[Discussion] Sexual Abuse Claims Against MJ Estate - Robson/ Safechuck/ Doe

I'm just curious. :unsure: Who is Greg Hildebrandt and what exactly did he do when working with MJ ? I seen a few posts exchanged by him and SOWR just now on twitter.

SOWR: michael par ‏@waderobsonallys · Jun 4
@HildebrandtGreg Do you realize that during the time you spent with MJ on the Bad tour a boy named Jimmy Safechuck, may have been molested




GH: Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 16h

@waderobsonallys I spent over weeks of my life with Michael both in NY and CA. I never once saw him be inappropriate to a child of any age.

https://twitter.com/HildebrandtGreg/status/474648799387082753
 
MJLovesyoumore;4017477 said:
I'm just curious. :unsure: Who is Greg Hildebrandt and what exactly did he do when working with MJ ? I seen a few posts exchanged by him and SOWR just now on twitter.

SOWR: michael par ‏@waderobsonallys · Jun 4
@HildebrandtGreg Do you realize that during the time you spent with MJ on the Bad tour a boy named Jimmy Safechuck, may have been molested




GH: Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 16h

@waderobsonallys I spent over weeks of my life with Michael both in NY and CA. I never once saw him be inappropriate to a child of any age.

https://twitter.com/HildebrandtGreg/status/474648799387082753

So are they trying to recruit "witnesses" for James? Pathetic. These people's obsession is scary.

Clicking on the link, I like his answers. These haters are pathetic. He did not answer to them what they wanted to hear and they started to attack him saying things like he "makes lite of" child abuse etc. When the only thing he said was that he did not see anything wrong. And they ask him this question and when he says he did not see anything they give him answers like this: "you mean he didn't molest a child in front if witnesses? Shocking". Ugh, you asked him, idiot!

I like that he says:

Greg Hildebrandt &#8207;<s>@</s>HildebrandtGreg <small class="time"> 1 h </small> <s>@</s>CelineMMD <s>@</s>waderobsonallys Someone cashing in on MJ 1st accusation referenced me in an article. 100% lie! Just the facts Man! Critical.

Greg Hildebrandt &#8207;<s>@</s>HildebrandtGreg <small class="time"> 1 h </small>
<s>@</s>CelineMMD <s>@</s>waderobsonallys You have no understanding of false accusation until it happens to you. So many lives destroyed by it.

Greg Hildebrandt &#8207;<s>@</s>HildebrandtGreg <small class="time"> 1 h </small>
<s>@</s>CelineMMD <s>@</s>waderobsonallys Truth and facts are what I live by. So should all of you. Just the Facts, like Sgt. Joe Friday said in Dragnet!

Greg Hildebrandt &#8207;<s>@</s>HildebrandtGreg <small class="time"> 59 min </small>
<s>@</s>CelineMMD <s>@</s>waderobsonallys I have no facts that substantiate that Michael Jackson molested anyone so I cannot say he did or did not.
 
Last edited:
Ok thank you. :)

I am also curious about this tweet by GH:

Greg Hildebrandt &#8207;@HildebrandtGreg · 59m
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys Someone cashing in on MJ 1st accusation referenced me in an article. 100% lie! Just the facts Man! Critical.

Any idea who and what article he is talking about?
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

How was Greg making light of it? (notice that I spelled light correctly?) These people seem really desperate, but why? What's their motivation? Why does this seem so personal to them? Maybe they were victims as children but why the hard on for MJ in particular? Then when they're confronted about believing people who say they saw MJ molesting someone they say he was "caught". They believe these people without question. They'll have to make up their mind how they think he operated.

It doesn't make sense for a person to think that MJ only molested a kid in secret but then people "caught" him doing it somewhere where other people would have access to to see it happen. Lets all just use the word of people who sold their stories for big money as proof, so reliable. What really annoys me is that they then accuse Greg of condoning MJ taking a kid to bed, we all know what they're getting at there and they're being very dishonest. There's a big difference between sleeping in the same bed and being sexual with them in there. One does not necessarily equate to the other. I can understand people's suspicions about that but that's where investigation and evidence come in. I think it's sad that we have come to a point where people think it's not possible for bed sharing to occur without it having to mean sexual activity.

