I know for a fact that these perjurers are lying and Dan (g)reed is making noise and the journalists who believe the lies are quite gullible but I do have some questions:
I have watched the full CBS interview of Wade and James but I haven't seen the mockumentary because I am too young but does that make me biased?
Maybe to some people. But the same could be said for people who then don't watch Square One or who take the documentary at face value after multiple inaccuracies were identified in it. The same could be said for the people who don't read court transcripts, or who don't listen to the people named in LN who actually vehemently oppose the claims in it (such as Brett Barnes). If it helps, I am definitely old enough to watch LN, but I have chosen not to. It is unlikely I ever will.
.is there any other justification why Michael had sleepovers and also why this can not be treated as absolute proof that he was a abuser?
As was mentioned above, I believe the sleepover thing was highly overblown. From my understanding, this wasn't a constant or regular occurrence with anyone. It is also my understanding that a large amount of time, other adults were present because Michael's bedroom was two stories and like the size of a condo. So my understanding is that it was a casual space people spent time. It was not something he intentionally sought out, but rather something that resulted from his closeness to the families in question.
For what it's worth, I used to find the sleepovers weird and I guess on some level they can be viewed that way. But since looking into all of this, I actually recalled that when I was a child I had a female caretaker (not a nanny...just a family friend) and I used to beg to sleepover at her house and I only wanted to sleep with her, in her bed. I had no interest in guest rooms. My parents were fine with it, she was fine with it, I was happy. No weirdness at all. This happened many times when I was a child, because I was the only one of my siblings who was extremely close to her, even though we all hung out. The main difference is in MJ's case is that he was a man.
.if I watched the mockumentary would I completely turn against MJ and if I did how I could go back to remembering the facts?
There is really no way of knowing what it would do to you to watch it. But it's important to keep in mind that ALL media uses certain tactics to illicit emotional responses from their viewers. The goal in the case of most, if not all, communication is to persuade. So it's important to look at what tactics are being used to persuade. If there are no ways to back up claims whatsoever, then the narrative will typically lean heavily into appealing to your emotion, rather than your intellect. I am not someone who thinks there is anything inherently wrong with appealing to emotion, but if that is ALL you do, then it is likely due to a lack of true evidence that would appeal to intellect (which is what has been consistently found when it comes to LN). If you choose to watch LN, keep in mind that their primary evidence is stories from two people, which include a lot of misinformation that has been disproven with hard evidence (such as dates, building permits, etc).
. Is there any sort of proof that Michael is innocent that may root from propaganda?
You mean propaganda trying to convince us of Michael's innocence? There will always be people who try to manipulate stories, data, images/videos, etc to push a narrative they want. So surely there is some content out there in Michael's defense that may not be entirely factual either. HOWEVER, the thing to keep in mind in this case is that Michael spent his entire life
fighting propaganda against him. There is absolutely proof of
that. Media manipulation cannot be denied at all in his case. So the amount of propaganda against MJ is almost incalculable. And the root of that is not some conspiracy theory, but just the undeniable fact that as the most famous person in the world, there was and still is A LOT of money to be made off of his name.
The most important thing to remember is that, in Michael's case, facts really do support his innocence. Facts that not only discredit LN, but the other allegations from when he was alive.
Will the money on GoFundMe will be properly used for the real documentary?
Presumably. Taj seems extremely committed to his uncle's legacy. I have had my doubts at times. I've never thought that Taj is pocketing the money, or anything like that. But that maybe it's just not possible to complete this project. Maybe it's too big. Maybe there are other obstacles with the estate. Who knows. That's a feeling I've had occasionally. But I can also see Taj intentionally holding back on updates in order to preserve the narrative and not let anything "leak" that can be misrepresented by the media.
If it helps, the MJCast podcast has done a few different LN round table discussions where they discuss a lot of this at length. I found these episodes to be extremely helpful resources for me.
I also really liked this article by Joe Vogel who is a professor who has written multiple books about Michael over the years:
Recent allegations against the pop icon are disturbing. But do they hold up to scrutiny?
www.forbes.com
