Latest on MJJC

Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

Guys, I really appreciate the fact that the fans are trying to discredit every statement the two liars made in that documentary. I think it is much easier in case of Wade than in the case of Safechuck simply because Wade is an arrogant who thinks he outsmart everyone so he said and did things that were not so smart plus the estate had the chance to compel him to hand over some of his emails during discovery, while safe chuck was away from the lime light, worked on his story for 8 to 9 months before he filed his lawsuit having in mind that the most important thing for his case to survive in a court was to present a story that gets him around the status of limitation.

Showing that he mixed dates or events is good but realistically speaking no one would have remembered in detail where and when exactly abuse took place. The victims remember the abuse, but no one really expect them to remember dates and places especially for someone who claims he was abused in all continents! The fact that after 28 years he is still able to remember the places and most of the events mean he made great efforts in building his case because after 30 years no one expect you to remember much. My tutor molested me 20 years ago. I hardly remember any dates not even the years when it happened. never spoke about it to anyone also although he was a known predator.


We cannot refute that a sexual act did happen because indeed we were not there and indeed they spent considerable time with MJ. For some people, that's all they need to accept these two were abused. For the critical minds, that's definitely not enough. Their credibility is of great importance given the circumstances. To attack their credibility we need to show that these two lie even when they do not have to. For example, the ten-second video of Safechuck trying to suppress his laugh when Oprah asked him about the wedding, not only he was about to burst into a laugh but he realised that his true reaction was inappropriate and he tried his best to show his sad face. That shows a willingness on his part to show a reaction (sad face) that was not his real reactions (laughs). Why did he do that? We do laugh sometime when we are in an awkward situation. but why did he feel he should put the sad face? why did he feel he needed to fake his reaction? How many times did he fake his reactions? which leads us to the important question. Is he indeed traumatised or acting traumatised because I am finding it extremely hard to believe people could not see how hard he was trying to look traumatised. Why not be natural? why Safechuck is using that sad face ALL THE TIME? He acts like he was raped yesterday? why is he FAKING his emotions if he is indeed a victim? Because one needs to be stupid and blind not to have noticed that his sad face is an ACT. And safe chuck 'realised' MJ was an evil man as early as 2005, so why is he still struggling with his emotions toward him? I mean if it were not for the 'love' towards mj and the claim that he was under mi's control even after mi's death, safe chuck has no chance of filing a lawsuit against the estate. That's something everyone needs to keep in mind. The whole i was in love with him and did not realise i was abuse was their excuse to explain their previous contradictions AND MOST IMPORTANTLY to get around the status of limitation. If he says anything else he is tossed. and the judge did not believe him. Simply he did not believe that if indeed he told his mom in 2005 MJ was evil that it took him until Wade was on tv to realise he was abused. Yes, their cases was thrown out based on status of limitation but if the judge believed what they have said in the documentary, then they would have been able to go around the status of limitation BUT HE DID NOT BELIEVE IT. Unlike the media he scrutinised their statements and found them not believable. Which takes us back to the question WHY DID THEY LIE AFTER MJ'S CORPSE LOST CONTROL OVER THEM?

Why did Robson lie so much in his statement to the judge that the judge had to throw it out completely? Why he resorted to lie BIG LIES after he supposedly realised he was abused and MJ had no control over him? BTW, why did he file his lawsuit under seal if he INDEED wanted to be heard finally? why was he lying about that to Oprah?

Yesterday, I re read Jordan Chanlder's interview with Dr Richard Gardner, found Jordan very very rehearsed and there is absolutely no evidence of him being a victim of sexual abuse. His answers were just very scripted. Anyone could have built on what the Chandlers did in 1993. MJ's profile as a paedophile was written by Victor Gutierrez and all other accusers just tried to create their own version of the profile Victor created that's why the stories are similar and people think there is a modus operandi. B all of them have been caught lying. ALL OF THEM. When one sees the bigger picture, the context, one will realise that this is a big lie based on some truth. MJ's story with tens of other families was identical except for the sexual abuse. That's when you know what part is the truth and what part is the lie.
 
