Controversial MJ Documentary Leaving Neverland [GENERAL DISCUSSION THREAD]

Speed_Demon87;4247081 said:
You can all call me whatever you like.

It’s clearly obvious though that you are not considered a fan if you disagree with Michael’s behaviour on here.

I love the man as the great entertainer and superstar that he was. Not as an alleged monster of a paedophile.

I know everything musically about Michael. To say I’m not a fan is just laughable all because I disagree with his actions.

Would a non fan really know songs like big boy, hot street, sunset driver, to other rare stuff like men in black, days in Gloucestershire or even songs that were supposedly done with will I am , for example, I’m dreaming.

I’m 100% a fan.

I didn't call you a non fan though. But please explain to me how in the world you can be doubting MJ now? Now when you have soooooo many facts, evidence and proof at your disposal that these three guys are lying through their teeth?

Not to mention plenty of people that actually worked with the man and come to his defense all the way? And they have nothing to profit from that.

Wade, James and Reed on the other hand.......
 
Speed_Demon87;4247081 said:
You can all call me whatever you like.

It’s clearly obvious though that you are not considered a fan if you disagree with Michael’s behaviour on here.

I love the man as the great entertainer and superstar that he was. Not as an alleged monster of a paedophile.

I know everything musically about Michael. To say I’m not a fan is just laughable all because I disagree with his actions.

Would a non fan really know songs like big boy, hot street, sunset driver, to other rare stuff like men in black, days in Gloucestershire or even songs that were supposedly done with will I am , for example, I’m dreaming.

I’m 100% a fan.
Not saying that you are not a fan cause I don't know you. But a 100% fan wouldn't remove his music. Ok, you can not agree with some of Michael's action but what has music anything to do with his actions?
 
Speed_Demon87;4247081 said:
You can all call me whatever you like.

It’s clearly obvious though that you are not considered a fan if you disagree with Michael’s behaviour on here.

I love the man as the great entertainer and superstar that he was. Not as an alleged monster of a paedophile.

I know everything musically about Michael. To say I’m not a fan is just laughable all because I disagree with his actions.

Would a non fan really know songs like big boy, hot street, sunset driver, to other rare stuff like men in black, days in Gloucestershire or even songs that were supposedly done with will I am , for example, I’m dreaming.

I’m 100% a fan.

For anyone to believe mj was the monster they describe one needs to believe he was a very smart and clever man. He was not, period.
 
Agreed to the fullest!

I have something to say about that as well. I had been staying quiet on these fans that all of a sudden starting to question Michael, I'm in total disbelief really because it's all based on these three. Of all things, THEM????? Three men, that if this were taken to court would be real easy to discredit and prove wrong? Admitted liars and perjurers? Did these fans not see all the insane amounts of facts and actual proof about these liars?

I'm not gonna call you a non fan and that you should leave but I will say that this is not the time to be starting to have doubts when the accusers and mister director present ZERO EVIDENCE, while more and more proof and in my book smoking guns are being revealed about Wade and James. I'm gonna continue ignoring those messages because I just can't have that, not when we're all fighting our ass off and feeling messed up over it too, plus again, do actual research on those two. Anything coming out of their mouth I consider trash that belongs in the garbage. I will not bother with you who do that. I'm utterly flabbergasted by this development.
That is exactly what I have been thinking several times.
 
Speed_Demon87;4247081 said:
You can all call me whatever you like.

It’s clearly obvious though that you are not considered a fan if you disagree with Michael’s behaviour on here.

I love the man as the great entertainer and superstar that he was. Not as an alleged monster of a paedophile.

I know everything musically about Michael. To say I’m not a fan is just laughable all because I disagree with his actions.

Would a non fan really know songs like big boy, hot street, sunset driver, to other rare stuff like men in black, days in Gloucestershire or even songs that were supposedly done with will I am , for example, I’m dreaming.

I’m 100% a fan.

