Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

1nn5

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2014
Messages
1,038
Points
48
Do anyone knows how to contact Ryan White family ?
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
It's even worse than that. Wade, his sister and his wife talked about being at a dinner at Neverland during the trial with his family and Michael's family. Wade talks about Paris trying to get Michael's attention and Michael just being so far gone that "he wasn't there". He said seeing his kids with their Dad in that state gave him even more strength to "save" Michael. His sister and wife both go along with this story in their interviews. Only problem is... Taj was at that dinner and he revealed that it happened AFTER Wade testified. I'm waiting for Taj to see the whole documentary. He has only seen clips.

I'm just confused now. Wade claims he was saving Michael, so he knew the public wouldn't understand the relationship he claims they had, so he knew it was not right. But he wants the people to believe he didn't see it as wrong back then in 2005, when he was in his twenties? And then even in his thirties he still thought it was normal until he was rejected by the estate for Cirque and then all of a sudden realized it was abuse.

How do viewers, some viewers of LN take that at face value? How can anyone fall for that? But do they cover that at all in LN, that he still thought it was normal in his twenties and thirties?
 

mjchris

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
3,959
Points
48
Smh these stupid assholes
813739e53a9029a65ffbd7b655582d1b.jpg

thanks for that post. i have watched it yesterday. havent realized that.
she says she was happy when Michael died. But the problem is then, how can she be happy about his death when she doesnt know at that time about the claimed abuse? haha lol. Idiots.
But its very very insane to say something like that in a tv special. Never saw something like that. Such a hate, and laughing about that. Pure devilish, weird and insane. You can clearly see the brutal hate she has.
So to everyone. Dont think about what they are saying. Now its proven that everything in this shit special are lies.
 

Lightbringer

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
807
Points
18
I'm just confused now. Wade claims he was saving Michael, so he knew the public wouldn't understand the relationship he claims they had, so he knew it was not right. But he wants the people to believe he didn't see it as wrong back then in 2005, when he was in his twenties? And then even in his thirties he still thought it was normal until he was rejected by the estate for Cirque and then all of a sudden realized it was abuse.

How do viewers, some viewers of LN take that at face value? How can anyone fall for that? But do they cover that at all in LN, that he still thought it was normal in his twenties and thirties?

Wade says in the film that at age 12 he begun feeling uncomfortable with some of the sexual things Michael did to him and tried to "change the subject." Yet the abused continued for 2 more years after that. I dont really understand why he says that in the film...
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
Ha interesting I found a comment from a well known MJ hater with the User Name "Anon Emous" who admits in one comment that he "get paid to spred the truth".

Its under this video under the pinned comment.
You must scroll a little bit:
https://youtu.be/FJmUdkfHOVM

I always had the imagination that there are some very busy influncer under every MJ video in these days active in the comment section.
Maybe we know now why they are so busy.
 

MJJ2theMAX

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
673
Points
0
Galactus123;4246177 said:
I'm thinking about sending an email to Yle that is going to air the documentary here in Finland. I'm not sure what to write. What things should I include?

Do it!

I’d just keep it short and say why it’s unethical and that you expected more from the Chanel. You could use parts of the SCLC letter. Many people have also posted their letters on this thread or started new threads so you could look there.

Personally I was so indecisive about what to write I realised I should should stop thinking and just send something. Something short to the point is much better than nothing
 

Lightbringer

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
807
Points
18
thanks for that post. i have watched it yesterday. havent realized that.
she says she was happy when Michael died. But the problem is then, how can she be happy about his death when she doesnt know at that time about the claimed abuse? haha lol. Idiots.
But its very very insane to say something like that in a tv special. Never saw something like that. Such a hate, and laughing about that. Pure devilish, weird and insane. You can clearly see the brutal hate she has.
So to everyone. Dont think about what they are saying. Now its proven that everything in this shit special are lies.

Unfortunately Razor has gotten that wrong.

