Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

[La74]

It's difficult for me to see members of Michael's family act like nothing is wrong while people call Michael a monster. Taj is on his own, in my view it just looks awful. Maybe it's me I don't know

Maybe they just don’t want to draw attention to it.

 

[KOPV]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

When did the jacksons ever pay for anything. Even janet wouldnt pay for her own mothers toliet roll when she stayed with her. Instead billing the estate

I don't want to bash Janet but..... She should have used her money over having Michaels estate to do it.. She has plenty of money to help!

 

[KOPV]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

what is the latest with Joy Robson? What do we know of her in recent times?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Elusive have you got a link to back up that Janet and the toilet paper comment? wasn’t sure if you were being sarcastic or if it’s actually true. Says it all about Janet that I really wouldn’t put it past her

Hi. Yeah its in the trial section in the probate section thread. When kj asked for loans etc it was all documented and public record and got posted there..prob one of the last things to happen so shouldnt be that far from the end of thread. Re estate email address. It was posted a couple of pages back by marc vivien

Edit. I see marc has posted it.

Considering janet worked with robson on the mtv tribute she has no reason not to speak out against him. Remaining silent does nothing. At the very least it makes you look like you dont care at the worst it looks like you dont support your family member. But janets always been about janet...

 

[Justthefacts]

Maybe they just don’t want to draw attention to it.

This fire has enough oxygen to burn down everything ing the Vegas shows and Michael's airplay. At the very least try to put the fire out

 

[marc_vivien]

[FONT=&quot]Ahead of its March 3 premiere on HBO, “Leaving Neverland” director Dan Reed tells Variety he is open to creating a follow-up to his controversial four-hour documentary revolving around sexual abuse allegations against Michael Jackson. If, that is, he would be able make contact with the King of Pop’s earlier high-profile accusers, Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“If Jordan Chandler were to come forth, and if I could sit down with him speak to him the way I did to Wade [Robson] and James [Safechuck], that would I think, be the core of a very interesting film about that story, and the same goes for Gavin,” said Reed in a phone interview from London.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Leaving Neverland,” which Variety critic Owen Gleiberman calls “overwhelmingly powerful and convincing,” debuted at Sundance and largely centers on the story and family lives of Robson and Safechuck, two men who say the mega-star befriended and abused them as children. The first two hours of the film in particular rarely stray from Robson and Safechuck’s telling of their respective stories, a deliberate choice.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“This is not a movie about Michael Jackson,” said Reed. “This is not a movie about Michael Jackson abusing little boys. It’s a movie about two families and how two families came to terms with what their sons revealed to them many years after Jackson died.”
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Should Reed ever pursue a follow-up project around Chandler and Arvizo, however, it “would be a different type of film.” Chandler’s allegations went public in the early 1990s and Arvizo’s in the early 2000s, while the singer was still alive.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“I would of course use the interviews I’ve already shot with investigators from those investigations — the D.A.s and all the people that were part of that wider drama,” he said. “That would have been a very different type of film. It wouldn’t be this sort of claustrophobic — you wouldn’t be locked in a room with the Safechucks and the Robsons. I’d tell the story from Jordan and Gavin’s point of view, partly, but also through the eyes of all the other participants.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Reed said he had tried find Chandler for this film but believes he wanted to stay hidden. While Reed conducted a “deep dive” into previous police investigations of Jackson and met with investigators, he chose not to include depictions of that research and verification, in favor of giving Robson and Safechuck’s more time to tell their stories firsthand.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“I try to be a good journalist and a good filmmaker at the same time,” he told Variety. “And I am kind of maniacally fussy about factual accuracy, and the authenticity of the stories that I tell, but I also want to give them impact and reach, and I want to make them engrossing and engaging like movies are. I want to use all the armory of a moviemaker to tell true stories that I think is a good signature of my style on screen.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]At Sundance, the film induced visceral reactions from both viewers and Michael Jackson fans. The audience was “deeply, deeply affected,” said Reed, who said that “you could hear people sobbing in the audience.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Jackson’s estate has been vocal in criticizing the film, previously calling it “tabloid character assassination.” Last week, the estate complained to the U.K.’s Channel 4 that the documentary violated the channel’s standards for factual programming, according to the Associated Press.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When asked about the latest complaint and the Jackson estate’s reaction to the film, Reed brushed it off, saying that the estate has “no legal arguments whatsoever,” and is a move directed at Jackson’s fan base.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“It’s pretty much a cut and paste from a fan forum, with a lot of really ridiculous remarks and comments and allegations about the film,” he said, adding that the estate “clearly hasn’t watched the film.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]But Reed doesn’t appear to have much desire to battle Jackson’s estate. And even if the documentary spurs a campaign to stop listening to Jackson’s music, in the same vein as the current “Mute R. Kelly” campaign, he “would not endorse that.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“The film’s not about Michael Jackson, and my intention is certainly not to topple Jackson from his iconic status, or to undermine his legacy,” said Reed. “I just think it needs to be re-contextualized. We need to somehow be able to accommodate the fact that he’s a pedophile with the man’s talent as an entertainer.”




https://variety.com/2019/music/news/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-sequel-1203142185/[/FONT]

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

And the fishing begins.