They then accuse him of bias by asking if he's only ok with it because it was MJ. They're assuming the worst and putting words in his mouth, they're very dishonest and illogical people. I like how Greg answers them with honesty and maturity and sticks to the facts rather than speculation. Well done and thank you Greg.

14360808992_b71646f0a7_o.jpg

14339233046_a9abaa25b4_o.jpg

14382513163_c581d3d186_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

How was Greg making light of it? (notice that I spelled light correctly?) These people seem really desperate, but why? What's their motivation? Why does this seem so personal to them? Maybe they were victims as children but why the hard on for MJ in particular? Then when they're confronted about believing people who say they saw MJ molesting someone they say he was "caught". They believe these people without question. They'll have to make up their mind how they think he operated.

It doesn't make sense for a person to think that MJ only molested a kid in secret but then people "caught" him doing it somewhere where other people would have access to to see it happen. Lets all just use the word of people who sold their stories for big money as proof, so reliable. What really annoys me is that they then accuse Greg of condoning MJ taking a kid to bed, we all know what they're getting at there and they're being very dishonest. There's a big difference between sleeping in the same bed and being sexual with them in there. One does not necessarily equate to the other. I can understand people's suspicions about that but that's where investigation and evidence come in. I think it's sad that we have come to a point where people think it's not possible for bed sharing to occur without it having to mean sexual activity.

They then accuse him of bias by asking if he's only ok with it because it was MJ. They're assuming the worst and putting words in his mouth, they're very dishonest and illogical people. I like how Greg answers them with honesty and maturity and sticks to the facts rather than speculation. Well done and thank you Greg.

14360808992_b71646f0a7_o.jpg

14339233046_a9abaa25b4_o.jpg

14382513163_c581d3d186_o.jpg

I have come to the conclusion that most of Michael haters who are like this are secretly pedos themselves or are homophobic. Because you must have a dirty mind to come to the conclusion that Michael having a boy under his arm equals him having sex with them? I mean, they must think all men who have children with them must be having sex with them. I also bet my right eye if Michael was hanging out with young girls instead of boys most of them wouldn't bet an eye. I also bet they wouldn't even be upset if Michael was accused of screwing an underage girl.

Finally, because this really pisses me off, sex offenders do not just have sex in bed. Pedos will raped kids anywhere whether it is in the kitchen, living room, garage, in the antic, or in a parking garage. They will do it if they think no one is watching. They are not going to wait until bed time when they have several other kids in the room and they are certainly not going to do it in a hotel where bodyguards, fans, and random people are walking around.

The people form MJ Facts know crap about real pedos, and sadly, so does the rest of the world.
 
full tweets

Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 14h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys I have no facts that substantiate that Michael Jackson molested anyone so I cannot say he did or did not.
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 2 times2
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 14h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys Truth and facts are what I live by. So should all of you. Just the Facts, like Sgt. Joe Friday said in Dragnet!
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 2 times2
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 14h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys You have no understanding of false accusation until it happens to you. So many lives destroyed by it.
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 5 times5
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 14h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys Someone cashing in on MJ 1st accusation referenced me in an article. 100% lie! Just the facts Man! Critical.
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 2 times2
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 14h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys It is a sick horrible act of violence. I only state that I cannot condemn what I do not know to be true. Facts!
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 0 times
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 14h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys So I cannot have an opinion regarding what I do not know. I do not facilitate anything like child abuse.
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 0 times
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 14h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys I feel I can only comment or have an opinion on what I actually know to be true. Not just with this issue.
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 0 times
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · 15h
@CelineMMD @waderobsonallys Maybe I am not being clear here. I live only by facts. I have no first hand knowledge of any abuse.
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 0 times
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · Jun 5
@waderobsonallys May have been means nothing to me.
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 1 time1
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · Jun 5
@waderobsonallys Michael was a brilliant talented young man who died too soon
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 4 times4
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · Jun 5
@waderobsonallys Someone is accusing a dead man? Really?
View conversation
ReplyReplied to 0 times RetweetRetweeted 0 times FavoriteFavorited 0 times
More
Greg Hildebrandt @HildebrandtGreg · Jun 5
@waderobsonallys I spent over weeks of my life with Michael both in NY and CA. I never once saw him be inappropriate to a child of any age.
 