@ Soundmind
Take a look in this thread and watch the videos there.
You can find there some big credibilty issues and big lies exposed.

https://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/142691-The-Leaving-Neverland-Lie-Collection-(No-comments)

I would love it when members would fill it with more content.

One big credibilty issues (which is not there) is for me that when they decribeing the sexual acts so detailed that both didn't mention MJs virtilego.
I am not victim but I think this would be one thing somebody like wade robson who has sawn MJ becoming a werwolf in thriller whould not forget and would describe cause it would scare every 7 til 12 year old kid intensly and make him feel very unconfortable perdorming sexual acts on that person.
But they say it was all no problem performing the sexual acts on that body, it was joy and they wanna do it voluntary with no coercion over 100 times .

What do you say to this as a victim?

This is maybe an intresting point in all accusations towards Michael.

They all say there was no violance and no coericion they did everthing voluntary!
Seames that they could not bring it over their hearts to invant that MJ used violance.
I remember Wade repeated Matt Lawer in 2013 that MJ forced him to perform sexual acts on him.
But I don't know if he said this later too.
 
Last edited:
There's now this older lady on Twitter saying "yeah but I looked at all these extra details." she then goes on to mention Chandler, Arvizo and the housekeeper. If they are all lying too....

The extra details, a hahahaha. Oh my. See, some people just are dead set on believing he was a p. Acting like they did actual research when they didn't do shit.
 
Last edited:
ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona said:
@ Soundmind
Take a look in this thread and watch the videos there.
You can find there some big credibilty issues and big lies exposed.

https://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/142691-The-Leaving-Neverland-Lie-Collection-(No-comments)

I would love it when members would fill it with more content.

One big credibilty issues (which is not there) is for me that when they decribeing the sexual acts so detailed that both didn't mention MJs virtilego.
I am not victim but I think this would be one thing somebody like wade robson who has sawn MJ becoming a werwolf in thriller whould not forget and would describe cause it would scare every 7 til 12 year old kid intensly and make him feel very unconfortable perdorming sexual acts on that person.
But they say it was all no problem performing the sexual acts on that body, it was joy and they wanna do it voluntary with no coercion over 100 times .

What do you say to this as a victim?

This is maybe an intresting point in all accusations towards Michael.

The all say there was no violance and no coericion they did everthing voluntary!
Seames that they could not bring it over their hearts to invant that MJ used violance.
I remember Wade repeated Matt Lawer in 2013 that MJ forced him to perform sexual acts on him.
But I don't know if he said this later too.
Click to expand...

In my case it was only touches. He was not violent at all. I still remember his face and his actions, how I felt as if everything happened yesterday. I don't remember how many times nor do I remember when it took place. all i remember it was during middle school. All I know I hated his guts, he was so disgusting and whenever I saw him I wanted to avoid him at all costs. There was no chance in hell I would have praised him nor defended him and what he actually did was way WAY LESS than what Wade and Safecuck claimed MJ did to them. Look at the pictures of Safechuck with mj how care free and happy he was. He was over the moon and look at his face now. When he was being assaulted he was so happy but now after 28 years he is so traumatised he face is always sad and acting like his trauma started yesterday. Seriously, how can people not recognise how fake he is?!

As for your question why they do not portray MJ as a violent abuser. Because Victor's profile made him to be a lover and a romantic partner. They all created their stories around that portray of MJ even the Chandlers. because Victor used the innocent child-like things MJ did to build his profile and that's why the stories are very much convincing and believable. Because the lies are added to a real true story and built around MJ's real personality.

Victor built his profile over years and years of investigating MJ, of going after previous employees and old acquaintances. We have evidence he was after MJ since 1985. That's 8 years of work by the time he approached the Chandlers.
 
Last edited:
ManBehindTheMirrOr - Dona;4249817 said:
We have searching for an analysis of Michael Jackson from a Psychlogist?

Here we have one from the German Psycholgyst Dieter Speck, an expert for sexual abuse.
He has analysis Michael in 2003 and spoke out about it in a show which were shown in German Television after the airing of "Living with Michael Jackson".

