Micky Jackson in trouble again

ceadaoin.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I posted something & you jumped down my throat saying that it was made up nonsense. Its a fact that oprah removed all of her tweets where she condemned Jackson. It's a fact that oprah removed the interview from her YouTube channel. It's a fact that the documentary got the dates of the alleged abuse wrong by a few years. None of that is "made up nonsense".

You should check your facts before labeling posts as "made up nonsense".

Some of the alleged abuse couldn't have taken place where it was claimed to have taken place. According to many posters here he always dropped the "victims" once they hit 13 or 14. If abuse took place in some places claimed then he was "abusing" a 16, 17, 18 or nineteen year old young man. This does not fit the MO laid down so carefully by so many posters on this thread. Hasn't everyone claimed that he was only into pre pubescent boys & discarded them once they hit puberty?

Saying that she deleted the stuff because it was proven lies is made up nonsense. If that was the case then they would be deleted from her website also . More likely to be due to the weirdos downvoting and brigading

Also, can we have a legit link about how HBO are dropping it please? All that comes up when I Google is something on magicbaltimore.com about how its "rumoured" lol

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I posted something & you jumped down my throat saying that it was made up nonsense. Its a fact that oprah removed all of her tweets where she condemned Jackson. It's a fact that oprah removed the interview from her YouTube channel. It's a fact that the documentary got the dates of the alleged abuse wrong by a few years. None of that is "made up nonsense".

You should check your facts before labeling posts as "made up nonsense".

Some of the alleged abuse couldn't have taken place where it was claimed to have taken place. According to many posters here he always dropped the "victims" once they hit 13 or 14. If abuse took place in some places claimed then he was "abusing" a 16, 17, 18 or nineteen year old young man. This does not fit the MO laid down so carefully by so many posters on this thread. Hasn't everyone claimed that he was only into pre pubescent boys & discarded them once they hit puberty?

Just because planning for the second train track was sought in 93 doesn’t mean Jackson waited until then to build it.

There was a train there in 1990 anyway.

Also hbo aren’t dropping the show.

Sleeper12

Flippyfloppy wrote:

Just because planning for the second train track was sought in 93 doesn’t mean Jackson waited until then to build it.

Eh have you seen what his biographer says about that? The abuse could not have happened where it was supposed to have happened at the time it is claimed. The exact place where the abuse was supposed to have taken place wasn't built at the time. The producer or director of leaving Neverland has accepted this publicly. His attitude was to shrug his shoulders & say that the "victim" just got his dates wrong. I'm not sure how this will wash in court. HBO had a responsibility to fact check these things and they obviously didn't

ceadaoin.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Eh have you seen what his biographer says about that? The abuse could not have happened where it was supposed to have happened at the time it is claimed. The exact place where the abuse was supposed to have taken place wasn't built at the time. The producer or director of leaving Neverland has accepted this publicly. His attitude was to shrug his shoulders & say that the "victim" just got his dates wrong. I'm not sure how this will wash in court. HBO had a responsibility to fact check these things and they obviously didn't

Well two other biographers claim it was there in 1990,so why is this one more right?

Also, a lot of people , including professionals acknowledge that it is common for memory mistakes like this to happen on the recall of childhood abuse. Maybe occasions of abuse did go on later, and he was ashamed about that, who knows. We know he was there after the station was built because there are pictures of him there as an older teen and ones he took of the station itself

Sleeper12

ceadaoin. wrote:

Saying that she deleted the stuff because it was proven lies is made up nonsense. If that was the case then they would be deleted from her website also . More likely to be due to the weirdos downvoting and brigading

You are twisting what I said. I quoted a fact. Oprah deleted the interview & tweets after it's been proved that the timescale is not possible. This is not made up nonsense. This is fact. She did not delete it before the time line was proven false. She deleted them after it was proven false. Please explain what is made up about this?

