channel stopped him from doing it. Maybe worth looking him up?
Unfortunately "respectful media" also failed MJ even in his lifetime, they often printed so blatant (and even illogical) lies copying word by word from tabloids, there was basically no difference (except for only a few).I find it sad, sad, sad, that young journalists of today or the young social justice warriors are nothing like the people I grew up admiring in the 70's. When I came of age, everyone wanted to be a journalist because of the great work they were doing. Now it's only opinionated blogs and no research.
If she really believes it then why doesn't she challenge the authorities who were responsible by letting this happen? There goes her credibility...Her article was biased embarrassment to herself, "let go" "got off"
Exactly. I attempted to give Aphrodite Jones the opportunity to break that story but she wasn’t interested but ofcourse what I actually sent her was a email with examples from William Wagner and he wasn’t that credible. I’m guessing Trish did the interviews for mjjf.ozemouze;4239787 said:Unfortunately "respectful media" also failed MJ even in his lifetime, they often printed so blatant (and even illogical) lies copying word by word from tabloids, there was basically no difference (except for only a few).
Though it's not only about MJ, let's take the trial for example: mass media traveled there to report on the case, and although they could find the sings that several cases of malicious prosecution could had happened there (apart from MJ's), none of them took the opportunity to investigate the situation further and break a story which is much more important and bigger than a simple celebrity case (talk about journalistic responsibility...).
If she really believes it then why doesn't she challenge the authorities who were responsible by letting this happen? There goes her credibility...
ChrisC;4239793 said:Although it's early in this fight, it was pleasing to see Michael Jackson's music booming out to a packed stadium in Atlanta and a television audience of 170 million yesterday.
APPARENT innocence.
The ugly reality is that Michael Jackson did not get off because he was innocent. Chances are, he was guilty of every single one of the charges and actually did deserve to pay for the damages he caused. THE REAL REASON MICHAEL JACKSON GOT OFF WAS BECAUSE HE WAS MICHAEL JACKSON, an icon who somehow attained a larger than life status that absolved him of any wrongdoing. "
It is still being played on a credit card commercial as well.Although it's early in this fight, it was pleasing to see Michael Jackson's music booming out to a packed stadium in Atlanta and a television audience of 170 million yesterday.
MJ did NOT hate his family (you sound like the tabloids). Did they have issues, YES just like ALL FAMILIES (I do not know why some people want to act like the Jacksons should be different than any other family. They are just famous and their business, truth or lies, get talked about. That is the ONLY difference.). Like him or not, Jermaine always is the one to speak when it comes to MJ. In that interview, I see a brother who was hurt by what going on and it is easy to sit back and judge him but when someone is lying on your family member, it is hard for some people to remember everything to say in a certain amount of limited time (they better be Glad it is the Jacksons, I know families with a lot more drama than the Jacksons and if you bother a family member, they will cut, fight, or use gun fire on someone messing with their family member. They can talk noise to each other but an OUTSIDER better not say or do nothing. As for the money, I rest for MJ's family to make and get money than a bunch of strangers with their own motives.I see this so called Jermaine "defence " and i utterly cringe every time i see it. He made MJ out to be a "weirdo" AGAIN. I detest this man with a passion and imo all he cares about is the money drying up if people boycott MJ's music. Never mind Word to the Badd he was also quoted saying he thinks the allegations could possibly have been true. I do not believe they are true of course but this man is a leech of the highest order. He is a has been or should i say a never was . Adopting the same mannerisms and speech patterns , things if you look back in time he was NOT like. I support a rebuttal but its only going to be called biased . Especially in this new movement. Any "rebuttal" has to come from NON family members because lets face it MJ hated his family apart from his mother.
I see this so called Jermaine "defence " and i utterly cringe every time i see it. He made MJ out to be a "weirdo" AGAIN. I detest this man with a passion and imo all he cares about is the money drying up if people boycott MJ's music. Never mind Word to the Badd he was also quoted saying he thinks the allegations could possibly have been true. I do not believe they are true of course but this man is a leech of the highest order. He is a has been or should i say a never was . Adopting the same mannerisms and speech patterns , things if you look back in time he was NOT like. I support a rebuttal but its only going to be called biased . Especially in this new movement. Any "rebuttal" has to come from NON family members because lets face it MJ hated his family apart from his mother.