Thanks on the channel Mean Machine for uploading it.
The video has english subtitles.

[video=youtube;aSYTnkuC53s]https://youtu.be/aSYTnkuC53s[/video]

Please share it!
Click to expand...
Great find! It's actually gives a realistic and convincing explanation (very clear and to the point, not obscure psychobabble) that IMO even some of the general public could accept if presented with.

It's a bit ironic, having this film out there accusing MJ with much more serious crimes, but for the general public it's still the "but he sleeps with kids" argument is the ultimate (most of them obviously aren't even familiar with R&S's claims), so this seems to be the one of the MOST important thing to clarify/debunk.

That's why I think it would be a good idea to make a SHORT video answering it, including the above analysis, Bashir admitting he didn't see anything inappropriate and maybe Mac's interview with King (I guess) when he talks about the size of MJ's bedroom. The general public won't watch a 15+ min. video about R&S's lies (especially as they aren't even aware of them), but may watch a short clip focusing on what they find the most dubious about MJ.

Edited to add this:
What about Jackson’s sharing his bedroom with unrelated children?
https://themichaeljacksonallegation...-sharing-his-bedroom-with-unrelated-children/
So there's already a detailed writing dealing with this issue (including source videos), but it shoud be made into a straightforward short video so people could refer to it as a quick response.
 
Last edited:
When I re read yesterday Jordan's interview with Dr Richard Gardner. I noticed that he told Dr Gardner what June testified to in 2005 that mj cried so much when June told Jordan not to sleep again in MJ's bed, he went and confronted her, told her she needed to trust him and allow Jordan to sleep in his bed, guilt tripped her to do so and that's why she allowed him to continue to sleep with mj overnight going forward. I have found this to be a completely fabricated story. In my opinion any mom in her right mind would have taken her child and run away if a middle aged man came to her crying for not allowing him to sleep in bed with her child. the fact that he was CRYING and hysterical about that should have been an enough of a red flag if one is to believe that story was trustful. Even if we are to believe he groomed the families and did abuse the kids, it would have been more believable to let the children (who were already mad in love with him and looking forward to "have sex with him" (according to Reed), beg their parents to allow them to stay with him rather than he actually asking the parents. As a parent i would not have allowed it but I could understand how a parent would have allowed their very pushy child who desperately wanted to stay with someone as likeable as mj to sleep in his room, but I do not believe for a moment a mother did not feel there was something very wrong with mj crying to sleep in bed with her son. Mind you Jordan had a very very selective memory during his interview with Dr Gardner, he remembered exactly what MJ told his mother following that incident and recalled MJ's conversation with her although in many instances he could not remember his own conversations with mj (he only remembered those related to abuse nothing else. His answers to almost everything else "I don't know", "I don't remember" was consciously trying not to deviate from Evan's script. Jordan was heavily rehearsed during that interview and completely unbelievable. Narrating a story he had memorised. No evidence of being a victim at all).

Joy did the same thing in the new documentary. She previously said that she was so upset at mj for not inviting her son to go on tour with him, that she considered it an emotional abuse of her son and cut all communications with mj for almost six months after that. now she claims he begged her to leave Wade with him for a year but she refused. Why her story has changed? You see the pattern with the Chandlers? They have created their stories around the Chandlers'.
 
Last edited:
Soundmind said:
As for your question why they do not portray MJ as a violent abuser. Because Victor's profile made him to be a lover and a romantic partner. They all created their stories around that portray of MJ even the Chandlers. because Victor used the innocent child-like things MJ did to build his profile and that's why the stories are very much convincing and believable. Because the lies are added to a real true story and built around MJ's real personality.

Victor built his profile over years and years of investigating MJ, of going after previous employees and old acquaintances. We have evidence he was after MJ since 1985. That's 8 years of work by the time he approached the Chandlers.
Click to expand...