Sleeper12

https://www.irishmirror.ie/showbiz/celebrity-news/leaving-neverland-director-makes-embarrassing-14221727#ICID=Android_IrishMirrorNewsApp_AppShare

Director Dan Reed admits that the dates of the alleged abuse are wrong. This isn't made up nonsense. It's fact

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

https://www.irishmirror.ie/showbiz/celebrity-news/leaving-neverland-director-makes-embarrassing-14221727#ICID=Android_IrishMirrorNewsApp_AppShare

Director Dan Reed admits that the dates of the alleged abuse are wrong. This isn't made up nonsense. It's fact

You really know nothing about CSA do you? I’m glad for you.

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Eh have you seen what his biographer says about that? The abuse could not have happened where it was supposed to have happened at the time it is claimed. The exact place where the abuse was supposed to have taken place wasn't built at the time. The producer or director of leaving Neverland has accepted this publicly. His attitude was to shrug his shoulders & say that the "victim" just got his dates wrong. I'm not sure how this will wash in court. HBO had a responsibility to fact check these things and they obviously didn't

No, one instance of the abuse has been cast ‘fake doubt’ upon by Michael Jackson crazies because there was two train tracks.

Oprah removing her videos from just one source does not equal to confirming this cr@p.

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It's a shame that they closed the Leaving Neverland thread with the breaking developments. HBO are dropping Leaving Neverland and Oprah deleted her interviews with the alleged "victims" from her YouTube channel, after its been proved that the timescale of the alleged abuse is not possible. HBO didn't fact check the stories closely enough.

You shouldn’t believe all the tripe the stans spout, it’s ridiculous https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/oprah-stands-leaving-neverland-interview-despite-reports-timeline-discrepancy-071231762.html?guccounter=1

ceadaoin.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You are twisting what I said. I quoted a fact. Oprah deleted the interview & tweets after it's been proved that the timescale is not possible. This is not made up nonsense. This is fact. She did not delete it before the time line was proven false. She deleted them after it was proven false. Please explain what is made up about this?

You said

"Oprah deleted her interviews with the alleged "victims" from her YouTube channel, after its been proved that the timescale of the alleged abuse is not possible."

You are implying she removed them because of the "lies". This is made up. She didn't remove them because of that and they are still available on her site. Also, pretty sure they were taken down before the train station thing even happened, probably because of people directing abuse towards her and towards abuse victims on these channels. Personally I don't know how those people can live with themselves, behaving like that, but if youre happy to pick apart the statements and use any inaccuracies to harrass and cast doubt on traumatised people good for you. I hope you wouldn't do that to someone in real life who confided in you.

So the Oprah thing has been debunked now. Any luck with a source about HBO dropping it?

ToBeFrank123

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Just because planning for the second train track was sought in 93 doesn’t mean Jackson waited until then to build it.

There was a train there in 1990 anyway.

Also hbo aren’t dropping the show.

Ah come off it. Reed himself said the abuse in the train station must have happened in 1995. His own words.

This is getting ridiculous now.

These guys are proven perjurers and liars. They should be in prison for perjury if right was right.

Whether you like or don't like Jackson or think he did this, that or the other is irrelevant. Proven liars and perjurers should never be given credibility. I said before these guys wouldn't last 5 minutes in court with the amount of lies and perjury they have told. I now believe they wouldn't last 1 minute. Its a pretty lame attempt at a shakedown from them that rightly never got nowhere in court.

Sleeper12

ceadaoin. wrote: »

You said

"Oprah deleted her interviews with the alleged "victims" from her YouTube channel, after its been proved that the timescale of the alleged abuse is not possible."

You are implying she removed them because of the "lies". This is made up. She didn't remove them because of that and they are still available on her site. Also, pretty sure they were taken down before the train station thing even happened, probably because of people directing abuse towards her and towards abuse victims on these channels. Personally I don't know how those people can live with themselves, behaving like that, but if youre happy to pick apart the statements and use any inaccuracies to harrass and cast doubt on traumatised people good for you. I hope you wouldn't do that to someone in real life who confided in you.

Any luck with a source about HBO dropping it?

