Leaving Neverland

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board' started by TitusMagee, Mar 6, 2019.

  1. John Peachy

    John Peachy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2011
    Messages:
    16,737
    Likes Received:
    16,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    The littlest hobo
    Location:
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Will do definitely.
     
    TitusMagee likes this.
  2. YTB

    YTBFC Guest

    Much easier to just post this (below) from UK journo, Charles Thomson. Because it covers so much of the 'dodgy' ground on which these two 'victims' stand.

    PLEASE read it, then come back to me with all your arguments again. Because like I say, I believe Jackson was weird, a freak, probably (I can't be certain) a nonce of some sort. I'm basing that purely on the fact he admitted to having kids in his bed. That's just weird. But not once was this man done for anything. Despite huge efforts to find evidence.

    But anyway, here's Mr Thomson putting it all forward better than I can.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -



    The evidence the media refuses to show you about Michael Jackson’s accusers

    I’ve felt total and utter shame at my industry as the coverage of tonight’s Michael Jackson TV show has grown increasingly dishonest and dangerous. I’ve worked in the media since I was a teenager. The whole media knows these two men are liars. But that’s not good for clicks or ratings.

    For five years, these men – both professional actors – have been suing Michael Jackson’s estate for hundreds of millions of dollars. This lawsuit has generated thousands of pages of court records: witness statements, motions, depositions and disclosure. These public documents PROVE beyond any reasonable doubt that the men are lying. The whole media knows about these documents, but is refusing to report on their contents. I’ve tried not to fill my Facebook feed with posts about this, but you are all being lied to from every direction. So this is my contribution to the debate on Facebook – a list of just some of the public record information the media is refusing to tell you.

    • Both men strenuously defended Jackson, including under oath, for decades, and only decided they’d been molested years after his death, when they were both in financial trouble and filed a lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions of dollars. That lawsuit was thrown out of court – twice – but the men are in the middle of an appeal, giving them a gigantic financial motive to lie.

    • Since filing their lawsuit, both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. For example, Wade Robson has told at least four directly contradictory stories about the first time Jackson supposedly abused him.

    • In the lawsuit, Robson was caught lying under oath so brazenly that the judge threw out his entire witness statement and said no rational juror could ever believe his account.

    • Between 2012 and 2014, Robson wrote two drafts of an abuse memoir and tried unsuccessfully to sell them to publishers. Meanwhile, he lied under oath and said he’d never discussed his allegations with anyone except his lawyers. When the Jackson estate discovered he’d actually been shopping books, the court ordered him to produce the drafts as evidence. They revealed the story of his abuse had changed significantly from one draft to the next.

    • Robson was also ordered to release his emails as evidence. He breached the order repeatedly, first by claiming they didn’t exist, then by simply refusing to hand them over. Then he redacted all the emails between himself and his family members and cited ‘attorney-client’ privilege, even though none of his family are attorneys.

    • When he eventually complied with the court order and released the emails, they revealed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was researching and emailing himself links to old tabloid newspaper stories about abuse allegations against Michael Jackson.

    • The emails showed Robson found one particular story from the early 1990s which specifically named he and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked whether it was true. She replied, ‘Wow, none of that is true’. He then included it in his story anyway.

    • Emails also revealed that throughout 2011/12, Robson was lobbying Jackson’s estate for a job directing and choreographing an official Michael Jackson tribute show in Las Vegas. His campaign to secure this role had included sending emails explaining that his amazing friendship with Jackson meant nobody was better qualified for the role than he was, and he was devoted to doing the best job he possibly could ‘for Michael’. After being told someone else had got the job, he suddenly claimed he’d been abused and filed a creditor’s claim against the estate for millions of dollars.

    • Months later, according to Jimmy Safechuck, he flipped on the TV and saw Wade Robson being interviewed about his lawsuit. In that moment, Safechuck suddenly remembered that he had been abused by Jackson as well, so decided to join the lawsuit. He didn’t mention that this epiphany coincided exactly with his inheritance circling the drain after a relative died and the surviving siblings started suing each other – including him – for control of the family business.