Yeah we have already heared this arguments from the other guy which the admins have banned from this forum in the end of january.
A very busy influencer on Youtube with the name REGIMENT65 tells simular things like you.
When you are only like MJs music and performances you can't taken seriously as a fan of him cause the man was much more!

Please do us a favor and let us here is peace, cause we are not only fans of the Music we are fans of the Man!
The man we saw in thousends of YouTube videos over and over again and not the man Dan Reed called Michael Jackson in his NAMBLA- faritail fantasy fiction movie!
Stop to be ignorant and ego!
This is not the place for you!
Let us in peace!
 
Last edited:
Speed_Demon87;4247088 said:
Perhaps I have to simply take a break and chill from the madness. I’m very much angered that we are in this situation once again.

MJ’s legacy was in a strong position after his death and I just feel his reputation has been tarnished once again.

I can always download the music again btw but I’m struggling to listen to him hence why I removed his music from my phone.

If the Estate can come out with a great rebuttal then I’m hopeful things can sort themselves out.

Seems more like you are ashamed to be an MJ fan right now. Pitiful. You'd rather join in with the doubters, just in case MJ's reputation does not recover, so you can act like you were on the accusers side all along. You'll pop back in once everything is straighted out like nothing ever happened.
 
In the phone call between Evan Chandler and Jordan Chandler's step father where Evan talks about how he's going to destroy Michael, I remember there being a longer version of that phone call where Jordan's step father asks Evan ''What about Jordy?'' and Evan responds by saying ''That irrelevant to me'' - Did I dream this, or was this part of that conversation that is missing from all clips I've seen of that phone call?

Evan does imply that destroying Michael's career is irrelevant in the following part (put a little extra context to it):

7 MR. CHANDLER: I don't know where it'll
8 go, but I'm saying is that when people -- when
9 you -- when people cut off communication totally,
10 you only have two choices: To forget about them,
11 or you get frustrated by their action. I can't
12 forget about them. I love them. That's it. I
13 don't like them. I still love Jordy, but I do not
14 like them because I do not like the people that
15 they've become, but I do love them, and because I
16 love them I don't want to see them [tape
17 irregularity]. That's why I was willing to talk.
18 I have nothing to gain by talking. If
19 I go through with this, I win big time. There's no
20 way that I lose. I've checked that out inside out.
21 MR. SCHWARTZ: But when you say
22 "winning," what are you talking about, "winning"?
23 MR. CHANDLER: I will get everything I
24 want, and they will be totally -- they will be
25 destroyed forever. They will be destroyed. June
133

1 is gonna lose Jordy. She will have no right to
2 ever see him again.
3 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.
4 MR. CHANDLER: That's a fact, Dave.
5 That's what --
6 MR. SCHWARTZ: Does that help --
7 MR. CHANDLER: -- Michael the career
8 will be over.
9 MR. SCHWARTZ: Does that help Jordy?
10 MR. CHANDLER: Michael's career will be
11 over.
12 MR. SCHWARTZ: And does that help
13 Jordy?
14 MR. CHANDLER: It's irrelevant to me.
15 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah, but I mean the
16 bottom line is --
17 MR. CHANDLER: The bottom line to me
18 is, yes, June is harming him, and Michael is
19 harming him. I can prove that, and I will prove
20 that
21 MR. SCHWARTZ: Yeah.
22 MR. CHANDLER: -- and if they force me
23 to go to court about it, I will [tape
24 irregularity], and I will be granted custody. She
25 will have no rights whatsoever.
 
I'm a big believer in free-will, so no judgement. But I am surprised at the small sect of fans who are now doubting MJ based on a) info we knew already and b) the slick production of a doc that we long understood to be heavily edited and one-sided - so as to tell a specific story. I'm actually surprised some fans even tuned in (why give such a doc ratings?), but let's chalk it down to curiosity and perhaps needing to know who/what you're defending. But I digress...