Never thought about that, but it's a good question actually and your answer is very plausible, and if you see it that way it's even more obvious how easy it was to build other allegations around this (how I wish the mainstream media would pick up on the Gutierrez angle - and not just for the sake of MJ):

Soundmind said:
Yesterday, I re read Jordan Chanlder's interview with Dr Richard Gardner, found Jordan very very rehearsed and there is absolutely no evidence of him being a victim of sexual abuse. His answers were just very scripted. Anyone could have built on what the Chandlers did in 1993. MJ's profile as a paedophile was written by Victor Gutierrez and all other accusers just tried to create their own version of the profile Victor created that's why the stories are similar and people think there is a modus operandi. B all of them have been caught lying. ALL OF THEM. When one sees the bigger picture, the context, one will realise that this is a big lie based on some truth. MJ's story with tens of other families was identical except for the sexual abuse. That's when you know what part is the truth and what part is the lie.
Click to expand...

Other great observation:
Soundmind said:
For example, the ten-second video of Safechuck trying to suppress his laugh when Oprah asked him about the wedding, not only he was about to burst into a laugh but he realised that his true reaction was inappropriate and he tried his best to show his sad face. That shows a willingness on his part to show a reaction (sad face) that was not his real reactions (laughs). Why did he do that? We do laugh sometime when we are in an awkward situation. but why did he feel he should put the sad face? why did he feel he needed to fake his reaction?
Click to expand...

And sorry to hear about your experience! I hope you could overcome it.
 
ozemouze said:
And sorry to hear about your experience! I hope you could overcome it.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I did already. It was similar to what Blanca's son claimed but unlike me he needed 7 years of therapy to overcome the tickling. No wonder the jurors laughed at him.
 
Soundmind said:
And safe chuck 'realised' MJ was an evil man as early as 2005, so why is he still struggling with his emotions toward him?
. If he says anything else he is tossed. and the judge did not believe him.

Simply he did not believe that if indeed he told his mom in 2005 MJ was evil that it took him until Wade was on tv to realise he was abused.
Click to expand...

Safechuck's complaint does not say that MJ was 'evil'. He uses a (likely) TV programme quote that MJ 'was a bad man'. (My previous posts about 'The Twilight Zone- It's a good life' and links to 'Threatened' refer.)

However, since neither MJ nor his legal team would have contacted Safechuck about testifying in 2005 (because the judge had already ruled that Safechuck's testimony would not be relevant), plus the fact that the so -called threats amount to Safechuck being called a 'perjurer' by MJ's legal team for defending MJ in 1993, that whole section of Safechuck's complaint is clearly entirely fictional anyway.