They're not homophobic, a male pedo raping or molesting a child is just pedophilia, it doesn't mean they're gay, some male pedos who victimize children the same sex as them are also attracted to women.

Another problem related to terminology arises because sexual abuse of male children by adult men2 is often referred to as "homosexual molestation." The adjective "homosexual" (or "heterosexual" when a man abuses a female child) refers to the victim's gender in relation to that of the perpetrator. Unfortunately, people sometimes mistakenly interpret it as referring to the perpetrator's sexual orientation.

As an expert panel of researchers convened by the National Academy of Sciences noted in a 1993 report: "The distinction between homosexual and heterosexual child molesters relies on the premise that male molesters of male victims are homosexual in orientation. Most molesters of boys do not report sexual interest in adult men, however" (National Research Council, 1993, p. 143, citation omitted).

To avoid this confusion, it is preferable to refer to men's sexual abuse of boys with the more accurate label of male-male molestation. Similarly, it is preferable to refer to men's abuse of girls as male-female molestation. These labels are more accurate because they describe the sex of the individuals involved but don't implicitly convey unwarranted assumptions about the perpetrator's sexual orientation.

Typologies of
Offenders The distinction between a victim's gender and a perpetrator's sexual orientation is important because many child molesters don't really have an adult sexual orientation. They have never developed the capacity for mature sexual relationships with other adults, either men or women. Instead, their sexual attractions focus on children &#8211; boys, girls, or children of both sexes.

Over the years, this fact has been incorporated into various systems for categorizing child molesters. For example, Finkelhor and Araji (1986) proposed that perpetrators' sexual attractions should be conceptualized as ranging along a continuum &#8211; from exclusive interest in children at one extreme, to exclusive interest in adult partners at the other end.

Typologies of offenders have often included a distinction between those with an enduring primary preference for children as sexual partners and those who have established age-appropriate relationships but become sexually involved with children under unusual circumstances of extreme stress. Perpetrators in the first category &#8211; those with a more or less exclusive interest in children &#8211; have been labeled fixated. Fixation means "a temporary or permanent arrestment of psychological maturation resulting from unresolved formative issues which persist and underlie the organization of subsequent phases of development" (Groth & Birnbaum, 1978, p. 176). Many clinicians view fixated offenders as being "stuck" at an early stage of psychological development.

By contrast, other molesters are described as regressed. Regression is "a temporary or permanent appearance of primitive behavior after more mature forms of expression had been attained, regardless of whether the immature behavior was actually manifested earlier in the individual's development" (Groth & Birnbaum, 1978, p. 177). Regressed offenders have developed an adult sexual orientation but under certain conditions (such as extreme stress) they return to an earlier, less mature psychological state and engage in sexual contact with children.

Some typologies of child molesters divide the fixation-regression distinction into multiple categories, and some include additional categories as well (e.g., Knight, 1989).

For the present discussion, the important point is that many child molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals (in the usual sense of those terms) because they are not really capable of a relationship with an adult man or woman. Instead of gender, their sexual attractions are based primarily on age. These individuals &#8211; who are often characterized as fixated &#8211; are attracted to children, not to men or women.

Using the fixated-regressed distinction, Groth and Birnbaum (1978) studied 175 adult males who were convicted in Massachusetts of sexual assault against a child. None of the men had an exclusively homosexual adult sexual orientation. 83 (47%) were classified as "fixated;" 70 others (40%) were classified as regressed adult heterosexuals; the remaining 22 (13%) were classified as regressed adult bisexuals. Of the last group, Groth and Birnbaum observed that "in their adult relationships they engaged in sex on occasion with men as well as with women. However, in no case did this attraction to men exceed their preference for women....There were no men who were primarily sexually attracted to other adult males..." (p.180). http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_sites/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

Some of them would probably be upset if MJ got with an underage girl but it would probably be just another excuse for them to hate him. People conveniently don't mention that there were girls around him as well as boys and his extensive heterosexual collection of porn proves he was interested in women, the fact that had so much of it that had been collected over a number of years proves he was consistently interested in women. The FBI never found anything on his computers to do with child porn and that's how many pedos get caught, they can't help themselves. MJ was no computer wizz so if those things weren't there it was because he didn't have it or look for it.