We shouldn't gloss over the fact that no empirical evidence was discovered or uncovered. Like, on the merit of the info (not) provided, this would literally have been thrown out in criminal court (even if MJ was alive) and already has been tossed out of civil court. Hence their appeal and its calculated timing.

I'm not presenting myself as some kind of enlightened being, but having worked close to media and studied audiences too, you can't sew together a highly one-sided story, throw dramatic cuts and edits over it, plus haunting music and convince me it's fact. No way.

Some audiences fall for the okey-doke (and that's called the hypodermic syringe model. Almost like being injected with a premixed perspective and taking it on as your own). However, we live in a time where media entities don't wield the power they once did to generate such collectivised reactions. Social media has given everyone an individualised voice and a lot people are seeing the BS for what it is. It's ironic and a bit sad that there are people who aren't even fans seeing the obvious holes in Wade and co's stories, while some longtime supporters are being swayed by purposefully persuasive media tactics. But again, each to their own.

I'd just caution of buying into the sensationalism. Whether that be the "MJ is guilty" narrative some are peddling, the pressure to see it as "they" see it, or the idea that the doc is this big thing. The ratings and majorly mute response from the masses make clear that it is not.

Make no mistake, it's the most negative thing that has happened post his death and is getting a lot of surrounding coverage. But that's how the media works. It's a game of clicks, views, and selling papers. At this point, I'm sure we'll see stories about what the Forest Lawn staff feel about the doc lol. Anything to keep the views coming in. Once another big story catches, watch and see how this becomes yesterday's news. That's not to say the estate won't have their work cut out from them rebuilding the brand a bit, but it's not the doom and gloom many are perceiving it to be. There are far too many wheels turning with the billion dollar brand of MJ and too much money being made (and to make) for the estate to ever let that happen. And that's just me taking my stan goggles off and any sentiment out of the equation for a moment.

I was much younger during the original accusations, but old enough during the '05 trial and the latter is honestly what piqued my interest in the inner workings of the media. Any and every claim by the prosecution would be splashed across the FRONT of papers daily and when when Tom Mez and co would have a slam dunk with their rebuttal arguments it'd either be in a small backpage area or not covered at all. Fandom aside, him being convicted on the basis of that evidence would have been a crime in itself.

So I say all of this to day, I feel we should really try and stay strong as a collective.

Make no mistake, with maturity and life experience, I look at the MJ story a bit differently and in many ways am frustrated that he constantly kept being naive enough to allow himself to be targeted like this (e.g. stubbornness regarding how the sleepovers looked). Hindsight is 20/20 and I now see the $20 million 94 payout as the worst thing he could have ever done (much as I understood his incentive). It established it as open season on him. While I feel it ironically highlights his consistent innocence (ALL accusations sans Gavin's have been civil, where the only possible win is money), it's the reason we will forever have to defend him in this regard. It is what it is, but it's grating all the same.

But again, let's stay strong and weather this storm in unity. MJ is innocent and I encourage us to not let a lopsided doc sway us.
 
I am too observant about this, but has anyone noticed Wade's had a hair transplant? Gotta pay for those cosmetic bills somehow right? Definitely looks like he's had one, either way, pretty sure he's had some cosmetic surgery somehow.

:rofl: Are hair transplants still a thing? Well, he is still ugly.
 
Seems more like you are ashamed to be an MJ fan right now. Pitiful. You'd rather join in with the doubters, just in case MJ's reputation does not recover, so you can act like you were on the accusers side all along. You'll pop back in once everything is straighted out like nothing ever happened.
that is exactly what all those radio stations are doing. They act how it convenient for them at the moment. Never thinking on their own.
 
Me too!

As for the creators of The Simpsons removing the episode with Michael...that is hypocrisy at its finest. Those are the same creators who wrote the episode where Homer is accused of sexual harassement without any real evidence. Someone has posted that earlier. I was going to write to those creators, but I`m not going to bother because Simpsons aren`t relevant anymore...
Well, Bart Simpson still LOVES Michael Jackson:
 
Speed_Demon87;4247081 said:
You can all call me whatever you like.