I didn't imply anything. I laid out the timescale. 1. The biographer stated that timescale of the abuse can't possibly be correct & is out by a few years at least. 2. Then the director of the documentary agreed that the alleged victim was indeed wrong with timescale & admitted that the abuse couldn't have happened as spelt out in the documentary. 3. It was after this (that Oprah deleted all of her tweets & youtube videos.



https://www.popdust.com/finding-neverland-pulled-popdust-opinion-2634235057.html


https://theboxhouston.com/9833209/did-hbo-pull-the-plug-on-leaving-neverland-oprah-removes-interviews/


On the HBO website it showed that Leaving Neverland was to be pulled on 19th April instead of the originally planned September. This was widely reported yesterday evening. HBO have since denied that it is being pulled & they have changed the listing on their website.


What I reported is 100% fact. It has been accepted by the director of the program that the abuse could NOT have taken place in the area claimed in the program or at the time claimed in the program.



I find it difficult to read that you believe that I am trying to manipulate facts & yet you believe a proven liar

Boggles

ceadaoin. wrote: »

You said
probably because of people directing abuse towards her and towards abuse victims on these channels.

Who ever runs her channel could have just disabled comments.

Seems a bit of purge going on either way.

Strange.

ceadaoin.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

I didn't imply anything. I laid out the timescale. 1. The biographer stated that timescale of the abuse can't possibly be correct & is out by a few years at least. 2. Then the director of the documentary agreed that the alleged victim was indeed wrong with timescale & admitted that the abuse couldn't have happened as spelt out in the documentary. 3. It was after this (that Oprah deleted all of her tweets & youtube videos.



https://www.popdust.com/finding-neverland-pulled-popdust-opinion-2634235057.html


https://theboxhouston.com/9833209/did-hbo-pull-the-plug-on-leaving-neverland-oprah-removes-interviews/


On the HBO website it showed that Leaving Neverland was to be pulled on 19th April instead of the originally planned September. This was widely reported yesterday evening. HBO have since denied that it is being pulled & they have changed the listing on their website.


What I reported is 100% fact. It has been accepted by the director of the program that the abuse could NOT have taken place in the area claimed in the program or at the time claimed in the program.



I find it difficult to read that you believe that I am trying to manipulate facts & yet you believe a proven liar

"Widely reported"? Yet when I googled it yesterday, the only result that came up was from a site called baltimoremagic.com and all they referred to was that it's "rumoured"

ToBeFrank123

Oprah is hardly a pullitzer prize winning journalist. She gave the guys far too easy a ride and like Reed didn't bother to check some facts which would have cast serious doubt on them.

What most people would like is Safechuck and Robson confronted by a competent journalist who knows their facts inside out.

Sleeper12

ceadaoin. wrote: »

"Widely reported"? Yet when I googled it yesterday, the only result that came up was from a site called baltimoremagic.com and all they referred to was that it's "rumoured"

Your google isn't working so. I had plenty of sites reporting it when I googled it yesterday evening. Think about this: It was so widely reported that HBO were forced to issue a statement late last night.


The sites I read didn't say"rumered". They posted a fact. They posted that the listing for leaving neverland changed from September to April 19th on the HBO website. This is fact. HBO have since altered the listing again.



Pick & twist at the little things all you want. The director admitted that parts of the documentary can't be factual. The abuse would have had to continue till the guy was 16 to 19 instead of 14 as he claimed. Jackson being remotly interested in a you adult doesn't fit the MO that's been put out in this thread time & again. "He discarded them at 13 & 14 & moved onto the next child". Seems that this isn't his MO

ceadaoin.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Your google isn't working so. I had plenty of sites reporting it when I googled it yesterday evening. Think about this: It was so widely reported that HBO were forced to issue a statement late last night.


The sites I read didn't say"rumered". They posted a fact. They posted that the listing for leaving neverland changed from September to April 19th on the HBO website. This is fact. HBO have since altered the listing again.

Widely talked about on social media is not the same as widely reported. Genuinely, I did not see one legit source when I googled it yesterday. I did ask you for a link, and none was supplied even though according to you there were tons.

Anyway, it's not true. They aren't dropping it.

It's not me picking and twisting at the little things btw. Its the MJ fans who have picked at both these guys statements trying to find any little detail to discredit them. Kind of pathetic really, and for me anyway, it doesn't change my opinion of the whole picture and what it paints over the years. It's not just about wade and Safechuck, it's everything

Sleeper12

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Widely talked about on social media is not the same as widely reported. Genuinely, I did not see one legit source when I googled it yesterday. I did ask you for a link, and none was supplied even though according to you there were tons.