Its not about michael. ? you keep telling yourself that fool

 

[Justthefacts]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

What the **** is this

 

[Staffordshire Bullterrier]

[FONT=&quot]Ahead of its March 3 premiere on HBO, “Leaving Neverland” director Dan Reed tells Variety he is open to creating a follow-up to his controversial four-hour documentary revolving around sexual abuse allegations against Michael Jackson. If, that is, he would be able make contact with the King of Pop’s earlier high-profile accusers, Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“If Jordan Chandler were to come forth, and if I could sit down with him speak to him the way I did to Wade [Robson] and James [Safechuck], that would I think, be the core of a very interesting film about that story, and the same goes for Gavin,” said Reed in a phone interview from London.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Leaving Neverland,” which Variety critic Owen Gleiberman calls “overwhelmingly powerful and convincing,” debuted at Sundance and largely centers on the story and family lives of Robson and Safechuck, two men who say the mega-star befriended and abused them as children. The first two hours of the film in particular rarely stray from Robson and Safechuck’s telling of their respective stories, a deliberate choice.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“This is not a movie about Michael Jackson,” said Reed. “This is not a movie about Michael Jackson abusing little boys. It’s a movie about two families and how two families came to terms with what their sons revealed to them many years after Jackson died.”
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
Should Reed ever pursue a follow-up project around Chandler and Arvizo, however, it “would be a different type of film.” Chandler’s allegations went public in the early 1990s and Arvizo’s in the early 2000s, while the singer was still alive.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“I would of course use the interviews I’ve already shot with investigators from those investigations — the D.A.s and all the people that were part of that wider drama,” he said. “That would have been a very different type of film. It wouldn’t be this sort of claustrophobic — you wouldn’t be locked in a room with the Safechucks and the Robsons. I’d tell the story from Jordan and Gavin’s point of view, partly, but also through the eyes of all the other participants.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Reed said he had tried find Chandler for this film but believes he wanted to stay hidden. While Reed conducted a “deep dive” into previous police investigations of Jackson and met with investigators, he chose not to include depictions of that research and verification, in favor of giving Robson and Safechuck’s more time to tell their stories firsthand.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“I try to be a good journalist and a good filmmaker at the same time,” he told Variety. “And I am kind of maniacally fussy about factual accuracy, and the authenticity of the stories that I tell, but I also want to give them impact and reach, and I want to make them engrossing and engaging like movies are. I want to use all the armory of a moviemaker to tell true stories that I think is a good signature of my style on screen.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]At Sundance, the film induced visceral reactions from both viewers and Michael Jackson fans. The audience was “deeply, deeply affected,” said Reed, who said that “you could hear people sobbing in the audience.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Jackson’s estate has been vocal in criticizing the film, previously calling it “tabloid character assassination.” Last week, the estate complained to the U.K.’s Channel 4 that the documentary violated the channel’s standards for factual programming, according to the Associated Press.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]When asked about the latest complaint and the Jackson estate’s reaction to the film, Reed brushed it off, saying that the estate has “no legal arguments whatsoever,” and is a move directed at Jackson’s fan base.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“It’s pretty much a cut and paste from a fan forum, with a lot of really ridiculous remarks and comments and allegations about the film,” he said, adding that the estate “clearly hasn’t watched the film.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]But Reed doesn’t appear to have much desire to battle Jackson’s estate. And even if the documentary spurs a campaign to stop listening to Jackson’s music, in the same vein as the current “Mute R. Kelly” campaign, he “would not endorse that.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“The film’s not about Michael Jackson, and my intention is certainly not to topple Jackson from his iconic status, or to undermine his legacy,” said Reed. “I just think it needs to be re-contextualized. We need to somehow be able to accommodate the fact that he’s a pedophile with the man’s talent as an entertainer.”




https://variety.com/2019/music/news/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-sequel-1203142185/[/FONT]

Jordan and Gavin? The nerve of this guy. He's open to make a follow up huh? Just die please, OK thank you. So insanely fed up with this guy already.