    • Robson was also ordered to produce his diaries as evidence. In them, he’d written about how these allegations might rescue his failing career by making him ‘relatable and relevant’. He also wrote, ‘It’s time for me to get mine.’ When questioned under oath about what he’d meant when he wrote that, he refused to answer.

    • Both men tell stories in the TV show which directly contradict stories told under oath in their lawsuit. In fact, they have continued to change their stories as recently as within the last week.

    • For example, Jimmy Safechuck claims under oath in the lawsuit that he only remembered Jackson had abused him in 2013 when he turned on the TV and saw Robson. Yet in tonight’s TV show and interviews promoting it, he claims he knew he’d been abused in 2005 and thus, when asked to testify for Jackson’s defence ‘towards the end of the trial’, he refused to do so.

    • But that’s a provable lie. Safechuck was never asked to testify for Jackson’s defence. The judge ruled long before the trial began that testimony could only be heard about certain children, and Safechuck was not one of them. All testimony about Safechuck was literally banned from the courtroom. So Jackson’s defence cannot have asked him to testify – and certainly not after the trial was already underway.

    • Robson claimed in a BBC interview last week that Jackson had abused him ‘hundreds of times’. Yet his mother’s sworn testimony is that they went to Neverland roughly 14 times but Jackson was almost never there. She estimates the number of times they visited the ranch and he was actually there was four.

    • Questioned about their financial motive, the men now say they don’t care about money and are only suing to embolden other abuse victims by holding the Jackson estate accountable. This is a provable lie. The lawsuit was originally filed under seal and Robson tried to extract a settlement from the estate with zero publicity. Only when the estate refused to pay a bean did he go public.
    I could continue, but if you’re still on board with the TV show and its accusers at this point, you are irrational to the point of mania.

    Tonight’s TV show covers up all of this information, instead presenting two professional actors’ heavily edited and completely unchallenged testimony without ever examining their credibility, their proven lies and perjury, their constantly changing stories or their financial motives.

    It is a stain on the journalistic profession, as has been the rest of the media’s coverage.

    Photo of relevant court documents

    ...

    Further information:

    ...

    Charles Thomson is a multi-award-winning journalist from Great Britain. He has won accolades for his investigative journalism, feature-writing, court reporting and campaigning. His stories have been published by media outlets including The Sun, The Mirror, The Guardian, MOJO, Wax Poetics and the Huffington Post.
     
  3. tobyornottoby

    tobyornottoby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    5,896
    Likes Received:
    1,451
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I'm not a Michael Jackson fan.

    No axe to grind.

    So I can safely opine that where firstly the complainants have already lied under oath, and secondly where they stand to make oodles of money if their abuse allegations are now on balance believed, then there has to be more than a reasonable doubt as to their credibility.

    S'abart it.
     
    wombwell-red likes this.
  4. YTB

    YTBFC Guest

    Same here. He did some decent tunes, could dance, and as a kid I used to love playing Moonwalker on the old arcade game. But I'm not a fan as such.

    And I think he was weird and possibly a nonce.

    But I don't believe these two chaps. Others clearly do, but based it seems on them just saying so.
     
    wombwell-red and TitusMagee like this.
  5. TitusMagee

    TitusMagee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2018
    Messages:
    8,599
    Likes Received:
    13,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Silkstone Common
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Interesting stuff, I guess the truth will come out eventually. I hope so anyway, either way.

    I'm a bit concerned that the 'multi award winning journalist' has a few thousand followers on twitter and is the "legal correspondent" for a michael jackson podcast, however.
     