You're definitely right about sexual abuse not always happening in a bed, there are plenty of places it can happen, anywhere where nobody is looking is usually good enough.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I have come to the conclusion that most of Michael haters who are like this are secretly pedos themselves or are homophobic. Because you must have a dirty mind to come to the conclusion that Michael having a boy under his arm equals him having sex with them? I mean, they must think all men who have children with them must be having sex with them. I also bet my right eye if Michael was hanging out with young girls instead of boys most of them wouldn't bet an eye. I also bet they wouldn't even be upset if Michael was accused of screwing an underage girl.

Finally, because this really pisses me off, sex offenders do not just have sex in bed. Pedos will raped kids anywhere whether it is in the kitchen, living room, garage, in the antic, or in a parking garage. They will do it if they think no one is watching. They are not going to wait until bed time when they have several other kids in the room and they are certainly not going to do it in a hotel where bodyguards, fans, and random people are walking around.

The people form MJ Facts know crap about real pedos, and sadly, so does the rest of the world.

I made this same conclusion myself long ago that people who accuse Michael of pedophilia are closet pedos themselves who try to take any suspicions off of them and redirect it to Michael cause he's an easy target. We got people typing up sick-ass fanfiction in Youtube comments about Michael raping children and everyone just sits there and yuks it up, because "hey, we're not actually doing it". Typing about it is just as bad. Then you got the people who harassed Prince and Paris on Twitter, sending them (particularly Paris) death and rape threats and even porn. Aren't such actions also considered a form of child endangerment/molestation? Why the hell aren't these people being investigated for pedophilia? Why aren't their homes being searched at night when them and their families are trying to sleep like Michael's was? It's ****ing hypocritical and no one does a goddamn thing about it because they let their emotions about such a thing cloud their judgment.

I agree with you about the "hanging out with young girls" thing too. There seems to be a bit of a gender bias going on with rape victims. Boys who are raped get coddled and believed almost immediately but girls are looked upon with skepticism and may be subject to victim-blaming. Look at Woody Allen's case; he had it WAY easier in the years following those accusations than Michael did. Hardly anyone has made a pedophilia joke about him (only one I know of is from The Simpsons, and I didn't know about it until recently) and almost everyone rushes to support him whenever it comes up, some of those supporters being the same people that say Michael is guilty. I can't help but wonder if the fact that his accuser was a girl, along with his ex-girlfriend being involved, made a difference in that.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I should probably also mention that pedophilia is sexual attraction to children, but it only means attraction, it doesn't also mean behaviour. Not all pedophiles engage in sexual activity with children, the label describes their attraction, not their behaviour or actions.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

They're not homophobic, a male pedo raping or molesting a child is just pedophilia, it doesn't mean they're gay, some male pedos who victimize children the same sex as them are also attracted to women.



Some of them would probably be upset if MJ got with an underage girl but it would probably be just another excuse for them to hate him. People conveniently don't mention that there were girls around him as well as boys and his extensive heterosexual collection of porn proves he was interested in women, the fact that had so much of it that had been collected over a number of years proves he was consistently interested in women. The FBI never found anything on his computers to do with child porn and that's how many pedos get caught, they can't help themselves. MJ was no computer wizz so if those things weren't there it was because he didn't have it or look for it.

You're definitely right about sexual abuse not always happening in a bed, there are plenty of places it can happen, anywhere where nobody is looking is usually good enough.

To be clear, I do not believe it is all homophobic, but when it comes to some haters and even the general public, how they treat Michael over the allegations reeks of homophobia. If Michael was accused of raping an underage girl, there would be some outcry, but no where the near the witch hunt we have seen. How may celebrities have said in the open that they had sex with underage women and it is not treated as a big deal? Heck, most people would probably said the girl was asking for it by the way she dressed.

I also know that being a pedo does not mean you are gay. That is a myth that homophobic people made to demonize homosexuals. You can be a pedo can be a heterosexual, because a pedo is a whole another category. That is the reason why some haters and even Sneddon wanted to paint Michael as gay because they know for many gay = child molester.

I should probably also mention that pedophilia is sexual attraction to children, but it only means attraction, it doesn't also mean behaviour. Not all pedophiles engage in sexual activity with children, the label describes their attraction, not their behaviour or actions.

