Latest on MJJC

5 upcoming documentaries?

Insane that’s it’s 2026 and people are STILL after this man. I feel so sorry for him ☹️ It’s very sad. We as fans shouldn’t be paying attention to any of this BS!
 
MJ5 said:
Are they 100% negative bs? Or anything positive/new in these?
Click to expand...
The first one is okay. The second one is all tabloid BS, but there is some new footage of Michael with his kids, which is the only thing worth watching in it. Nothing interesting in the third one.

Harun said:
!??? !????

This is so confusing. I thought Jordan's descriptions of Michael's genitals were inaccurate, and now it's being said they were!? This And Jordan never claimed that Mike was circumcised? So what's the truth??These statements come directly from the senior officials who led the case at the time.
Click to expand...
Of course the description was not accurate, the only thing they ever said that was approximately in the same area was one spot. Notice how they just conveniently never mention circumcision or the other spots that didn't match? In Chandler's book, he says that Jordan described "numerous distinctive markings and discolorations on Michael’s privates". So how come only one spot matched? Can we talk about the numerous spots that didn't match?
 
Harun said:
!??? !????

This is so confusing. I thought Jordan's descriptions of Michael's genitals were inaccurate, and now it's being said they were!? This And Jordan never claimed that Mike was circumcised? So what's the truth??These statements come directly from the senior officials who led the case at the time.

But by the way wow how great rare stuff’s in this quality

Shana is such a b…
Click to expand...
They officials lied. And you know this.

Jordan did say he was circumsized.

Even dan reed admitted it

And I happen to know that there is ironclad evidence that the "liden report" mentioned on the smoking gun article was real and it quoted directly from that report The right people have the evidence.

These crooked cops can lie all they want. They are digging themselves into a hole.
 
etoile 37 said:
The first one is okay. The second one is all tabloid BS, but there is some new footage of Michael with his kids, which is the only thing worth watching in it. Nothing interesting in the third one.


Of course the description was not accurate, the only thing they ever said that was approximately in the same area was one spot. Notice how they just conveniently never mention circumcision or the other spots that didn't match? In Chandler's book, he says that Jordan described "numerous distinctive markings and discolorations on Michael’s privates". So how come only one spot matched? Can we talk about the numerous spots that didn't match?
Click to expand...
The footage of the kids has already been stripped is available on several fan pages, so theres no need to watch this trash to see it.
 
etoile 37 said:
The first one is okay. The second one is all tabloid BS, but there is some new footage of Michael with his kids, which is the only thing worth watching in it. Nothing interesting in the third one.


Of course the description was not accurate, the only thing they ever said that was approximately in the same area was one spot. Notice how they just conveniently never mention circumcision or the other spots that didn't match? In Chandler's book, he says that Jordan described "numerous distinctive markings and discolorations on Michael’s privates". So how come only one spot matched? Can we talk about the numerous spots that didn't match?
Click to expand...
Its so dumb because common sense says MJ had spots down there if he had vitiligo. The fact that they pretend like that was some top secret info is insane. Also Evan saw MJs butt and knew there were spots on them and lo and behold jordan said it too, cause Evan coached him.
 
etoile 37 said:
The first one is okay. The second one is all tabloid BS, but there is some new footage of Michael with his kids, which is the only thing worth watching in it. Nothing interesting in the third one.


Of course the description was not accurate, the only thing they ever said that was approximately in the same area was one spot. Notice how they just conveniently never mention circumcision or the other spots that didn't match? In Chandler's book, he says that Jordan described "numerous distinctive markings and discolorations on Michael’s privates". So how come only one spot matched? Can we talk about the numerous spots that didn't match?
Click to expand...
thats a good point no one brings up. can you cite the page from chandlers book?
 
etoile 37 said:
The first one is okay. The second one is all tabloid BS, but there is some new footage of Michael with his kids, which is the only thing worth watching in it. Nothing interesting in the third one.

Of course the description was not accurate, the only thing they ever said that was approximately in the same area was one spot. Notice how they just conveniently never mention circumcision or the other spots that didn't match? In Chandler's book, he says that Jordan described "numerous distinctive markings and discolorations on Michael’s privates". So how come only one spot matched? Can we talk about the numerous spots that didn't match?
Click to expand...

So this new 3 episode series says that Jordan never claimed MJ was circumcised? Is that correct? I mean if they are saying that in the program with no evidence then its really shitty of BBC to include it as they are re-writing history and the evidence to their own liking to suit their narrative, but I guess we should not be surprised.

And probably because they know they can get away with saying anything? There is also the possibility of people believing MJ was guilty and therefore have a motive to lie and take evidence out of context etc without feeling bad about it. On the opposite they would feel good about doing it as they think they are exposing a child molester!
 
etoile 37 said:
They say that the photos matched, and they don't mention circumcision at all, precisely because it didn't match.
Click to expand...
Its so silly, the photos did "match" but they call Catherine to the grand juries and ask if MJ could have had cosmetic surgery on his genitals. Meaning it did not match. And they did not even introduce it as evidence before the grand jury in 1994. And then they sit today and pretend it was bomb shell evidence etc, its just very tiring!

How they cclaim it was a match when they did not even bother to use it in court? If people just used common sense they would see right through it!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top