It's clear that this miserable human being is having the time of his life, don't worry man, there's also a special place waiting for you I'm sure. Or at least some kind of karma.

Gavin? Is he serious and is he ****ing dumb then? Is he not aware of how there was zero evidence of any wrongdoing, the story that kept changing by the mother, the history of the family being grifters, and how the jury just fully acquitted Michael? So this dude clearly believes Gavin was a victim, good lord please help me.

And I am beyond tired of hearing "powerful, convincing" about this mockumentary. Reed clearly doesn't know the real story behind W&S and how shady they are, or he does and he genuinely believes it doesn't matter, because after all he believes Gavin was a victim as well.

And the same goes for Variety and their ridiculous review of the mockumentary. This isn't the first glowing review and it won't be the last.

It's not about MJ, yet the thing is called Leaving Neverland. My ****ing ass dude. Just get the hell out of here with that nonsense.

Even if Jordan were to come out (in the hopes for a quick buck, same goes for Gavin) would that even be allowed? Didn't that settlement in the 90s say he couldn't discuss MJ in the media or something anymore? I could be wrong.

 

[KOPV]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

let him Gavin in.. PLEASE! he will only give people more reason to discredit his bull..


He already incriminated himself with the claims in the documentary.. IF Wades and James story was true, there entire claim would be true.. And we all know Rubba is not a 'secret' nick name.. We know a lot of the claims are BS and can be proven.


Lucky for us, there is probably not a human that ever lived that is more documented than Michael Jackson!


I'd like him to explain his way on how molestation dates change once the dates prove that Michael wasnt even in Cali.. And what logic is it to START molesting the kid you are being accused of AFTER the investigation starts. Which BTW means the investigation was not warrented at the time.

 

[WildStyle]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

I finally believe in conspiracies.

 

[ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

What a horrible nightmare!!!
I hope that the Avisos don't really get the idea now to come forward.
Cause I guess they would again see the money signs and repeate their lies in better takes.
They have to fear much more consiquences then Jordan Chandler when they whould come forward to tell the truth.
Remeber that Ray Chandler saw the chance to sell a book during the 2003-05 Allegationcase.
Something like this can happen now again.
Poor Michael... ?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Funny how reed doesnt mention about how robson tried to get chandler involved in the lawsuit.wasnt that when they were trying to get lilly etc. And docs were filed. Reed only wants you to know his "truth"

 

[Staffordshire Bullterrier]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Yeah and it makes me wonder what kind of questions these interviewers are asking at all. If I was a interviewer I'd absolutely ask him about Robson and his history of being a liar and much more. So far it doesn't seem he gets those kind of questions at all. This dude actually believes MJ was guilty in 2005 too. You can't make this shit up. What is so wrong about this goddamn world is how such an idiot can make it so far with his mockumentary.

It will air in Holland in March too and I'm sure we'll have the papers and news full of it. Luckily I've given papers and watching TV a big middlefinger long long ago, so I will miss that. I'm sure family and relatives will likely bring it up though.

I kinda wish we could just skip a month or two, maybe three. Hopefully the calm has returned and the damage done isn't too severe. But I honestly just don't know. If the estate won't do much anymore I just hope Taj has something really strong coming up and if all else fails hopefully some TV programs will analyze this mockumentary and also go into details about the two... that's probably too much to ask though.

 

[Glanni]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

"this film is not about michael" is the slogan of the year lol.

with saying that he admits 100% that its all about michael and money

 

[ozemouze]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Why are these people provided with this much platform? Why isn't there anyone in corporate media who feels it's their duty to hear the other side of story as well? This isn't just usual bias and sensationalism, this is complete madness.

 

[KOPV]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

question.. do we know when James was traveling with michael on the Bad tour - if his parents were traveling with.. or no? of course trolls are talking about how they traveled together without supervision.

 

[myosotis]

People like Reed lie to themselves as much as they lie about everything else. It's one big ego trip. He thinks he's going to win awards with this. Talk about self-delusion:

“I try to be a good journalist and a good filmmaker at the same time,” he told Variety. “And I am kind of maniacally fussy about factual accuracy, and the authenticity of the stories that I tell, but I also want to give them impact and reach, and I want to make them engrossing and engaging like movies are. I want to use all the armory of a moviemaker to tell true stories that I think is a good signature of my style on screen.”

I don't know why he deserves any air time.