I will quote Lovepeace from earlier today. I assume that Safechuck sad something like "Michael was a bad man" after the 2005 NOT GUILTY verdict if I am not mistaken. And the mother never asked why he said that. But to laugh and dance when MJ dies, Safechuck must have told her more in detail, but thats not explained in his deposition, maybe becase it would be hard to explain why the mother would agree to not do anything about a pedo on the lose!!!

Does anyone know the original source for this is? We cant have it his way speculating.

He did not deny in 2005 that there was no abuse, he was not required to testify at that time and anyway he says that he didnt want defend Michael in 2005.
When he denied the abuse was in 1993 in a sign document when he was still a child, so in the eyes of the people this is not very valid because it was a child and it is known that the victims of abuse do not process the abuse until an average of 20 years later.
so in this case he could be hiding it then in 1993.
in 2005, however, he did not defend michael, nor years before. he lost contact with michael in 96 and never came out to defend it publicly after that, he simply retired from public life and in his lawsuit says that in 2005 michael personally called him several times to "supposedly" make sure everything went well between them and that did not give him away, and that was when he "insinuated" his mother that something was wrong with Michael when he was a child without going into details or naming the word abuse, but his mother as a mother seemed to understand that something it was good between michael and him, but without knowing the magnitude of what had happened because he did not give more details or talk more about the subject.
There he was already 26 years old, so his mother knew that something was wrong but I respect his son in the decision to remain silent because he was already an adult.
 
Last edited:

Lovepeace1

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
96
Points
0
thanks for that post. i have watched it yesterday. havent realized that.
she says she was happy when Michael died. But the problem is then, how can she be happy about his death when she doesnt know at that time about the claimed abuse? haha lol. Idiots.
But its very very insane to say something like that in a tv special. Never saw something like that. Such a hate, and laughing about that. Pure devilish, weird and insane. You can clearly see the brutal hate she has.
So to everyone. Dont think about what they are saying. Now its proven that everything in this shit special are lies.

razorfist did not read the safehuck lawsuit well.
in the safechucks lawsuit is explained that Safechuck told his mother in 2005 that Michael had not acted well with him when he was a child, but without giving details of what happened because he was not even prepared to tell anyone.
so he did not tell more details to his mother anymore , he made him promise that she would not say anything. his mother did not know exactly what had happened but due to the reaction of his son and the 2005 trial, he imagined it or had suspicions. So that's why she says that in 2009 I dance, because she knew something had happened since 2005.
They must read the demands of everything. there he puts everything.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
I am very disapointed on Corey!!!
I wished he had left it by his twitter posts and not go on national Television!
Now he takes advantage of the situation to bring attention to his own case and his own documentary.
I hope that he didn't plan that the MJ accusations should be part of it now.
This whould be a big backstep!
 

Lightbringer

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
807
Points
18
razorfist did not read the safehuck lawsuit well.
in the safechucks lawsuit is explained that Safechuck told his mother in 2005 that Michael had not acted well with him when he was a child, but without giving details of what happened because he was not even prepared to tell anyone.
so he did not tell more details to his mother anymore , he made him promise that she would not say anything. his mother did not know exactly what had happened but due to the reaction of his son and the 2005 trial, he imagined it or had suspicions. So that's why she says that in 2009 I dance, because she knew something had happened since 2005.
They must read the demands of everything. there he puts everything.

Here is it is:


 

Lovepeace1

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
96
Points
0
Yes he did.

in which he participate?
the first time I hear it, I think you told it before.
James had his last association with Michael in 96-97. in its demand it also specifies this, according to this I do not participate in anything else with the after that date. Where have you seen that?
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2004
Messages
5,463
Points
63
Lovepeace1;4246195 said:
razorfist did not read the safehuck lawsuit well.
in the safechucks lawsuit is explained that Safechuck told his mother in 2005 that Michael had not acted well with him when he was a child, but without giving details of what happened because he was not even prepared to tell anyone.
so he did not tell more details to his mother anymore , he made him promise that she would not say anything. his mother did not know exactly what had happened but due to the reaction of his son and the 2005 trial, he imagined it or had suspicions. So that's why she says that in 2009 I dance, because she knew something had happened since 2005.
They must read the demands of everything. there he puts everything.