Anyway, it's not true. They aren't dropping it.

It's not me picking and twisting at the little things btw. Its the MJ fans who have picked at both these guys statements trying to find any little detail to discredit them. Kind of pathetic really, and for me anyway, it doesn't change my opinion of the whole picture and what it paints over the years. It's not just about wade and Safechuck, it's everything

You are twisting things again. I don't use social media for my news. Sorry for so many links but when I say widely reported I mean widely reported & not on social media



https://www.hotnewhiphop.com/hbo-denies-reports-they-pulled-leaving-neverland-from-programming-news.76968.html


https://www.okayplayer.com/culture/is-hbo-removing-michael-jackson-doc-leaving-neverland.html


https://www.vladtv.com/article/253947/hbo-appears-to-pull-leaving-neverland-as-oprah-deletes-interview-w-


https://kysdc.com/3711435/hbo-pulls-plug-on-neverland-documentary-oprah-deletes-interviews-with-accusers-from-her-youtube/


https://theboxhouston.com/9833209/did-hbo-pull-the-plug-on-leaving-neverland-oprah-removes-interviews/


https://www.popdust.com/finding-neverland-pulled-popdust-opinion-2634235057.html


https://kblx.com/nikki-thomas/hbo-pulls-leaving-neverland/


https://www.rhymeswithsnitch.com/2019/04/hbo-pulls-plug-on-leaving-neverland.html


https://b1039.com/2019/04/10/hbo-appears-to-pull-leaving-neverland-doc-as-oprah-deletes-accusers-youtube-interviews/

ceadaoin.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You are twisting things again. I don't use social media for my news. Sorry for so many links but when I say widely reported I mean widely reported & not on social media



https://www.hotnewhiphop.com/hbo-denies-reports-they-pulled-leaving-neverland-from-programming-news.76968.html


https://www.okayplayer.com/culture/is-hbo-removing-michael-jackson-doc-leaving-neverland.html


https://www.vladtv.com/article/253947/hbo-appears-to-pull-leaving-neverland-as-oprah-deletes-interview-w-


https://kysdc.com/3711435/hbo-pulls-plug-on-neverland-documentary-oprah-deletes-interviews-with-accusers-from-her-youtube/


https://theboxhouston.com/9833209/did-hbo-pull-the-plug-on-leaving-neverland-oprah-removes-interviews/


https://www.popdust.com/finding-neverland-pulled-popdust-opinion-2634235057.html


https://kblx.com/nikki-thomas/hbo-pulls-leaving-neverland/


https://www.rhymeswithsnitch.com/2019/04/hbo-pulls-plug-on-leaving-neverland.html


https://b1039.com/2019/04/10/hbo-appears-to-pull-leaving-neverland-doc-as-oprah-deletes-accusers-youtube-interviews/

Sorry but not one of those is a legit source and the very first one I clicked on refers to "rumours". You might want to be more circumspect about where you get your "news".

kunst nugget

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Sorry but not one of those is a legit source and the very first one I clicked on refers to "rumours". You might want to be more circumspect about where you get your "news".

What?!?! Rhymes with Snitch is the gold standard of journalism that all others aspire to...

Sleeper12

ceadaoin. wrote:

Sorry but not one of those is a legit source and the very first one I clicked on refers to "rumours". You might want to be more circumspect about where you get your "news".

You can try discredit them all you want but they reported a fact. Leaving Neverland changed on the HBO website schedule from ending in in September to ending on April 19th. This did happen. HBO had to rectify the schedule and make a statement. As you can see my Google works just fine dozens of entertainment websites reported. You "claim" that only one site comes up in a Google search. I see dozens of sites. All reporting a fact. The HBO website schedule showed leaving Neverland being dropped on April 19th.

You slag where I got my news & yet these sites were 100 percent correct in what they reported.

In all your posts you haven't discredited anything.

1. Oprah deleted ALL of her tweets criticising Jackson & deleted the interview from her YouTube channel after it was proved that the timescale of the alleged abuse is not possible.