I am very sorry to read that you were assaulted by a tutor - that must have been an appallng and horrendous experience.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">beautiful metaphor for humanity. this is why i’m trying to tell everyone to smoke and chill. you’re allowed to be concerned over injustices but violence and angry energy end with results similar to this picture. this is what you get for bein’ a snake. js <a href="https://t.co/YqBn550JSr">https://t.co/YqBn550JSr</a></p>&mdash; Paris-Michael K. J. (@ParisJackson) <a href="https://twitter.com/ParisJackson/status/1106754350506868737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">why are people just now realizing this ?</p>&mdash; Paris-Michael K. J. (@ParisJackson) <a href="https://twitter.com/ParisJackson/status/1106766728984330241?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">my father handled his trials and tribulations with grace, peace, and love. it’s a more effective way of life. i suggest we all take that as an example</p>&mdash; Paris-Michael K. J. (@ParisJackson) <a href="https://twitter.com/ParisJackson/status/1106766635111579648?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">“Mr. Jackson, she’s right there, you might as well say hello.” Stay tuned for our Season 5 launch ep with Bill ‘<a href="https://twitter.com/MJBODYGUARDS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@MJBodyguards</a>’ Whitfield to hear what they spoke about! The REAL MJ. Coming soon. J. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MichaelJackson?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MichaelJackson</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJFam?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJFam</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Moonwalkers?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Moonwalkers</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TheJacksons?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TheJacksons</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/JacksonFam?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#JacksonFam</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TheMJCastEp97?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TheMJCastEp97</a> <a href="https://t.co/hcWM7EMPSi">pic.twitter.com/hcWM7EMPSi</a></p>&mdash; The MJCast (@TheMJCast) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheMJCast/status/1106732143512674304?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Michael Jackson fan groups to sue accusers for 'sullying his memory' <a href="https://t.co/t0XKdWAFiD">https://t.co/t0XKdWAFiD</a></p>&mdash; andjustice4some (@andjustice4some) <a href="https://twitter.com/andjustice4some/status/1106738805279580160?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Michael Jackson's Estate has not only paid for Bubbles' care for the past 10 years, but also donated to expand the chimpanzee exhibits. <a href="https://t.co/KlJYN4DsAr">pic.twitter.com/KlJYN4DsAr</a></p>&mdash; andjustice4some (@andjustice4some) <a href="https://twitter.com/andjustice4some/status/1106679983064256513?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">15. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Yesterday my cousin visited Pelourinho (a neighborhood) in the Brazilian city of Salvador where Michael shot TDCAUS. Looks like Michael rules undisturbed &#129304;&#128536; Apparently, they actually renew the poster everytime it gets to worn out by the weather. <a href="https://t.co/ulH4vU7XhP">pic.twitter.com/ulH4vU7XhP</a></p>&mdash; Monica_RC79 (@Mj79Monica) <a href="https://twitter.com/Mj79Monica/status/1106572205855518722?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">15. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/CherylDiamond18?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@CherylDiamond18</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/tajjackson3?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@tajjackson3</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/BJackson82?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@BJackson82</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/Zigmanfreud?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@Zigmanfreud</a><br>A must watch. I love how these two incredible people FIGHT for Michael Jackson&#9996; <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MJInnocent?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MJInnocent</a><a href="https://t.co/PtA5oeMaXj">https://t.co/PtA5oeMaXj</a></p>&mdash; Efe Doguses (@EDoguses2013) <a href="https://twitter.com/EDoguses2013/status/1106744260693581826?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Part three, the big one. Wade Robson says: 'Every night I stayed with MJ, he abused me'. But emails show when he was writing a book he tried to shop about the abuse, he had to ask his mother about what they did the first time they visited Neverland... <a href="https://t.co/RtPw8g6KYq">https://t.co/RtPw8g6KYq</a></p>&mdash; Mike Smallcombe (@mikesmallcombe1) <a href="https://twitter.com/mikesmallcombe1/status/1106680317077798914?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">15. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This whole <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LeavingNeverland?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LeavingNeverland</a> situation isn't about Michael Jackson anymore. It's about the world we now live in. A world where people can say whatever the hell they want without evidence or fact, without caring about the consequence, and be paid for doing so. Appalling.</p>&mdash; Michael Howarth (@mjh_music) <a href="https://twitter.com/mjh_music/status/1106846939893649409?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="de"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">All those ‘attempts’ to mute Michael have proved fruitless! Number Ones raced up the charts in the U.K. from number 61 last week to Number 28 this week, its highest position in years! Michael isn’t going away and he won’t be silenced!!! ALEXA, PLAY MICHAEL JACKSON! &#128524; <a href="https://t.co/HpMa5cg7IA">pic.twitter.com/HpMa5cg7IA</a></p>&mdash; Pez Jax (@Pezjax) <a href="https://twitter.com/Pezjax/status/1106832201419812864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">16. März 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
I was so angry at mj when the documentary aired, and I did say to myself at best he brought it on himself, but now I have regained my senses. MJ was a very good man, A VERY GOOD MAN, who is still being taken advantage of by people who are the lowest of the low. Between Michael Jackson and James Safechuck, I believe Michael Jackson.
 
Soundmind said:
I was so angry at mj when the documentary aired, and I did say to myself at best he brought it on himself, but now I have regained my senses. MJ was a very good man, A VERY GOOD MAN, who is still being taken advantage of by people who are the lowest of the low. Between Michael Jackson and James Safechuck, I believe Michael Jackson.
Click to expand...

If truth be told,he did bring some of it on himself,still doesn't make him a bad person.

After 93 and when HIStory was released there were photos of him with kids and he said he wouldn't stop hanging about with them as he had done nothing wrong.

I applauded that at the time and in many ways,I still do but it wasn't the best decision when you take everything into account.