Yes, I also know this. Being a pedo does not mean you are a child molester, but you really cannot tell people that. Also, I don't want to put it in some fan's heads that the best way to defend Michael is by pointing out that even if he was a pedo it does not mean he raped kids.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

To be clear, I do not believe it is all homophobic, but when it comes to some haters and even the general public, how they treat Michael over the allegations reeks of homophobia. If Michael was accused of raping an underage girl, there would be some outcry, but no where the near the witch hunt we have seen. How may celebrities have said in the open that they had sex with underage women and it is not treated as a big deal? Heck, most people would probably said the girl was asking for it by the way she dressed.

Very true, the reaction is so different. I'm not sure why exactly that is.

I also know that being a pedo does not mean you are gay. That is a myth that homophobic people made to demonize homosexuals. You can be a pedo can be a heterosexual, because a pedo is a whole another category. That is the reason why some haters and even Sneddon wanted to paint Michael as gay because they know for many gay = child molester.

Exactly, I've seen it happen and I hate it when people do this. A close family member of mine is gay and the way he was treated by some people caused him to be suicidal. The biggest thing people miss when trying to equate one with the other is consent. Sneddon was a terrible DA, he didn't even try to hide the fact that he was desperate and that made it even sadder but at least the jury was able to see it for what it was.
Yes, I also know this. Being a pedo does not mean you are a child molester, but you really cannot tell people that. Also, I don't want to put it in some fan's heads that the best way to defend Michael is by pointing out that even if he was a pedo it does not mean he raped kids.

Definitely agree, I should have said that the reason I put that there wasn't for it to be used as any kind of defense, it was more about the logic of it since I was talking about one thing automatically being equated with another. Sometimes I'm not very good at explaining what I'm getting at, that was my fault.

People only have speculation when trying to say MJ was a pedo, like equating sharing a bed with sexual activity like it's not possible for there not to be any which I think is very disturbing. Other than that all they have is claims and leaps in logic, but there's nothing which proves their premise. A lot of people don't seem to understand what kind of evidence is needed to prove something like that, we've just seen this on Greg Hildebrant's twitter.

I hope I didn't sound like I was having a go at you in my previous post, it wasn't how I intended it. I'm often frustrated with text like this because sometimes I say something only to realise later how it could be taken. I think that's the biggest drawback of text, it's hard to present tone and emotion.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I agree that homosexuality and pedophilia are not the same, but for many people it's easier to see a gay man being attracted to underage boys or crossing the line to underage boys than a heterosexual man. That's why there's such a desperation on these people's part (including the prosecution) to portray Michael as a gay man. This may be a politically incorrect opinion, but I think you can understand the logic behind linking the alleged abuse of male children to homosexuality. I mean, someone mentioned earlier the fact that many rock stars admit to have slept with underage girls at some point. Those are heterosexual men and no one calls them a pedophile for that, but if they indeed slept with underage girls, then they did cross the line at some point. No one would say heterosexuality=pedophilia, but if you are a heterosexual man and you cross the line then you will abuse underage girls and not boys. And if you are a gay man who crosses the line then you will abuse boys, not girls. So it's a bit more complicated IMO. But I think the real pedophiles are who are exclusively attracted to children and not attracted to adults of any gender at all. That certainly does not have anything to do with terms like heterosexuality or homosexuality.

Haters (including the prosecution) don't know where to go with Michael. Their whole narrative is so inconsistent. They tried to say MJ was gay, based on a couple of art photo books with nude males, but then the prosecution was forced to parade around dozens of heterosexual magazines in court, because that's what Michael's real porn was - all heterosexual. So they made up this whole narrative about Michael only keeping it to show it to boys. A man who is well documented to have been interested in art photography having a couple of art photo books with nude males means he was gay, but dozens of heterosexual porn magazines and DVDs do not mean that he liked women and that it was his actual sexual interest. It's just a desperate, desperate narrative.