  6. TitusMagee

    TitusMagee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2018
    Messages:
    8,599
    Likes Received:
    13,262
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Silkstone Common
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    When people tell you something, you make a judgement on whether they are telling the truth or not. It's natural. These guys are very convincing and based on what we know, what he himself has admitted i.e sleeping in the same bed with children when in his 40s, I think it's perfectly reasonable to come to the conclusion that MJ may have been a paedophile.

    Michael Jackson and his estate had and still has huge amounts of funds to potentially make things disappear, and as anyone with those resources available, will do everything possible to discredit Robson and Safechuk.
     
  7. fir

    fired Administrator Staff Member Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    15,826
    Likes Received:
    10,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)

    Makes for interesting reading Whitey. The whole defence does seem to be based on discrediting these 2 though. Two people who are possibly so messed up that they are motivated by revenge, or possibly waiting for back up to have the courage to take on one of the most popular men on earth, and his multi billion pound family? A family that has the wherewithall to employ endless staff to work on discrediting these two? For sure they have lied somewhere down the line, one way or another. Strange that MJs nephew didn't mention the law suits on the radio yesterday?
    I just find it staggering that anyone would try to earn money this way. Especially on the knowledge that the backlash has already destroyed lives of people previously filing allegations?

    I don't know. I haven't seen the programme, so I've only got info from what I've read from both sides. As for believing them just because they say so - That's not me. I believe something happened, because there is too much other evidence and allegations. Not least MJ's own admission that little boys went to his bed. They may prove to be liars, who knows. I still think he was grooming children. We already know it's rife in the entertainment industry.

    I think they should take lie detector tests. Job done.
     
    TitusMagee likes this.
  8. Sup

    SuperTyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Messages:
    52,896
    Likes Received:
    25,954
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I think Michael Jackson was strange and that the things he did with children were crossing a line but I honestly get the feeling that it wasnt sexual. I actually believe that if he had tests done on his mental health they would have discovered that he had the mental age of a child.

    I also feel that the people coming out to say things now are pathological liars and saw nothing in the documentary to convince me that they were telling the truth now any more than they were when they said completely the opposite in front of a judge just s few years ago.
     
  9. Marc

    Marc Administrator Staff Member Admin

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    Messages:
    26,403
    Likes Received:
    19,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    i've personally not watched it and don't intend to. there can be no winners out of all this. however, there is a trail of evidence which massively brings the credibility of both robson and safechuck into question. much of which is explained in this thread.

    I don't know enough about the case to really form a view. However there is a raft of counter evidence out there, that is just being completely ignored. Unfortunately we now live in an era where it's often a case of 'no smoke without fire'. Especially when it comes to child abuse. There are also no U.S. laws protecting the deceased against defamation or slander, which means the media can basically say whatever they want.

    I'm not defending Michael Jackson one bit. I just want all the facts to be shared. Not just the ones which play to the narrative of a Film Director.
     
    fired likes this.
  10. fir

    fired Administrator Staff Member Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    15,826
    Likes Received:
    10,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Can't agree. I work with people who have the mental age of a child. Low mental age has nothing to do with level of sexual interest. Even if you discredit these two as pathalogical liars, what about the others who have said similar things? Are they all lying?
     
    TitusMagee and Redhelen like this.
  11. fir

    fired Administrator Staff Member Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    15,826
    Likes Received:
    10,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Agreed, but to counter-act that we have been brought up in a world where famous people have got away with the most appalling sex crimes, because they had the power to do so.

    You're right, there are no winners.
     
    TitusMagee and Redhelen like this.
  12. Sup

    SuperTyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Messages:
    52,896
    Likes Received:
    25,954
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    But I said I didn't think it was sexual so I don't think it was a sexual interest. I think it was more a case of he felt like a child so surrounded himself with children. Children sleep in other children's beds all the time, it's fun for them but its not for sexual purposes.

    I don't know the answer to the question ''did so many people lie?' but I do know that once somebody rightly or wrongly has a reputation for something it is so so easy to say me too and just as you have done people automatically give your claim credence whether they would have done had you made the claim in isolation or not.