He was too trustworthy,probably even gullible and its been used against him most of his life.
 
I know this is off topic, but amidst all this, it has been announced that Janet is playing the Glastonbury festival this year. This will be the weekend around the 10 year anniversary. It will be interesting how she addresses the anniversary.
 
myosotis said:
Safechuck's complaint does not say that MJ was 'evil'. He uses a (likely) TV programme quote that MJ 'was a bad man'. (My previous posts about 'The Twilight Zone- It's a good life' and links to 'Threatened' refer.)

However, since neither MJ nor his legal team would have contacted Safechuck about testifying in 2005 (because the judge had already ruled that Safechuck's testimony would not be relevant), plus the fact that the so -called threats amount to Safechuck being called a 'perjurer' by MJ's legal team for defending MJ in 1993, that whole section of Safechuck's complaint is clearly entirely fictional anyway.

I am very sorry to read that you were assaulted by a tutor - that must have been an appallng and horrendous experience.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the 2005 call story. Certainly I don't believe for a minute MJ threatened him. He was upset at Casico for not taking the stand in 2005, but did he call him and threaten him? Never and Casico was actually much more crucial to his defence than Safechuck who was already being ruled a non-entity by the judge because no one actually claimed anything with regard to him. If anything the Safechucks could have been pissed at MJ for cutting ties with them and that's why they called him a bad man in 2005 if indeed they did. Roger Friedman made a living between 2000 and 2009 of writing articles about past associates of MJ who were cut off his life and how ungrateful he was to everyone who came into contact with him. We have seen that ALOT. He "dumped" them. But he dumped pretty everyone who he felt was bad news to him. He must have felt something wrong about them to have dumped them. That was his defence mechanism the infamous door slam. I have this mentality. Once I feel uneasy about someone they are out of my life with no explanation. I can relate to that and I understand him. He did not confront people. He preferred to run away. This theory is plausible if one considers what was revealed recently by an ex neverland employee that the safechuckes used to visit Neverland a lot but MJ chose not to be there when they were. God knows how angry they must have been to be dumped like that. Why he would do that? Maybe because they were asking for too much. Did he volunteer to send Safechuck to take film lessons? I bet not. James' mother already determined her son was going to be a movie star before they met mj. MJ had nothing to do with that dream of the Safechucks except that when he was asked to help he did, but I am sure there was a time when he felt he was being taken advantage of and started to distance himself. Those who doubt MJ's innocence need to look at the context and the bigger picture. They have twisted many things to fit their narrative but one can decipher the source of their resentment really. It was never the sexual abuse but the fact that they were 'dumped'. Did MJ dump them for no reason? It seems they were asking him for financial support until at least 1997. They claim he groomed them and then dumped them. But was it really the truth? If you continue to use me, am I not allowed to say enough is enough? They come across as very entitled. God knows what they were asking from him for him to avoid being with them at Neverland. This is very similar to Gavin Arviso. After the Bashir documentary, when MJ people asked Janet Arviso to participate in the rebuttal, she said "what we will get to do that?" When they told he MJ will be her children education and buy them an apartment. She said "only an apartment!". mind you in their version before the jurors, they claimed that Gavin was not molested before the basher documentary, so MJ was offering them an apartment although he did not abuse Gavin (according to their own statements). What does that tell you? He understood that anyone could turn on him and claim the worst. He understood that very well. I am sure he was terrified of the prospect that any of his old friends could have turned on him any minute.
 
Last edited:
Soundmind;4249934 said:
I don't believe the 2005 call story. Certainly I don't believe for a minute MJ threatened him. He was upset at Casico for not taking the stand in 2005, but did he call him and threaten him? Never and Casico was actually much more crucial to his defence than Safechuck who was already being ruled a non-entity by the judge because no one actually claimed anything with regard to him. If anything the Safechucks could have been pissed at MJ for cutting ties with them and that's why they called him a bad man in 2005 if indeed they did. Roger Friedman made a living between 2000 and 2009 of writing articles about past associates of MJ who were cut off his life and how grateful he was for everyone who came into contact with him. We have seen that ALOT. He "dumped" them. But he dumped pretty everyone who he felt was bad news to him. He must have felt something wrong about them to have dumped them. That was his defence mechanism the infamous door slam. I have this mentality. Once I feel uneasy about someone they are out of my life with no explanation. I can relate to that and I understand him. He did not confront people. He preferred to run away.
Click to expand...