Then the age factor. Wade and James now claim Michael lost interest in them and stopped abusing them as soon as they reached puberty. So that would be a classic pedophile who is interested exclusively in children. But, in the same breath the prosecution and haters also tried to use Brett Barnes' testimony against Michael when he said he slept in the same bed as Michael until he was 19. I have also seen haters trying to interpret something into a trip that Omer was on with Michael in 2003. And Omer was 19 and 20 at the time. Haters and the media also like to embrace any "gay lover" story about Michael - from Jason Pfeiffer to Ian Halperin and Scott Thorson. So which one is it? Was Michael a classic pedo, who stopped abusing children when they reached puberty, or was he a gay man who liked it young and crossed the line at times? (BTW, it also shows the hypocrisy of the media. They will deny linking pedophilia and homosexuality, because they would be called out by gay organizations if they openly did. But then what was the purpose of it when, for example, in 2004 the National Enquirer paid Scott Thorson to say he had a sexual relationship with Michael? It's clear that for many in the media to portray Michael as a gay man brings them closer to be able to portray him as a pedo. Gay organizations should actually notice that and be very offended by it...)

But to be honest, I don't think haters are too interested in bringing consistency into their logic. They know that salaciousness in itself can work a number on many people's minds and it does not have to make much sense - as long as there is a shock factor and a "ewww" factor you can get many people believe it, because to be honest most people are not very deep thinkers, they just judge on an emotional basis and surface stuff.

As for haters motives. Of course, they aren't a homogenous group, they probably have many different motives. I do think that most of them are mental cases. You do not obsess about hating someone so much if you do not have mental issues. And no, it's not about the children to them and it's not about child abuse to them, because they do not care about any other child abuse case (only in how to link it to MJ). They harass people online, they hack people's accounts - that's not normal behavior. There are obviously deep seated issues with these people - what these issues are is anyone's guess. The leader of the WR support group, Michael Par-whatever his name is, claims on his FB that he is a gay man. He also has a brother who seems to be a member of some fundamentalist religious group. That in itself (a gay man in a fundamentalist religious family) could mean some type of dynamics and problems within his family, for example. I'm not saying this is definitely his problem, but it's definitely rooted in something that is personal to these people and it's more about their own psychological issues than about Michael. Unfortunately they found Michael to project their issues on and to use as a punch bag.

I do think that some of these people might have been abused as children and some others battle with pedophiliac thoughts. Some of the language they use is definitely disturbing as they borrow NAMBLA arguments and language sometimes. And others are just plain ol' haters. Every celebrity has haters and I guess the bigger the star is the bigger the hate is. It can have many different reasons, including jealousy of a certain celebrity. And I think it also gives them a sense of power to be able to sway opinion on a world famous star and that they can contribute to ruining someone's reputation who is that famous. And most of these people are just plain, classic bullies IMO who like to see others suffer (ie. Michael's children, friends, fans) and that makes them feel better about themselves.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Very true, the reaction is so different. I'm not sure why exactly that is.



Exactly, I've seen it happen and I hate it when people do this. A close family member of mine is gay and the way he was treated by some people caused him to be suicidal. The biggest thing people miss when trying to equate one with the other is consent. Sneddon was a terrible DA, he didn't even try to hide the fact that he was desperate and that made it even sadder but at least the jury was able to see it for what it was.


Definitely agree, I should have said that the reason I put that there wasn't for it to be used as any kind of defense, it was more about the logic of it since I was talking about one thing automatically being equated with another. Sometimes I'm not very good at explaining what I'm getting at, that was my fault.

People only have speculation when trying to say MJ was a pedo, like equating sharing a bed with sexual activity like it's not possible for there not to be any which I think is very disturbing. Other than that all they have is claims and leaps in logic, but there's nothing which proves their premise. A lot of people don't seem to understand what kind of evidence is needed to prove something like that, we've just seen this on Greg Hildebrant's twitter.

I hope I didn't sound like I was having a go at you in my previous post, it wasn't how I intended it. I'm often frustrated with text like this because sometimes I say something only to realise later how it could be taken. I think that's the biggest drawback of text, it's hard to present tone and emotion.

There is no hard feelings, I know you weren't coming after me. Some times it is hard to give full clarification in text. I think we were saying the same thing, but we kind of miss each other. :)
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

If Michael was accused of raping an underage girl, there would be some outcry, but no where the near the witch hunt we have seen. How may celebrities have said in the open that they had sex with underage women and it is not treated as a big deal? Heck, most people would probably said the girl was asking for it by the way she dressed.