Just for 'light relief', I looked to see what was playing on Channel 4 on Weds and Thursday night this week, in the forthcoming LN slots. Weds: 'Skint Britain'. Thurs 'Sleeping with the Far Right'.

In the latter, the documentary-maker selected a particular far right-wing male interviewee as being of interest, because 'He’s not a household name, but he’s someone who’s very connected to power players across the nationalist movement. He’s in regular contact with Dr David Duke, former leader of the KKK'.

On what the interviewee will get out of it:

Why do you think he agreed to it?
I think he hoped that it was going to be an opportunity to disseminate his beliefs on a large scale, a national broadcast platform for him to preach on. I think anybody who has political aspirations, or anyone who has previously been in politics, probably sees it as a great moment to reach some new ears.

The Ch4 interviewer was asked 'were you ever scared', and replied: ' I told him I was worried that he might disseminate false information about me on the internet that was false, but that could be damaging.'

So it seems to be a Channel 4 characteristic that they aim to interview extreme people who are prepared to lie in the media (as long as they don't lie about Channel 4 staff).
Says it all about Channel 4, really. It's just 'TV' to them. Never mind people's lives.

https://www.channel4.com/press/news/sleeping-far-right-interview-alice-levine

 

[ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

During the Days of "Leaving Neverland"
Young fans "Returning to Neverland" on a beautiful sunny day:

I love the video!

 

[christy]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

It's about time to stem the bleeding...enuff is enuff...
The estate should hire TSCM - the "facts fountain" & the bestPR firm
on the planet to fight this! Pronto!
A couple of letters for rebuttal and rehashing positive articles ain't cutting it
Big guns, mega celebrities who have rooted for Michael during the worst of times in 2005
should come outta the woodwork backing him now...
# me too movement's too controversial no one should touch it with a ten foot pole

 

[Staffordshire Bullterrier]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

It's about time to stem the bleeding...enuff is enuff...
The estate should hire TSCM - the "facts fountain" & the bestPR firm
on the planet to fight this! Pronto!
A couple of letters for rebuttal and rehashing positive articles ain't cutting it
Big guns, mega celebrities who have rooted for Michael during the worst of times in 2005
should come outta the woodwork backing him now...
# me too movement's too controversial no one should touch it with a ten foot pole

Maybe these celebrities aren't yet aware of what a shitstorm this likely is going to be. Remember that it hasn't been aired on HBO yet and I don't know how much it has been covered at all on decent channels and news programs in the US. It's not on the level of 2005 yet.

Still though, yeah I wish we'd see some big name celebrities that knew him, that spoke fondly of him after his passing to come with some support on Twitter. Beyonce, Whoopy Goldberg, Akon, Chris Tucker and so on. It's absolutely possible that they don't find this worth their time because they don't believe it and are sick of it, but still..why has it only been fans so far and a few people that knew him but not much else?

Also, his own family. Taj has been very active but what about Janet? I don't know if she's a active social media user but some messages of support would be real nice, especially since she worked with that piece of trash Wade. Jermaine did say that the Jackson way has always been that they don't meddle in each other's controversies and what not, but that this couldn't keep going on. And I wouldn't call this just a controversy anyway, I'd call it a conspiracy to bring MJ and his legacy down forever. I guess they all have their reasons for not getting into this. But I can't deny that i find it disappointing.

 

[1nn5]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

What a horrible nightmare!!!
I hope that the Avisos don't really get the idea now to come forward.
Cause I guess they would again see the money signs and repeate their lies in better takes.
They have to fear much more consiquences then Jordan Chandler when they whould come forward to tell the truth.
Remeber that Ray Chandler saw the chance to sell a book during the 2003-05 Allegationcase.
Something like this can happen nlw again.
Poor Michael... 😭

I think they are in obligation to not speak about the case

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

"this film is not about michael" is the slogan of the year lol.

with saying that he admits 100% that its all about michael and money

Exactly. They are so pathetic. Its like saying im not a racist but.....

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Why are these people provided with this much platform? Why isn't there anyone in corporate media who feels it's their duty to hear the other side of story as well? This isn't just usual bias and sensationalism, this is complete madness.

Its always been the same for the last 30 years.the media have always hated his guts. Now they see this as their chance to finally destroy him .hes not here to fight and the estate are as useful as a chocolate teapot.they have been waiting for someone to come along since 09 and nows their chance.

 

[ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

"this film is not about michael" is the slogan of the year lol.

with saying that he admits 100% that its all about michael and money

Yeah its not really a film about Michael cause the storys are horrible fairytales.
But its a film about using Michael for careersucess and getting so much money out of him as possible
Everthings works very well for Reed W&J.
More and more countrys wanna air this shit!