This is fact

2. The director Dan Reed accepts the the timescale isn't possible as described in the documentary.

This is fact

3. HBO didn't check the stories closely enough

This is also fact

I have a feeling that you'd argue with your own shadow.

ceadaoin.

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You can try discredit them all you want but they reported a fact. Leaving Neverland changed on the HBO website schedule from ending in in September to ending on April 19th. This did happen. HBO had to rectify the schedule and make a statement. As you can see my Google works just fine dozens of entertainment websites reported. You "claim" that only one site comes up in a Google search. I see dozens of sites. All reporting a fact. The HBO website schedule showed leaving Neverland being dropped on April 19th.

You slag where I got my news & yet these sites were 100 percent correct in what they reported.

In all your posts you haven't discredited anything.

1. Oprah deleted ALL of her tweets criticising Jackson & deleted the interview from her YouTube channel after it was proved that the timescale of the alleged abuse is not possible.

This is fact

And yet

1. The videos are still up on oprahs site and she herself has said she stands by them.

2. HBO have put out a statement clarifying that the documentary isnt being dropped.

That makes both those stories untrue. HBO aren't dropping it and Oprah didn't delete the videos because they were lies. Seems the tactic of MJ fans is to create a rumour, let it gain legs by being picked up and "reported" by less than stellar news outlets and then claim it as "fact"

Good luck with that. If you'll excuse me I've got to get back to arguing with my own shadow haha so I'll leave you to it

Sleeper12

ceadaoin. wrote: »

And yet

1. The videos are still up on oprahs site and she herself has said she stands by them.

2. HBO have put out a statement clarifying that the documentary isnt being dropped.

That makes both those stories untrue. HBO aren't dropping it and Oprah didn't delete the videos because they were lies. Seems the tactic of MJ fans is to create a rumour, let it gain legs by being picked up and "reported" by less than stellar news outlets and then claim it as "fact"

Good luck with that. If you'll excuse me I've got to get back to arguing with my own shadow haha so I'll leave you to it

You read into my posts what you want to see.

1. The videos are still up on oprahs site and she herself has said she stands by them.

No one said otherwise. You are arguing with yourself on this. I stated that she deleted her tweets & the interview from her Youtube channel. I never mentioned her site.

2. HBO have put out a statement clarifying that the documentary isn't being dropped.

Yes but you fail to mention that they had to alter their schedule on their website late last night. When I posted last night their site schedule said it was being dropped on 19th April instead of the planned September ending date. Let's be very clear here, the HBO website had the program ending tomorrow week. According to the HBO website last night they were dropping the program. They obviously made a mistake with their scheduling & have rectified it since but last night the HBO site was dropping the program. This isn't a case of fake news. This is HBO making a mistake

Flippyfloppy

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Ah come off it. Reed himself said the abuse in the train station must have happened in 1995. His own words.

This is getting ridiculous now.

These guys are proven perjurers and liars. They should be in prison for perjury if right was right.

Whether you like or don't like Jackson or think he did this, that or the other is irrelevant. Proven liars and perjurers should never be given credibility. I said before these guys wouldn't last 5 minutes in court with the amount of lies and perjury they have told. I now believe they wouldn't last 1 minute. Its a pretty lame attempt at a shakedown from them that rightly never got nowhere in court.

On one hand you’re accusing them of being perjurers and on the other saying you don’t believe their accusations. They can only be perjurers if they lied about Michael not committing sexual abuse against them. There seems to be a huge issue here with your ability to grasp that.

Yes they did commit perjury but only because they felt like they were in a loving sexual relationship with Michael....I feel awful for the boys who lost out due to their testimonies but you can hardly blame them.

Why would the stand be the perfect place for them to admit to the world that they had been having sex with Michael Jackson since they were little?

Having children providing testimonies that such and such doesn’t abuse kids is a terrible, archaic idea.

And yes it is getting even more ridiculous, the cr@p stans are coming up with, first the train station then making up the Oprah story and HBO. If anyone lacks credibility.....

Sleeper12

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

On one hand you’re accusing them of being perjurers and on the other saying you don’t believe their accusations. They can only be perjurers if they lied about Michael not committing sexual abuse against them. There seems to be a huge issue here with your ability to grasp that.