I think a lot of that has to do with history. Historically for a long time age was not really considered a factor when having sexual relationships with someone. I mean you have laws against homosexuality in the Bible, but there is not one passage where it would say it's forbidden to marry people under a certain age. In fact, it was not uncommon for adult men to marry 12-14 year-old girls. Muhammad married a 9-year-old girl when he was 50 and that was not considered wrong at the time.

But fortunately human society evolved and people realized the negative effects it has on a child. However this backward cultural heritage is somehow still installed in people deep down - and IMO that is why male-female pedophilia gets more of a pass sometimes than male-male pedophilia. Even 100-150 years ago it was not uncommon for girls to get married at 14-15.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I have come to the conclusion that most of Michael haters who are like this are secretly pedos themselves or are homophobic. Because you must have a dirty mind to come to the conclusion that Michael having a boy under his arm equals him having sex with them? I mean, they must think all men who have children with them must be having sex with them. I also bet my right eye if Michael was hanging out with young girls instead of boys most of them wouldn't bet an eye. I also bet they wouldn't even be upset if Michael was accused of screwing an underage girl.

Finally, because this really pisses me off, sex offenders do not just have sex in bed. Pedos will raped kids anywhere whether it is in the kitchen, living room, garage, in the antic, or in a parking garage. They will do it if they think no one is watching. They are not going to wait until bed time when they have several other kids in the room and they are certainly not going to do it in a hotel where bodyguards, fans, and random people are walking around.

The people form MJ Facts know crap about real pedos, and sadly, so does the rest of the world.

I have always truly believed they want MJ to have abused kids because they themselves secretly have sick fantasies about child molestation. Calling the people they believe (or want) to be MJ's victims "MJ's Boy lovers" and making comments like this, IMO just proves it.

sowr.png


image.png


Notice how disappointed M.P(SOWR)is about the tweet where Greg tells him he never saw anything inappropriate happen between MJ and children. Anyone in their right frame of mind would be relieved to hear such things never occurred, wouldn't they? But no, M.P is "Sad" about this.

As for (SOWR FB regular) Lisa, she knows the Cascio's still to this day defend MJ, yet she makes disgusting comments like this. Who in their right mind thinks of something sexual from looking at a photo of them all just sleeping, and especially when the people in the photo vehemently deny anything improper ever occurred.

There is something seriously wrong with these people. Like I said, it truly sounds like they want MJ to have abused kids.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

They have serious mental health issues. They focus on Michael with a pathological obsession, constantly parroting the same responses over and over, washing over or completely ignoring facts or simple common sense when it's shown to them. They grasp at straws trying to make proof out of the most innocent things. I'm not even sure if they really even believe he is guilty. It's just as said earlier, a massive power trip for their egos and a sick need to be right no matter what.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

It's also pathetic how they try to turn Hildebrant against MJ by emotional blackmail saying things like "this would rather sad if this is the real Greg Hildebrant" as if there is something shameful in him saying he didn't see anything. If he didn't then he didn't. What do they want? Him to lie? Probably, because obviously these people have no problem with obvious liars as long as they push their agenda.

I do agree with SarahJ, that I can imagine that even they do not really believe some of the crap they spout. It's just a game and power trip to them.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

sowr.png


image.png


Notice how disappointed M.P(SOWR)is about the tweet where Greg tells him he never saw anything inappropriate happen between MJ and children. Anyone in their right frame of mind would be relieved to hear such things never occurred, wouldn't they? But no, M.P is "Sad" about this.

As for (SOWR FB regular) Lisa, she knows the Cascio's still to this day defend MJ, yet she makes disgusting comments like this. Who in their right mind thinks of something sexual from looking at a photo of them all just sleeping, and especially when the people in the photo vehemently deny anything improper ever occurred.

There is something seriously wrong with these people. Like I said, it truly sounds like they want MJ to have abused kids.

Good Lord, please tell me that someone replied to either one of those dumbasses and asked "What's so sickening? Where's the molestation and rape in that photo?" because seriously, there is NOTHING like that there. People are trying too hard to find something that isn't there.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Maybe that's why they posted it. They probably know full well its innocent. Their just looking for a response from fans to feed their need for attention so they can keep spewing their distorted view of reality.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Maybe that's why they posted it. They probably know full well its innocent. Their just looking for a response from fans to feed their need for attention so they can keep spewing their distorted view of reality.