It’s clearly obvious though that you are not considered a fan if you disagree with Michael’s behaviour on here.

I love the man as the great entertainer and superstar that he was. Not as an alleged monster of a paedophile.

I know everything musically about Michael. To say I’m not a fan is just laughable all because I disagree with his actions.

Would a non fan really know songs like big boy, hot street, sunset driver, to other rare stuff like men in black, days in Gloucestershire or even songs that were supposedly done with will I am , for example, I’m dreaming.

I’m 100% a fan.


There is a different between 'disagree with Michael’s behaviour' and believing that he ****ed children, especially when Michael sleeping with children has been known for decades now.
 
I'm a big believer in free-will, so no judgement. But I am surprised at the small sect of fans who are now doubting MJ based on a) info we knew already and b) the slick production of a doc that we long understood to be heavily edited and one-sided - so as to tell a specific story. I'm actually surprised some fans even tuned in (why give such a doc ratings?), but let's chalk it down to curiosity and perhaps needing to know who/what you're defending. But I digress...

We shouldn't gloss over the fact that no empirical evidence was discovered or uncovered. Like, on the merit of the info (not) provided, this would literally have been thrown out in criminal court (even if MJ was alive) and already has been tossed out of civil court. Hence their appeal and its calculated timing.

I'm not presenting myself as some kind of enlightened being, but having worked close to media and studied audiences too, you can't sew together a highly one-sided story, throw dramatic cuts and edits over it, plus haunting music and convince me it's fact. No way.

Some audiences fall for the okey-doke (and that's called the hypodermic syringe model. Almost like being injected with a premixed perspective and taking it on as your own). However, we live in a time where media entities don't wield the power they once did to generate such collectivised reactions. Social media has given everyone an individualised voice and a lot people are seeing the BS for what it is. It's ironic and a bit sad that there are people who aren't even fans seeing the obvious holes in Wade and co's stories, while some longtime supporters are being swayed by purposefully persuasive media tactics. But again, each to their own.

I'd just caution of buying into the sensationalism. Whether that be the "MJ is guilty" narrative some are peddling, the pressure to see it as "they" see it, or the idea that the doc is this big thing. The ratings and majorly mute response from the masses make clear that it is not.

Make no mistake, it's the most negative thing that has happened post his death and is getting a lot of surrounding coverage. But that's how the media works. It's a game of clicks, views, and selling papers. At this point, I'm sure we'll see stories about what the Forest Lawn staff feel about the doc lol. Anything to keep the views coming in. Once another big story catches, watch and see how this becomes yesterday's news. That's not to say the estate won't have their work cut out from them rebuilding the brand a bit, but it's not the doom and gloom many are perceiving it to be. There are far too many wheels turning with the billion dollar brand of MJ and too much money being made (and to make) for the estate to ever let that happen. And that's just me taking my stan goggles off and any sentiment out of the equation for a moment.

I was much younger during the original accusations, but old enough during the '05 trial and the latter is honestly what piqued my interest in the inner workings of the media. Any and every claim by the prosecution would be splashed across the FRONT of papers daily and when when Tom Mez and co would have a slam dunk with their rebuttal arguments it'd either be in a small backpage area or not covered at all. Fandom aside, him being convicted on the basis of that evidence would have been a crime in itself.

So I say all of this to day, I feel we should really try and stay strong as a collective.

Make no mistake, with maturity and life experience, I look at the MJ story a bit differently and in many ways am frustrated that he constantly kept being naive enough to allow himself to be targeted like this (e.g. stubbornness regarding how the sleepovers looked). Hindsight is 20/20 and I now see the $20 million 94 payout as the worst thing he could have ever done (much as I understood his incentive). It established it as open season on him. While I feel it ironically highlights his consistent innocence (ALL accusations sans Gavin's have been civil, where the only possible win is money), it's the reason we will forever have to defend him in this regard. It is what it is, but it's grating all the same.