Thank you...I've been reading more abut this, and it seems that Safechuck may have said on the 'Oprah' post-USA screening interview, that he told his mom that 'MJ was evil', which is a change from both versions of his legal claim, where he consistently uses the phrase 'bad man'.

This article is interesting. The writer is still very much 'on the fence' about Mj, but he does write this at the end of the article:

There were inconsistencies in some of the men&#8217;s answers to Winfrey that neutered some of her probing questions in a way that it would have been uncomfortable to address in &#8220;After Neverland&#8221;s setting. In one of the documentary&#8217;s most quietly fraught sequences, Safechuck describes Jackson calling his mother in the wake of the 2005 trial, seeking to get James to testify on his behalf. Safechuck explains that he told his mother Jackson was an evil man&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;and his mother vividly recalled how her son wept and begged her &#8220;Please don&#8217;t tell anyone.&#8221; During &#8220;After Neverland,&#8221; when Oprah asks Safechuck &#8220;When did you realize it was abuse?,&#8221; he explains that it was only after he saw Robson come out with his story that he realized the horror of what he&#8217;d endured. Safechuck is clear that his reason for not testifying in that case wasn&#8217;t due to him understanding he&#8217;d been abused. &#8220;I didn&#8217;t think of it as good or bad. It was that old wiring of sort of&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;if you&#8217;re caught, your life will be over,&#8221; Safechuck explained, reiterating that he only declined to testify out of self-preservation. &#8220;To be thrown into that would be too much to handle.&#8221; But that seems to contradict the timeline of 2005 events he and his mother described in the doc, when he states that &#8220;I told my mom then, that&#8230;he wasn&#8217;t a good person.&#8221; His mother adds that James told her &#8220;Michael&#8217;s an evil man.&#8221; It&#8217;s a confusing bit that warrants some clarity. What could&#8217;ve made Michael &#8220;evil&#8221; in 2005 were it not the abuse you&#8217;d endured? If you were revealing this trauma to your mother then, how does that connect to you not realizing what you&#8217;d experienced until 8 years later? It&#8217;s a question that gnawed at me. And it appears that none of the principles involved with Leaving Neverland have offered anything to answer such questions. These questions lingered long after I watched this documentary days prior to its broadcast.

In the aftermath of Leaving Neverland, I was surprised to see that so many others had no such questions&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;that this documentary was enough to convince them that we&#8217;d finally gotten the truth about Michael Jackson. A documentary that arrives on the heels of two men changing their stories, one superstar dead in the ground, and lawsuit appeals pending. We&#8217;re asked to believe everything, even with no clarification or corroboration in what&#8217;s being presented. I was shocked that this was all anyone needed. So many people seemed to retreat to the most naïve parts of their reasoning, while wielding sanctimony like a blazing sword&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;tearing into anyone who dared not jump to co-sign this project&#8217;s claims as a morally-defunct celebrity worshipper. Social media is often as politically performative as Capitol Hill and as reactively bloodthirsty as Game of Thrones.

For all of my experience as &#8220;a cultural commentator,&#8221; I am not much of a journalist. I have never felt comfortable calling myself one. Journalists are relentless fact-finders who probe and prod; journalists aren&#8217;t afraid of seeking an uncomfortable truth. In the age of contemporary pop culture commentary, there are so many incentives to pander&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;not the least of which is the immediacy with which the general public can heap scorn upon what you write. For many years, I believed that my commentary was me speaking truth to power; in actuality, I&#8217;d long been preaching to the choir for easy &#8220;amens.&#8221; I am not a journalist, but I&#8217;d never considered myself a coward. At least not before last week. There is a lot of loud silence in the wake of Leaving Neverland, and I myself likely would not have written this had I not written something so spineless as my initial take. It may sound like an over-inflated sense of self-importance, but I lost sleep wrestling with the idea that my words helped fan the flames of internet hysteria.