True... although I don't know if it would be good to let them have the last word, either. To not respond would probably come across as a sign of defeat to them. That is, they would notice that it's quiet and go "You're not saying anything about this, so that means you really do think he's a pedo and we were right! We win!"
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

So he's happy to harass Greg and then say he'd be disappointed if it's the real Greg? So, he has no problem with harassing people when he's not even sure if it's the right person? He's pissed because he didn't get what he wanted and neither did the others, they showed their annoyance about that by putting words in Greg's mouth, accusing him of bringing in other people to help defend MJ and trying to say that he was ok with children being molested. These are certainly not respectable people.

Someone genuinely wanting to know the answer to a question about Safechuck wouldn't behave this way when they got their answer, this is clear desperation to have more people say what they want them to say and anyone who doesn't agree is labeled a pedophile supporter. This dishonesty and manipulation is disgusting and it proves beyond reasonable doubt that these people are not to be trusted in any way under any circumstance. I hope more people pay attention to how these people operate so they don't get sucked in by the info on the mjfacts website. To someone who doesn't know much about the subject it could seem very convincing and a lot of people don't know how to look into these things to find out the truth so they believe what they've read because it seems plausible and convincing.

The more these haters talk the more rope there is to hang them with, they're publicly proving they aren't reliable, hopefully then people will think twice about believing what's on their site.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

These guys need to stop harassing people MJ associated with and do something about the real child abuse victims out there.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I've never seen them speak about child abuse not related to MJ in some way, they have an unrelenting obsession and it's very unhealthy. If you care enough to post all over the internet about child abuse it should be something useful that could help people, not going after a dead man day in and day out.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

What makes me especially angry is that Wade seems to want to live on easy street on both the past and future sides of this, (in my opinion). He supported Michael while Michael was still alive, basically building a career off of him. But now he's trying to get money off of Michael's estate by accusing him of abuse years after Michael has died. Personally, I wish that Wade had not testified for Michael at all in 2005. Because look what he's doing now. And this mess is getting increasingly horrific and disgusting with each new article.
 
Last edited:
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Yes, and Wade had to "outdo" everyone by claiming rape. Probably just for the shock factor but it wasn't a smart move since nobody else claimed that. I hope it all blows up in his face.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

What makes me especially angry is that Wade seems to want to live on easy street on both the past and future sides of this, (in my opinion). He supported Michael while Michael was still alive, basically building a career off of him. But now he's trying to get money off of Michael's estate by accusing him of abuse years after Michael has died. Personally, I wish that Wade had not testified for Michael at all in 2005. Because look what he's doing now. And this mess is getting increasingly horrific and disgusting with each new article.

Actually I am glad he did because it gives the estate a lot of facts to attack Wade with. Here was this adult, intelligent man making strong claims on the witness stand that nothing improper happened. I hope once the evidence comes in, Michael's name is taken off in the same way that other guy was removed from the Hollywood molestation case. After all, Michael's side has more documents of Wade's statements that were given in a court of law.
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

Actually I am glad he did because it gives the estate a lot of facts to attack Wade with. Here was this adult, intelligent man making strong claims on the witness stand that nothing improper happened. I hope once the evidence comes in, Michael's name is taken off in the same way that other guy was removed from the Hollywood molestation case. After all, Michael's side has more documents of Wade's statements that were given in a court of law.

Yes, I agree. It's a good thing he testified in 2005. It would be harder to fight against his allegations if he hadn't. That doesn't mean though that James will have an easier run - although he never testified, but he too is on the record saying that MJ never molested him as he was certainly interviewed by the police in 1993. And he was of course aware of the trial in 2005 at the age of 27, so he too is in difficulty of explaining how a criminal trial did not trigger anything in him, but the prospect of suing for money now did...
 
Re: [Discussion] Wade Robson files claim of sexual abuse against MJ-Estate

I hope once the evidence comes in, Michael's name is taken off in the same way that other guy was removed from the Hollywood molestation case. After all, Michael's side has more documents of Wade's statements that were given in a court of law.


I hope so too. Because Wade's entire case seems to be centered around making excuses for why his glowing 2005 testimony and his 20 years overall of defending Michael shouldn't count, in my opinion. The Estate needs to be ready with the cold hard facts to deflect anything he could throw at them.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top