Of all the things being claimed so far I find this the most odd one. I can't take Wade serious at all and neither Safechuck with everything else. But if he did say that in 2005, one has to wonder why he called him a bad man. Since I have zero doubts about Michael I'm not even gonna entertain the possibility that it had to do with abuse. Maybe MJ stopped contacting him and that Safechuck felt neglected? Of coooouuuurse the mother is now making it fit the narrative of abuse, all too convenient for her.

MJJ2theMAX;4246196 said:
But didn’t Safechuck help with This is It?

La74;4246198 said:
Yes he did.

For sure? On what did he help out? He wasn't shown during the TII doc we got, was he?
 

Strange Blues

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
830
Points
0
Location
Finland
I'm thinking about sending an email to Yle that is going to air the documentary here in Finland. I'm not sure what to write. What things should I include?

As a Finn myself, I find it appalling that a public broadcasting company that gets a large chunk of its funding from regular taxpayers would broadcast a mockumentary with no basis in facts whatsoever. You could perhaps expect this from a TV station like Frii, Hero, Channel 5 or Fox even, but for Yle to take part in this is just ridiculous. Id also point out that these two accusers have not been truthful before but this documentary does nothing to actually _investigate_ the claims made by Safechuck and Robson. As such, it has no public interest value and would only have the effect of placing Yle on the same level as the worst tabloids in the country.
 

Lightbringer

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
807
Points
18
Of all the things being claimed so far I find this the most odd one. I can't take Wade serious at all and neither Safechuck with everything else. But if he did say that in 2005, one has to wonder why he called him a bad man. Since I have zero doubts about Michael I'm not even gonna entertain the possibility that it had to do with abuse. Maybe MJ stopped contacting him and that Safechuck felt neglected? Of coooouuuurse the mother is now making it fit the narrative of abuse, all too convenient for her.

We can stop speculating now - Safechuck said to his mom in 2005 he was abused, its in his civil lawsuit.

Did Razorfizt delete his tweet? NO, its still up.

Here is it is:


 
Last edited:

MJLife

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2019
Messages
17
Points
0
A few random musings:

* Feeling a lot better. The doc is of course not a good look for MJ, but this could have been much bigger (and was anticipated to be), but it's fairly mute. The US ratings are a pitiful given the hype; and all that the entire fiasco has done (on a significant level) is energize both the supporters and haters.

* We've all wondered what the Estate's strategy is and many have bemoaned the seeming lack of one. But it feels like while a "wait and see" approach was employed by them, I also feel they've deliberately not gone guns blazing as it'd only bring more attention to the doc. Truly sinking the doc is to limit its reach, appeal, and commercial viability. Which leads me to...

* While LN should never be seen as positive, there is one somewhat positive take-away. It tanking actually limits the feasibility of another such doc. The public have proven that they're tired of the "MJ is bad" narrative. Even those that entertain it realize that there's an eternal brick wall in him having passed away. Innocent as WE know he is, for those who believe otherwise, there's actually no means of "justice" (as they see it) being carried out. Which just doesn't see there be a mental pay-off to still be so invested in being anti-MJ. In simplest terms, the media game is a money game and if "MJ is bad" as a sellable narrative can't command big ad bucks (because there's no guaranteed audience e.g. LN) then there could well be a "what's the point" approach from other networks moving forward.

* We're not out of the woods just yet, though. While the ratings were wack, certain sites and stations (Variety, Deadline, Billboard, CBS especially) are milking it because THEY are the ones most likely reaping the rewards of extra views and clicks. Media sensationalism will never go out of fashion. It's literally a science. So I guess we can expect to have to keep fighting back through this month and maybe even next as it rolls out internationally. Especially in the UK, as the press there have a penchant for doing the MOST when it comes to Michael and the doc airs there today and tomorrow.

