Latest on MJJC

[Discussion] Sexual Abuse Claims Against MJ Estate - Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe

Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I think VMJ is sometimes speculating and not 100% facts but as far as I know it's positive and "good enough", it's not perfect. I don't know VMJ2.0 who's behind it?

You should use http://michaeljacksonallegations.com It's great, focuses on facts, shows more than one aspect and very informative.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Was Aldebran an MJ hater? Could never quite get my head around his posts.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^ Who knows? I guess it got all of us confused but let's not dwell in the past :)
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I don't think Aldebaran was a hater or troll. He/she was a fan, just very aggressive in the way she/he tried to put his/her point across.

He/she clearly did not believe MJ to be guilty either.
 
InvincibleTal;4085579 said:
I think VMJ is sometimes speculating and not 100% facts but as far as I know it's positive and "good enough", it's not perfect. I don't know VMJ2.0 who's behind it?

You should use http://michaeljacksonallegations.com It's great, focuses on facts, shows more than one aspect and very informative.
Click to expand...

Yes I know, Its Ivi´s site afaik.

The VMJ and VMJ 2.0 (both blogs are running by the same team of bloggers) have such enormous factual pieces of information including photos and court files/transcriptions, videos.

The bloggers are really active and dedicated, I am stunned.

zaOyMQHDIq0.jpg
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

^ I agree, they do a great job

There are few blogs that fans run I really dislike, they focus on spreading hate more than they are focused on spreading on truth and they often misinform their readers. Not the one mentioned here, other blogs.

btw, what does the first line mean? lol :)
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

respect77 said:
I don't think Aldebaran was a hater or troll. He/she was a fan, just very aggressive in the way she/he tried to put his/her point across.

He/she clearly did not believe MJ to be guilty either.
Click to expand...

Yeah Aldebaran did not come across as a hater to me. He/she came across as a fan who was concerned. I mean, she/he did make some valid points that will without a doubt be used by Robson/Safechuck's lawyers. I guess he/she was banned because things were getting out of hand.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

In my view, it is unfair to characterize a person who is unable to defend themselves against such characterization. It is unfair to do so publicly here to Aldebran and it will be unfair to do so to Michael's memory if these charges are allowed.
 
ILoveHIStory;4085578 said:
Oh, I see that some Aldebran was banned, its obvious that there are (a few, but very "profilic") anti-jackson trolls trolling on MJboards.

For those who are on MJstar.com, you can see the pattern of writing of such trolls´ comments citing "info" from MJfacts (naming MJ fans "his delusional pedophile loving fans").
I think that this board should warn other fans about this hater site, formerly known as "Desiree Speaks So Listen"

They are like worms infecting the system=MJcommunity, or like the actual online "war" of trolls of the Russia vs USA propaganda.
Its pretty obvious on many nonMJ sites like Topix and co.

On the other hand, Iam surprised that there are far more possitive comments on the articles than negative.
Click to expand...

A few years ago I joined MJIC until 7 months later I abruptly left there for reason, #1 haters a couple of haters invaded there thus we fought them off #2 the founder of MJIC was being an @$$ towards a couple of my friends and had a personal vendetta against one of them and #3 I had a suspicion that founder would allow haters in and believing the facts don't matter. #2 is the major reason why I left due to the founder's actions and which I began to believe he's a fraud and does not care for Michael or many fans at all.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

ILoveHIStory said:
Can somebody confirm if these sites are really credible and trustworthy?

1/ https://michaeljacksonvindication2.wordpress.com/
2/ https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/

I just want to know if they are, because I have sent some of their links to articles on the net, and just want to know if we MJ fans can totally rely on this info.
Click to expand...

Yeah those sites are both legit. I think there are some fake versions of these blogs out there, though, but I don't know if they're still up. You can tell pretty quickly what the fake ones are because they claim to be "vindicating MJ" but are actually painting him as guilty. I remember one of them had a disgusting banner that was clearly insulting his appearance.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

PoP said:
A few years ago I joined MJIC until 7 months later I abruptly left there for reason, #1 haters a couple of haters invaded there thus we fought them off #2 the founder of MJIC was being an @$$ towards a couple of my friends and had a personal vendetta against one of them and #3 I had a suspicion that founder would allow haters in and believing the facts don't matter. #2 is the major reason why I left due to the founder's actions and which I began to believe he's a fraud and does not care for Michael or many fans at all.
Click to expand...

I agree with you about MJIC and the same thing happened at MJFC. The founder and mods allowed MJ haters to take over the board and it caused the entire fan site to crash and burn.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PoP
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

InvincibleTal said:
I think VMJ is sometimes speculating and not 100% facts but as far as I know it's positive and "good enough", it's not perfect. I don't know VMJ2.0 who's behind it?