I am not ruminating on Michael Jackson&#8217;s guilt, but I am stating definitively that this particular project does not come close to confirming anything. Forget your preoccupation with a star&#8217;s legacy. Forget ideas about conspiracies designed to attack beloved Black figures. Such chatter has only become a din of misinformation and hyperbole; someone needs to be more thoughtful than that. Instead of making pronouncements, someone just needs to ask better questions. That&#8217;s what journalists do.

I am not a journalist, but if all I am good for, as a writer, is churning out Woke Nigga&#8482; rhetoric for white liberal consumption, then I have failed in every way that matters. Mastering the jargon and slogans was never my goal; they sit in service to larger ideas that will sometimes be messy and complicated in application. Many have consistently stated over the past few days that victimhood doesn&#8217;t always look the way you&#8217;d expect it to; well, standing up for victims won&#8217;t always look the way you expect it to, either. If you are of the mind that &#8220;regardless of whether these guys are right&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;I know he did something,&#8221; then I need for you, as Reed himself has intimated, to de-center Michael Jackson. Your need for cultural closure on a 25-year scandal may be blinding you to the fact that this particular saga isn&#8217;t going to end with a pedophile in handcuffs. Michael Jackson is dead and his legacy has already been tarnished. No&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;this story is going to most likely end with a lawsuit settlement that will no doubt look like a victory&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;now that the men who filed said lawsuit have the visibility and push of public opinion behind them. I don&#8217;t know how anyone&#8217;s idea of justice can include persons possibly exploiting abuse survivors and an entire movement to support victims, then getting a huge payday for it. That&#8217;s why questions can&#8217;t be shuttered for the sake of pseudo-empathy. Fighting for the oppressed should never require weaponized naiveté. I don&#8217;t know when that has ever helped anyone.

Some will read this and be greatly disappointed in me for writing it. That&#8217;s unfortunate and I hate that we&#8217;ve come to this as our &#8220;all or nothing&#8221; reality. But I don&#8217;t yell &#8220;Fire!&#8221; in a crowded room&#8202;&#8212;&#8202;and I don&#8217;t feel guilty about asking questions when I&#8217;ve already been lied to.

Thank you for reading.
Click to expand...

https://medium.com/@stereowilliams/correct-me-if-im-wrong-6336108a25db
 
Last edited:
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
There's now this older lady on Twitter saying "yeah but I looked at all these extra details." she then goes on to mention Chandler, Arvizo and the housekeeper. If they are all lying too....

The extra details, a hahahaha. Oh my. See, some people just are dead set on believing he was a p. Acting like they did actual research when they didn't do shit.
Click to expand...
I hope u bursted her old @$$ out. I did two of them the other day. clearly trolls or just fools. They stop posting. They know they were lying.
 
terrell said:
I hope u bursted her old @$$ out. I did two of them the other day. clearly trolls or just fools. They stop posting. They know they were lying.
Click to expand...

Exactly that!!! I noticed with a lot of these ridiculous comments on Twitter especially that when I reply to them in a very normal way, no name calling or even profanity. But I give them actual facts and do I hear from them again? Nope.
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
Exactly that!!! I noticed with a lot of these ridiculous comments on Twitter especially that when I reply to them in a very normal way, no name calling or even profanity. But I give them actual facts and do I hear from them again? Nope.
Click to expand...

Haha,this has happened to me a couple of times too,recently with some girl Phoebe,talking all sorts of crap.
 
MJInnocent;4249942 said:
Haha,this has happened to me a couple of times too,recently with some girl Phoebe,talking all sorts of crap.
Click to expand...

Yeah, some folks are just not worth your time. Here is the one I was talking about. SmoothEmjay went loose on her and I can't blame him.

Check out @Daily_Express’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/Daily_Express/status/1106706468563271687?s=09

She watched this shit FIVE times. Just let that sink in for a while. And any of the facts we give her, she just ignores them and keeps yapping on about nothing, pathetic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top