Yes they did commit perjury but only because they felt like they were in a loving sexual relationship with Michael....I feel awful for the boys who lost out due to their testimonies but you can hardly blame them.

Why would the stand be the perfect place for them to admit to the world that they had been having sex with Michael Jackson since they were little?

Having children providing testimonies that such and such doesn’t abuse kids is a terrible, archaic idea.

And yes it is getting even more ridiculous, the cr@p stans are coming up with, first the train station then making up the Oprah story and HBO. If anyone lacks credibility.....

In bold isn't quite true. They could have perjured themselves in their failed civil suit where they wanted a Billion dollars

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

You read into my posts what you want to see.

Haha says the poster who came onto boards yesterday announcing Oprah took down her videos and HBO are pulling the documentary because of the train station!!! Nice backtracking by the way.

Sleeper12

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Haha says the poster who came onto boards yesterday announcing Oprah took down her videos and HBO are pulling the documentary because of the train station!!! Nice backtracking by the way.

That's not what I said at all


Were you the poster that tried to talk about a 2nd rail track when rail tracks had nothing to do with the claims at all? It was a station building that wasn't built at the time not tracks

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It's a shame that they closed the Leaving Neverland thread with the breaking developments. HBO are dropping Leaving Neverland and Oprah deleted her interviews with the alleged "victims" from her YouTube channel, after its been proved that the timescale of the alleged abuse is not possible. HBO didn't fact check the stories closely enough.

Right....

Sleeper12

What I actually said

It's a shame that they closed the Leaving Neverland thread with the breaking developments. HBO are dropping Leaving Neverland and Oprah deleted her interviews with the alleged "victims" from her YouTube channel, after its been proved that the timescale of the alleged abuse is not possible. HBO didn't fact check the stories closely enough.

And what you managed to read that wasn't in my post at all

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Haha says the poster who came onto boards yesterday announcing Oprah took down her videos and HBO are pulling the documentary because of the train station!!! Nice backtracking by the way.

Absolutely none of that is in any of my posts

hetuzozaho

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What I actually said




And what you managed to read that wasn't in my post at all







Absolutely none of that is in any of my posts

Just catching up, what did you mean by the timescale is not possible?

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What I actually said




And what you managed to read that wasn't in my post at all







Absolutely none of that is in any of my posts

Oh apologies, so when you said ‘after its been proved that the ......’ you just meant completely co-ink-identally, not as a result of.
Fair enough. Weird but fair enough.

Sleeper12

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Just catching up, what did you mean by the timescale is not possible?

The abuse is supposed to have happened in a particular building in the train station. The abuse stopped when he was 14. The building he says the abuse happened in wasn't built till he was 16. The director accepts that the dates have been proven wrong but he still believes the abuse happened but the lad would have been 16 at the very youngest if he was abused in that building on the day it opened. He could have been 17, 18,19 or maybe he wasn't abused in the building at all

Sleeper12

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Oh apologies, so when you said ‘after its been proved that the ......’ you just meant completely co-ink-identally, not as a result of.
Fair enough. Weird but fair enough.

It would be simpler if you just read the last few pages instead of making random comments. I explain in detail in post 3213

hetuzozaho

Sleeper12 wrote: »

The abuse is supposed to have happened in a particular building in the train station. The abuse stopped when he was 14. The building he says the abuse happened in wasn't built till he was 16. The director accepts that the dates have been proven wrong but he still believes the abuse happened but the lad would have been 16 at the very youngest if he was abused in that building on the day it opened. He could have been 17, 18,19 or maybe he wasn't abused in the building at all

Ah right.

Yeah maybe he was never abused in the building at all. Maybe a mix up on the behalf of the alleged abused.

Flippyfloppy

Sleeper12 wrote: »

It would be simpler if you just read the last few pages instead of making random comments. I explain in detail in post 3213

Was that your backtracking post or another?

Sleeper12

Flippyfloppy wrote:

Was that your backtracking post or another?