 

[marc_vivien]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

It's about time to stem the bleeding...enuff is enuff...
The estate should hire TSCM - the "facts fountain" & the bestPR firm
on the planet to fight this! Pronto!
A couple of letters for rebuttal and rehashing positive articles ain't cutting it
Big guns, mega celebrities who have rooted for Michael during the worst of times in 2005
should come outta the woodwork backing him now...
# me too movement's too controversial no one should touch it with a ten foot pole

You can voice your opinion to alicia@mjonlineteam.com

 

[Staffordshire Bullterrier]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Its always been the same for the last 30 years.the media have always hated his guts. Now they see this as their chance to finally destroy him .hes not here to fight and the estate are as useful as a chocolate teapot.they have been waiting for someone to come along since 09 and nows their chance.

Absolutely!

When he was acquitted they couldn't do anything except for reporting on that simple fact but before the verdict had come in they were salivating of the thought that he was gonna get thrown behind bars.

When he passed away the media acted as if it was so terrible, how we lost a legend, and what not, but now see their true intentions again. It's very telling how since the news appeared of Sundance we have had maybe one or two (Forbes) sources that were willing to publish something that was actually factual and the rest was just publishing nothing but slander really.

Actual decent and good media sources would try to report the truth, find out what's what, be objective and professional. But no, it's MJ and they want to destroy him. 100% a conspiracy. I'm afraid we're gonna see very few positive things about MJ for a while now, if at all.

 

[AliCat]

Maureen Dowd is a writer and not too long ago she wrote about Uma Thurman's #metoo movement against Harvey Weinstein. Maureen Dowd now has written praising "Leaving Neverland" and her hatred of Michael Jackson, in the New York Times.

Here's what Heidi Stevens, who wrote an article for the Chicago Tribune had to say about Maureen Dowd's interview with Uma Thurman. The problem with Maureen Dowd's Uma Thurman column, and why it matters...It reads like a Gillian Flynn novel. I found myself reading and re-reading for clues to piece together, rather than reading for a more complete understanding of the sort of sexual harassment and assault we need to be discussing and combating.

As writer Anne Helen Petersen points out in a critique headlined “Uma deserves better,” the lack of clarity leaves too much room for speculation and, possibly, disbelief.

“Which isn't to say that Thurman should have been forced to detail what happened — if she was able to in the first place,” Peterson writes. “This is a place when the journalist and her editors make a call: what does this narrative do? Does the inability to report it with accuracy actually call the subject's authority — on her own experience — into question? Does it transform a piece that's intended to allow a victim of sexual harassment and abuse to tell her story into one that invites readers to doubt her?”

To be clear, I believe Thurman. I’m not looking for more details so I can determine whether she’s credible. I’m looking for more details so I can understand what she endured and how it fits into a pattern of alleged abuse.

As Peterson writes: “Good reporters don’t ignore the inconvenient or contradictory parts of a subject’s interview; they dig deeper into them. That’s not what seems to be happening in this Thurman story. Rather, Dowd veers into a part of the narrative that Thurman can’t or won’t disclose, and allows the ambiguity to remain in a way that’s at once titillating and open to personal interpretation: two things reporting on sexual assault should never do.”

It’s important to tell these stories, and it’s important to tell them correctly.

I’m not harping on Dowd for the sake of harping. I’m jumping into this discussion because if #MeToo is going to be the wrecking ball that takes down a toxic structure, we need to hear survivors’ stories. And we don’t need them turned into artful, plot-twisty narratives.

We don’t need them to titillate. We need them to illuminate, so we can get to work on effecting change.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/life...ens-monday-uma-thurman-me-too-0205-story.html

Yes...the lack of clarity leaves too much room for speculation, and possibly, disbelief. Maureen Dowd is once again not digging deeper. She likes to titillate and allow the reader to personal interpretation, which you do not do when reporting on sexual assault. You tell the stories correctly. We don't need to turn a survivor's story into an artful, plot-twisty narrative. Maureen Dowd loves to write with a narrative on titillation. She is loopy in her writing of facts!

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Shes already been called out. She has a history.

 

[WildStyle]

Re: Sundance Festival 2019 - Controversial MJ Documentary "Leaving Neverland"

Funny how reed doesnt mention about how robson tried to get chandler involved in the lawsuit.wasnt that when they were trying to get lilly etc. And docs were filed. Reed only wants you to know his "truth"

He probably doesn't even know about that with his great investigative "journalism". "They're just so damn believable." Us crazy MJ fans with our factual court documents.