You should use http://michaeljacksonallegations.com It's great, focuses on facts, shows more than one aspect and very informative.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure David Edwards runs VMJ 2.0, plus it has some of the same bloggers from the original site. A split happened around the time posts incorporating religion started to come about, plus David likes to keep things rational rather than being an emotional gushing fan. I personally prefer David's site but then I'm more logically minded.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

perhaps "Ivi" stand for me? michaeljacksonallegations.com is not my site, it's respect77's site.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I got mixed feelings about his recent interviews. Obviously I agree with the first part but I don't know why he's pushing that idea that the estate will probably settle. Doesn't he realize it's damaging?
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Oh, Tom! Please stop it. This woman on Crime Time seems to understand it better than you this time. (Suing the Estate is the same as suing Michael himself , etc.)
I agree the case is ludicrous but I don't understand why he keeps on and on at Weitzman and Branca.
They're NOT going to settle!!

(Edit: I mean no disrespect to Tom. If I didn't admire him so much, I wouldn't be so disappointed now. )
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I don't mean to insult him because I'll be forever thankful for the excellent job Tom did in 2005 but the more he talks, the more I believe he's off his rocker lately. It doesn't help some fans are pushing the Estate to hire him either.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

barbee0715 said:
This woman on Crime Time seems to understand it better than you this time. (Suing the Estate is the same as suing Michael himself , etc.)
Click to expand...

she had a good understanding about the difference between the lawsuits against the church vs Estate.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I don't like it either that he is going on about a settlement, but apart from that I liked that he pointed out that the timing of this tabloid campaign ($200 million paid to 20 people) is pretty suspicious and it looks like a page out of Larry Feldman's playbook and how the opposing side always tended to use the media as a way to try to put pressure on MJ to settle.

And yeah, this reporter appeared to be fair for a change and actually appeared to understand what they are talking about.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Personally I still find Tom very impressive defender of Michael. I do worry that the estate is being frightened into settling - not saying they will but I suppose tom is looking at this as he as the lawyer who dealt with the consequences of the settlement with j.c. This openned the door to more false allegations.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

IMO he's speaking from a place of bitterness. I don't know what's going on but he seems to go out of his way to take shots at Branca and Wetzimen. And frankly it's not a good look for him. He's entitled to his opinion but there has not been an ounce of proof that their would be a settlement. In fact the estate is fighting them back with facts and matters of law not bullish and running to the press. IMO again Tom is upset for some unknown reasons
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I actually liked that the interviewer brought up the question of whether it is fair to sue someone for sexual abuse after they passed. And Mez said the same what we are saying here that it's "very troubling" because the accused person is not here to defend himself and to assist his defense.

Now, I understand that sometimes these type of claims take decades for a victim to come out about. That sometimes the accused person is threatening to the accuser so they would not be able to come out while the person is alive. That often victims fear that no one would believe them etc. But this is not that case at all with 1993 and especially 2005. These people had all the opportunities in the world to make these claims while MJ was here to respond. There was no issue of "no one would believe me" when the prosecution and the media were so ready to embrace anyone who would be willing to make an allegation. Safechuck's declaration claims he was looking at the Arvizos and how they were vilified in the media. Is he even serious? Most of the media were pro-prosecution and there were very few which was even balanced let alone pro-MJ. Gavin was portrayed as some innocent, clueless little lamb - the poor, violated "cancer victim". MJ was portrayed as some predatory monster. Polls showed that public opinion was predominantly pro-prosecution. So what kind of environment could be more supportive for someone who would want to make allegations? So it would be just utterly unfair to let this go forward. There is no reason to give favours and set a new precedent for these people IMO.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Even if you felt bad about the way Gavin was treated in the media what did you do about it Nonuts? Not a damn thing miss with with that bull
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Wade had many chances to come forward before. I don't think those people who come forward years later are reasoning it with "I didn't realize what it was" after people asked them constantly (as kids and as adults) for over 10 years if they were abused or touched by someone and if it's by the guy who actually abused them.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Sorry not given Radar any hits
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

marc_vivien said:
here new docs http://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/MJcase-signed.pdf
Click to expand...

So using Blanca Francia's testimony. How is this going to put him within statutes of limitations?

I also realize that he does not use his own testimony from 2005.

Q. Have you ever taken a shower with Mr. Jackson?

A. No. [4]
​
Click to expand...
Q. Has anything inappropriate ever happened in any shower with you and Mr. Jackson?

A. No. Never been in a shower with him. [4]

​
Click to expand...

I guess he just wasn't aware/didn't realize what a shower was.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

marc_vivien said:
here new docs http://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/MJcase-signed.pdf
Click to expand...

So it really isn't about the late claim and they really got nothing. They're going to use Francia's false claims about seeing underwears on the bedroom\bathroom floor and about Michael being in the shower with a "smaller figure" when she can't even put Wade in the scene for sure. I think it's very weak.

Speaking of Tmez I wish he'd stop acting like a baby because I think he should be called to testify against these people.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson / James Safechuck file claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

InvincibleTal said:
So it really isn't about the late claim and they really got nothing. They're going to use Francia's false claims about seeing underwears on the bedroom\bathroom floor and about Michael being in the shower with a "smaller figure" when she can't even put Wade in the scene for sure. I think it's very weak.

Speaking of Tmez I wish he'd stop acting like a baby because I think he should be called to testify against these people.
Click to expand...


The funny thing about that shower thing is under cross sheadmitted she was lying and he denied it. It's funny because again that was one of those specific questions he wasasked about and said nothing happened. And again what does any of that have to do with your claim being late?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top