But again, let's stay strong and weather this storm in unity. MJ is innocent and I encourage us to not let a lopsided doc sway us.


Only people with boxes can give ratings. For example, my house doesn't have a box, so I can't give ratings to anything even if I had HBO.

And it seems that those who are doubting Michael now is more due to emotion. Since Michael's trial in 2003 wasn't broadcast, it was easy for some to read the facts for what they are. Leaving Neverland is pure appeal to emotion, which affects some people more than most.
 
Last edited:
For anyone to believe mj was the monster they describe one needs to believe he was a very smart and clever man. He was not, period.

I disagree. Michael Jackson was very smart and intelligent. What he was not however was evil and perverted. In the wise words of Michael Trapson: "Look motherfuc*er. I'm Peter Pan!"

 
MJRemixed;4247082 said:
I had my eye on twitter too. It didn’t trend at all.

I might have said it before, MJRemixed. But your signature is EVERYTHING. :laughing:
 
Speed_Demon87;4247088 said:
Perhaps I have to simply take a break and chill from the madness. I’m very much angered that we are in this situation once again.

MJ’s legacy was in a strong position after his death and I just feel his reputation has been tarnished once again.

I can always download the music again btw but I’m struggling to listen to him hence why I removed his music from my phone.

If the Estate can come out with a great rebuttal then I’m hopeful things can sort themselves out.

You are not a fan. Bye. Leave. There is no way in hell that a REAL fan would say what you did, based on the LIES of two perjurers and based the evidence we have against them. Btw, when all of this is proven to be a lie, please do NOT come back to MJ fandom. I am disgusted at so-called “fans” being so weak-minded and gullible.
Btw, the Estate doesn’t have to prove anything to ME, I already know that Michael is 1000 % Innocent. Surely, you people are haters posing as fans. You can’t make me believe that a fan would believe what Wade and James are spewing.
 
If people feel others are trolling then you should use the report button. Exlimation mark in triangle

I find it odd how ppl can doubt mj now but didnt in 03,93. When this is possibly the least credible of all the accusations.(not that the others had any
 
If people feel others are trolling then you should use the report button. Exlimation mark in triangle

I find it odd how ppl can doubt mj now but didnt in 03,93. When this is possibly the least credible of all the accusations.(not that the others had any


Emotion. Wade and Safechuck made a doc to exploit people's emotions. The 2003 trial couldn't really do that since the trial wasn't on TV and most people kept up from reading new articles, which doesn't carry the same weight as hearing someone say they were rape. I don't believe a word of this doc, but the graphic details makes me want mouth wash.
 
I felt a little better hearing Paris suggesting to calm down and chill after my rant about the Simpsons. Still mad at them, but felt better thanx to her.

Paris also tweeted something along the lines of "Fans worried about my father's legacy? What?!! Calm down." (paraphrasing). I loved that. I share her sentiments.

Michael-Jackson-HIStory-Past-Present-and-Future-Book-I-Cover-michael-jackson-31568920-1726-1707.jpg
 
JacksonPassion aka Mary has seen Leaving Neverland.
I hope she can give us a powerful rebuttle and can compare the things they are telling there with Victor G. Book.
She seams to have it.
 
I was struck by Mrs Safechuck saying (at the end) 'I had one child and one job, and I f..d up'

Actually, she doesn't have one child, she has three. Safechuck has a much older brother and sister, who had left home (she says) by the time Jimmy met MJ.

I'm surprised that the older two siblings were not included in the film. Shane Robson was included, even though he had remained in Australia during the period that Robson knew MJ.

Another 'small' lie that struck me, was Safechuck saying (of the Bad tour) 'There were shows every night'. (I'm sure he said that to imply that he was 'abused' every night).