    And if we accept that it's human nature to give people's claims credence based on reputation then we have to look back at the first claims against Michael Jackson. Claims that were made by a father with an agenda and whom is recorded as saying "if I go through with this I win big time. I will get everything I want and they will be destroyed forever. June (his ex wife) is gonna lose Jordy (the boy at the centre of the case). A conversation he had BEFORE the date that he claimed his son told him anything had happened.

    Jordy chandler described Michael Jackson's penis as being circumcised when in actual fact it was not. A pretty big difference really that if you've had even the quickest glances you can't help but notice. Especially considering the vast vast majority of American men are so you would notice pretty quickly if it wasn't. It's true that the local Sherrif believed Jordy described his penis accurately but in actual fact the prosecution themselves asked Jackson's family if it was possible that Jackson had altered the appearance of his penis so that it DIDNT match the description given. Not just on the circumcision issue but in general. The jury also decided they didn't think it matched the description. That's the jury and the prosecution itself both admitting it didn't match. And didn't match by such a significant amount that prosecution claimed jackson must have had cosmetic surgery to alter it's appearance and requested medical records to prove it (they didn't).

    He was found not guilty on all charges but the old adage of there's no smoke without fire left him guilty in a lot of people's minds. Nothing is easier than accusing somebody who people already think is a guilty man.
     
  13. Bossman

    Bossman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,341
    Likes Received:
    12,693
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Carlton
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Whatever the credibility of the two lads doesn’t make any difference to me, the fact that a 30 something bloke wants 7 year year old to sleep in the same bad as him (on his own admission) tells me all I need to know,, if it was some random bloke on the street then everyone would rightlfully be in uproar...it’s seems some folk are agreeing he’s a weirdo and possible nonce but it’s ok cos these 2 are lying. Weird.
     
    TitusMagee and John Peachy like this.
  14. John Peachy

    John Peachy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2011
    Messages:
    16,737
    Likes Received:
    16,024
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    The littlest hobo
    Location:
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Agree with the weird & I still think there is abuse. Not sure all these claims are true though.
     
    Bossman likes this.
  15. tobyornottoby

    tobyornottoby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    5,896
    Likes Received:
    1,451
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    What does it tell you?

    It might tell you that there's a really weird child-like man who never grew up, able to share his eternal childhood with kids cos he can.

    It might tell you there's a predatory paedophile on the loose, able to abuse innocents at will.

    One's weird, one's evil.
     
    BarnsleyReds and SuperTyke like this.
  16. fir

    fired Administrator Staff Member Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    15,826
    Likes Received:
    10,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)

    He was found not guilty. So was OJ Simpson!
    The prosecution provided evidence of magazines, and photos of young naked boys in sexual poses. They brought forward witnesses from within the house (chef and another member of staff )both testified that they had seen him put his hand inside Macauley Culkin's shorts. Several other members of staff said they had seen him molest young boys. All of these things were either denied (by Culkin) or witnesses discredited by the defence.
    There are an awful lot of people who apparently have a "grudge" against him.....
     
  17. Bossman

    Bossman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,341
    Likes Received:
    12,693
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Carlton
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Jimmy saville allegedly abused loads of women
    He also made a loads of kids dream come true
    Ones a evil predator, ones an amazing person
    Which one do you believe?
     
  18. tobyornottoby

    tobyornottoby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2012
    Messages:
    5,896
    Likes Received:
    1,451
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Presumably you don't believe in trial by jury. Which is fair enough.

    How else do we decide upon guilt?
     
  19. fir

    fired Administrator Staff Member Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2007
    Messages:
    15,826
    Likes Received:
    10,675
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Of course I do. But sadly, I also believe that corruption exists. Especially when people have huge amounts of money.
     
  20. ark

    ark104 (v2) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    6,199
    Likes Received:
    1,527
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    York
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Yeah, them Nuremberg Trials eh
     

Share This Page