Hoping there's more push back from Taj, Piers, whoever over next few days to combat that. As, with UK being one of the western world's strongest media markets, any blowback there could easily become US headline fodder (like the rumored radio bans). Not to minimize other regions, but I wouldn't be too alarmed by the "sold to 130 markets"thing if key media markets didn't give it the hype it wanted. There tends to be a domino effect with most things that happen in pop culture in the US and UK that sees the rest of the world follow suit. At least Pop culturally speaking.

* Lastly, unless there's a drastic change of energy, it feels like the worst may have passed us. And with R. Kelly (deservedly) back in the spotlight after his shocking interview and another scandal from some celeb undoubtedly around the corner (there always is!), hopefully the proverbial finish line of this nightmare is now in sight?

I have faith that the Estate know this too. The new Broadway show kicks off next year, so I'm sure they have a plan for now and more longterm so as for "this" to not even be a thing for their promo efforts come 2020. All emotion aside, MJ is a billion-dollar business and one that has to keep earning. So I'm trusting that it won't be allowed to wither, when the one thing that powers it is public embrace of the MJ brand. No matter how testing the climate.
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
1,676
Points
0
Ok.... there seams to be more familys who are planing to come forward for Michael.

I found this comment under the same video I posted before from a woman with the username " Bernadette Baily":

"Before the first charges were ever made, I had an encounter with Michael that lasted until his death. I was a single mom with two sons ages 10 and 14. I regret to this day of what I went through. I believe he knew I knew him and what he was about to go through and we kept a powerful spiritual bond. Throughout my entire childhood until he died, I knew he was an angel of God and so was I. I know he's in heaven! I thank God for that spiritual encounter with him that lasted for 15 years, which was frustrating, but when God joins in spirit together to help, no one can break that bind, and I tried. I miss him being alive on Earth because of the light God gave him to shine his star on Earth. I hope the details of the trial, evidence, other people like me who knew him and have kept quiet will speak up in his defense or support... let all truth come out to put this matter to rest I'm starting with myself and what I knew about him and his family.?"
 
Last edited:

KOPV

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
12,968
Points
63
wait so is it true or not true that James told his mom in 2005 and told her not to say anything?On a good news bases, I told 2 of my friends this Michael Jackson sh** is stressing me out and they responded "What Michael Jackson sh**?"
 

Lightbringer

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2003
Messages
807
Points
18
wait so is it true or not true that James told his mom in 2005 and told her not to say anything?

Its in his civil lawsuit. Safechuck made his mother not tell Michael that he had told her about the abuse. So according to Safechuck MJ phoned the mother and she did not say that she had been made aware Michael had molested her son!

Here is it is:


 

wednesday

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
550
Points
0

Cory Feldman being POLITICAL CORRECT now, how suprising.

Well, that was bumpy! I bet Cory would not have been given airtime if he had pronounced that he was going to defend Michael unequivocally. To his credit, he did say that he did not recognize Michael when watching LN from his own experiences with him.

Stay strong, Cory! You were on the right side of history. Don't waver now!
 

Ramona122003

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,447
Points
0
Wade is a sociopath and he is very capable of lying. As TSCM pointed out, he claimed he testified for mj because he was afraid mi's kids will lose their dad. So he did the unthinkable to you, but you were ok with him raising kids, you were worried that his kids would lose him he who raped you? what kind of a ****ed up excuse is this?!


He isn't a very capable lair. He wasn't believed in 2013 where he was at his strongest and Michael was only dead for four years. The only people who really believed him are the usual suspects. Most saw Wade as a rat and that haven't changed even with this documentary.

I honestly think some of you give Wade and Reed way more credit than they deserved. They did some damage, but given how they pushed this, their documentary went over like a wet fart and people are more interested in R Kelly.
 
Last edited:
Top