Actually, there weren't shows every night.

Here's the Bad tour schedule for that summer, starting with Paris:

June 27 1988 -Paris, June 28 1988 - Paris
July 1 1988, July 3 1988, July 8 1988, July 10 1988 - Germany
July 14 1988, July 15 1988, July 16 1988, July 22 1988, July 23 1988 - London
July 26 1988 - Wales
July 30 1988, July 31 1988 - Ireland
August 5 1988, August 7 1988, August 9 1988 - Spain
August 12 1988, August 14 1988

I don't know when Safechuck left the tour to go back to school, but at most it seems like he would have been around for 19 shows, of which 7 were on consecutive nights, and between cities they would be packing up and travelling. (And Safechucks mum / parents would have been around every time they traveled, because they were travelling with the show too).

And about those shows. MJ said he lost 3-4 lbs weight during each show, because on the 'Bad' tour he was singing and dancing 'full on' in every show. Do I think MJ had the energy afterwards to be chasing around after some kid ... stressing about who might come into the hotel room or make a noise, or practising getting dressed quickly? Nope.

If tours were fun for Michael, and he had lots of enjoyable time abusing boys, wouldn't he look forward to touring? Well, he CAN tell us that himself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0SBTBcTDHo




And why white male mini-me's anyway. For starters, he could hardly take a girl on tour with him. He didn't want to spend time with adults who all wanted money or monetary favours; cars, houses, loans etc etc. But aside from that, and the reason I think it continued, is because it was simply great publicity. Here was a singer who had made a ground-breaking short film (Thriller) and Yetnikov apparently had to threaten to remove other Sony artists from MTV schedules before MTV would include 'Thriller' in their schedules. That was in late 1983.

Yet here, only 5 years later- in 1988, was a white middle class kid (with business-owning parents) who wanted to dress like MJ and dance like MJ. This kid would be up on stage with a black singer and black band, dancing in front of a primarily white audience in many European countries. For MJ, who had experienced racial abuse aimed at his mother while travelling with her, this must have seemed like a real breakthrough. No wonder no-one in his 'team' discouraged it. it must have looked like fantastic advertising for their target 'cross over' audience.

Same for Neverland (and Havvenhurst). Here were ordinary white families, not slinging racial epithets, but visiting a black guy at home, and going back and telling all their friends and relatives what a wonderful person he was. They'd seen all over his house, and he lived just like them (only with a bigger and better house and garden).

It's absolutely horrendous that instead of illustrating 'racial harmony' these guys have twisted an age-old excuse for physical lynching (inter-racial relationships) into a modern day nightmare, adding the worst of all crimes into the mix.
 
Last edited:
Leaving Neverland is pure appeal to emotion, which affects some people more than most.

THIS!

You pretty concisely summed up everything I rambled on about lol. LN is exactly that -- a play on emotions! And, as we're all made up of different life experiences and are just different as people, we are predisposed to reacting to such tactics differently.

By nature and experience, I think of myself as more analytical (and a touch cynical about the media). So a doc that is one-way traffic was never going to knock me down. But it's also wholly understandable how someone who leans a bit more to the emotional would be affected differently.
 
Today it airs in my country, in one go , nonetheless. I think not many people will sit in front of their tv for 4 straight hours.
I'm a member at various forums about different themes and everywhere there is but one conclusion, that he must be guilty. I 'm not saying this to wind people up. That is what is happening right now. This is how bad his legacy is already tarnished, couple that with radio bans and now the Simpsons thing and you can say it's looking bad.
I AM a fan but don't kid yourselves people, you are not going to win this fight, people simply don't listen anymore because they find fans unreasonable and deluded. Every forum has one or two MJ fans defending him with links to rebuttals etc but it's not making any impact. Wether he did it or not doesn't matter when you will start to get into trouble at work or school because you're defending MJ.

Weird I was banned two days ago, what happened?
 