Ah go away with yourself. You have no argument, nothing to debate. I have proved each of my posts to be fact. Go pick on someone else with your nonsense posts

ToBeFrank123

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

On one hand you’re accusing them of being perjurers and on the other saying you don’t believe their accusations. They can only be perjurers if they lied about Michael not committing sexual abuse against them. There seems to be a huge issue here with your ability to grasp that.

Yes they did commit perjury but only because they felt like they were in a loving sexual relationship with Michael....I feel awful for the boys who lost out due to their testimonies but you can hardly blame them.

Why would the stand be the perfect place for them to admit to the world that they had been having sex with Michael Jackson since they were little?

Having children providing testimonies that such and such doesn’t abuse kids is a terrible, archaic idea.

And yes it is getting even more ridiculous, the cr@p stans are coming up with, first the train station then making up the Oprah story and HBO. If anyone lacks credibility.....

They have lied or perjured themselves for decades now either in court or in multiple civil cases aimed at suing the Jackson estate. Their sworn evidence contradicted other sworn evidence from their parents. Robson swore one thing about the first time the abuse happened, his mother swore the opposite. Robson emailed his mother a list of stories to check if any of them were true. She said none of it was true. But he included it in his book draft nonetheless.

They've perjured themselves about the abuse not happening. They also appear to have lied/perjured themselves about dates and locations of it allegedly happening. And either their parents perjured themselves or the sons perjured themselves about dates and locations. Robson alleges he was abused hundreds of times. His mother said under oath Jackson was at Neverland 4 times they were there. Robson said he had no recollection of certain events and asked his mother about them. After she told him, he was able to present it in the documentary as if he remembered everything.

So which holds more value, sworn testimony in court, or a soft one sided documentary with a biased director?

Flippyfloppy

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

They have lied or perjured themselves for decades now either in court or in multiple civil cases aimed at suing the Jackson estate. Their sworn evidence contradicted other sworn evidence from their parents. Robson swore one thing about the first time the abuse happened, his mother swore the opposite. Robson emailed his mother a list of stories to check if any of them were true. She said none of it was true. But he included it in his book draft nonetheless.

They've perjured themselves about the abuse not happening. They also appear to have lied/perjured themselves about dates and locations of it allegedly happening. And either their parents perjured themselves or the sons perjured themselves about dates and locations. Robson alleges he was abused hundreds of times. His mother said under oath Jackson was at Neverland 4 times they were there. Robson said he had no recollection of certain events and asked his mother about them. After she told him, he was able to present it in the documentary as if he remembered everything.

So which holds more value, sworn testimony in court, or a soft one sided documentary with a biased director?

You clearly don’t understand the intricacies of Childhood sexual abuse so there is absolutely no point in discussing this with you.

Mr.Wemmick

Those stupid boys, why didn't they get their diaries out every time they were abused and note down: place, time, date, weather.. little fibbers is what they are.

It doesn't matter that they were 7 or 8 or 9 or 14, they could write couldn't they? They went to school did they not..?!

Load of codswallop, little liars.. off with their heads and be done with it. And MJ can continue on with his innocent history of child boyfriends and little bed fellows. Bless his white cotton socks.

ToBeFrank123

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

You clearly don’t understand the intricacies of Childhood sexual abuse so there is absolutely no point in discussing this with you.

Ah that old chestnut. You can't win with some people.

Safechuck and Robson are caught telling blatent lies about years, locations and the number of alleged abuse incidents and when its questioned, their supporters will say its ok to tell lies because they were abused. So its ok to make up stories about abuse now is it, stories that have been subsequently proved to be false.

Robson has changed his story regularly over the years. Some events he clearly couldnt remember yet presents it in the documentary as a clear memory. Complete nonsense. No wonder hiw own mother said he'd win an oscar for lying.

Safechuck doesn't even know the year the abuse stopped! Nor did Reed.

Sleeper12

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

Those stupid boys, why didn't they get their diaries out every time they were abused and note down: place, time, date, weather.. little fibbers is what they are.

It doesn't matter that they were 7 or 8 or 9 or 14, they could write couldn't they? They went to school did they not..?!

Load of codswallop, little liars.. off with their heads and be done with it. And MJ can continue on with his innocent history of child boyfriends and little bed fellows. Bless his white cotton socks.