Just finished watching Leaving Neverland. For non fans I feel like the documentary is really boring. It‘s so long and there are stories in it which might be important to understand the whole thing but which are really boring. But Dan Reed did a good job in making Robson and Safechuck seem credible. After finishing watching it I really felt like both told the truth... Wade was so convincing when he shed tears and when his voice cracks while speaking about the abuse. He is so convincing. Then I went on Taj Jackson‘s Twitter and he explained that a key scene in the movie is a lie.
https://twitter.com/tajjackson3/status/1103175247547777024?s=20
This changed my mind. Because if he was telling the truth, then why lie about something like this? Or did he just want to make an excuse for defending Michael in 2005? I believe it was a Smart move by them to make Wade seem more likeable.
I really recommend Reading all the tweets by Taj Jackson and his answers to the Tweet I just included here.
 
One thing though, now that Matt Groening(irrc) removed the MJ stuff from The Simpsons, this will obviously already affect some profits for the estate, not to mention radio stations pulling his music. This can't be what the estate wants. Surely they can do something? For all we know they are busy with things behind the scenes. But man, being so powerless and while almost on a daily basis now seeing all these things about statues being removed, songs pulled from radio and now this The Simpsons stuff.... just sucks so much! :( :( :( :(
 
One thing though, now that Matt Groening(irrc) removed the MJ stuff from The Simpsons, this will obviously already affect some profits for the estate, not to mention radio stations pulling his music. This can't be what the estate wants. Surely they can do something? For all we know they are busy with things behind the scenes. But man, being so powerless and while almost on a daily basis now seeing all these things about statues being removed, songs pulled from radio and now this The Simpsons stuff.... just sucks so much! :( :( :( :(

Matt Groening has no control over what gets removed from The Simpsons. This decision was probably made by one of the higher ups at Fox
 
Just finished watching Leaving Neverland. For non fans I feel like the documentary is really boring. It‘s so long and there are stories in it which might be important to understand the whole thing but which are really boring. But Dan Reed did a good job in making Robson and Safechuck seem credible. After finishing watching it I really felt like both told the truth... Wade was so convincing when he shed tears and when his voice cracks while speaking about the abuse. He is so convincing. Then I went on Taj Jackson‘s Twitter and he explained that a key scene in the movie is a lie.
https://twitter.com/tajjackson3/stat...547777024?s=20
This changed my mind. Because if he was telling the truth, then why lie about something like this? Or did he just want to make an excuse for defending Michael in 2005? I believe it was a Smart move by them to make Wade seem more likeable.
I really recommend Reading all the tweets by Taj Jackson and his answers to the Tweet I just included here.

Yes, this a good point.

If Wade and James were actually abused they could simply be honest and tell the truth from their own recollections.
Of course I can't say what happened in a closed room between two people, nobody can, but the lies they have told about things we DO know about is a big red flag to say the least.

If this were being tried in a court of law they would be rejected, no doubt.
 
So much wrong with that documentary. manipulative, zero proof, whilst taking full advantage of the me too movement , plus Michael's fans are being seriously emotionally abused by reed. This should not be allowed . Glad it is over in UK. Hugs to the next country ..

Guys, it is an awesome fact that it failed in america and now in england :D ...getting even less views on the second episode in england shows me , the general public do not believe it
 
2million is actually quite good for C4.

Lower numbers in the second half just shows lack of interest, not a belief in innocence or guilt.
 
https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/michael-jackson-neverland-body-exhumed-14041454

https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...on-documentary-leaving-neverland-body-exhumed

I only skimmed before as I was checking headlines following the documentary airing over here. They both reference a Radar Online article.. so I guess its BS and US fans have probably already seen this.

Very unclear where this 11 new victims information comes from but they're reporting it.


from these weird articles... third best selling artist. He is the BEST SELLING ARTIST, WORLDWIDE, OFF ALL TIMES.
 
Back
Top