Wouldn't that have been wonderful

Dear diary


I wasn't abused today


The End

You make it sound like they got their dates wrong by a day or two. One of them is out by at least two years! The abuse stopped at 14 he said but the place he was abused wasn't built till he was 16. So he could have been abused at 16' 17' 18.

Mr.Wemmick

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Wouldn't that have been wonderful



You make it sound like they got their dates wrong by a day or two. One of them is out by at least two years! The abuse stopped at 14 he said but the place he was abused wasn't built till he was 16. So he could have been abused at 16' 17' 18.

No I make it sound like he was a serial abuser and got away with it. The mighty jackson estate has seen to that.. all those relationships with little boys. One after the other.

But anyway.. dates, exact dates it is. Carry on.

Sleeper12

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

No I make it sound like he was a serial abuser and got away with it. The mighty jackson estate has seen to that.. all those relationships with little boys. One after the other.

But anyway.. dates, exact dates it is. Carry on.

How do you decide when they are telling lies & telling the truth?

Mother of Michael Jackson 'victim' Wade Robson told friends her son DENIED being molested by the king of pop 'time and time again' and 'had no reason to believe he was abused'

His own mother calls him a liar

ToBeFrank123

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

No I make it sound like he was a serial abuser and got away with it. The mighty jackson estate has seen to that.. all those relationships with little boys. One after the other.

But anyway.. dates, exact dates it is. Carry on.

You are basing this largely on the testimony of 2 serial perjurers and liars I'm taking it as well as a director who hasn't the foggiest about central events and timelines!

Unfortunately Jackson isn't around to defend himself, so any and all allegations can be made against him without it seems a single shred of hard evidence. But the testimony from these two chancers that has been debunked time and time again.

You also appear to be another poster who isn't particularly interested in dates, actual as opposed to made up events or facts. Safechuck has gone to ground it should be noted. He hasn't set the record straight about when the abuse ended. So the central idea of the documentary, that Jackson moved the kids on once they hit puberty has been shown to be bullsh*t. So if that was bullsh*t how much more of the documentary is bullsh*t. We already know most of it is, including the claim from Safechuck he refused to testify in 2005.

Necro

Christ this thread is still going?

Seems the Jackson defenders are putting extra effort into defending their champion of the people :rolleyes:

One wonders if Jim the plumber from Ballygobackwards was accused in this fashion, after openly admitting to sleeping in the same bed as young boys...

Would the defence and effort to discredit be as visceral.

ToBeFrank123

Necro wrote: »

Christ this thread is still going?

Seems the Jackson defenders are putting extra effort into defending their champion of the people :rolleyes:

One wonders if Jim the plumber from Ballygobackwards was accused in this fashion, after openly admitting to sleeping in the same bed as young boys...

Would the defence and effort to discredit be as visceral.

You haven't followed the thread or followed the story. So if you have nothing informative to add...

Necro

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

You haven't followed the thread or followed the story. So if you have nothing informative to add...

That makes two of us then

ToBeFrank123

Necro wrote: »

That makes two of us then

Nope, followed the story from the start and know a fair bit about it at this stage and the backgrounds of most of characters involved.

Necro

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Nope, followed the story from the start and know a fair bit about it at this stage and the backgrounds of most of characters involved.

Ah yeah, that old nugget.

Truth is you're speculating just like everyone else

You can believe one way or another but neither side has definitive proof of anything.

One fact we do know though - is that Jacko slept in the same bed with little kiddies.

ToBeFrank123

Necro wrote: »

Ah yeah, that old nugget.

Truth is you're speculating just like everyone else

You can believe one way or another but neither side has definitive proof of anything.

One fact we do know though - is that Jacko slept in the same bed with little kiddies.

We are not really discussing whether he slept in the same bed as them.

What we are discussing is what are more than likely false accusations of anal and oral rape. So unless you have proof of this definitively you are just speculating like everyone else as you say.

But people, a lot of people have misunderstood speculation for fact. They present it as fact that Jackson anally and orally raped children, with little to back it up. Ultimately a lot of people have been taken in by 2 shysters, Robson and Safechuck who have been shown to have lied time and time again.