Notice
Thread ordered by most liked posts - View normal thread.

Web30

VIP Member
Iv watched the first part today. Now iv read and seen so much about Wade and his pushy stage mum that i just dont believe him at all. Jimmy iv not really heard much about. Im not falling for it though, i just dont look at mj as someone who would do those things to a kid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

AbnormalFrog

VIP Member
He didn't have a childhood....that is something I don't get as an excuse because there are millions who went through the same or worse who didn't grow up to do what he did. It's as bad as the 'he was still a child/asexual' excuses when there is tons of evidence he was far from it. There are videos of him lusting after women and people talking about buying him porn etc which proves it was bullshit. Of course they then use that as an other excuse to proof his innocense like there havent't been countless instances of straight men married for years with kids being caught with CSAM containing just boys.


BIB - it's the saint effect that happens to everyone when they die. Diana is the perfect example. When she was alive she could be a right nasty cow. Even friends said she could be really vindictive yet the minute she died, people forgot she had flaws and could be nippy and decided she was a saint who was too good for us idiots. There are people out there who think the likes of Bundy, Dahmer and other serial killers were poor guys who just weren't treated right....it's mad but it happens.
Totally agree with everything you've wrote! Even down to the stuff about Diana, I dont think of her as the saint the world seems to either 🤣
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

shellie

VIP Member
He said he slept on the floor, that part always gets missed out / glossed over
He also said in another interview there was nothing wrong in sleeping in a bed with children. The exact quote being "What's wrong with sharing your bed? I didn't say I slept in the bed. Even if I did sleep in the bed, it's okay. I am not going to do anything sexual to a child."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

Horatio

VIP Member
Yeah I read a similar article that summarised the allegations, very graphic, very grim as you say.

Im inclined to believe them. I know the Jackson stuff has been a mess going back and forth for years but I do believe when he was alive he held a lot of power to intimidate- that’s what wealth like that can do. I don’t know if it’s in this documentary but I saw something recently about his former housekeeper who says as much and retracted her testimony that said she saw no abuse - she now says she did and that he threatened her to keep quiet. At this point what would be in it for her to lie?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

KINGAA

VIP Member
why would MJ beg young male fans to share his bed? beg their parents, pay them off with gifts.

MJ was enabled, he was a huge star back then with an entourage of enablers keen to keep his dirty secrets hidden.

I believe MJ was a paedophile. I was a big fan and went to see him in an amazing concert.

he shouldn’t have shared his bed with kids, he was proud of it, announcing how natural it was on more than one occasion.
It was either Mark Ronson or Culkin brothers that said he never shared the actual bed, his room was apparently like an apartment and had multiple bedrooms or something and the kids would sleep in one and him in another which was in another part or something and his security would be with him. I don’t remember which celeb said it or which doc it was said in or there was something like he’d actually leave and not sleep there - allegedly.

I think he was VERY stupid to do that and his team were careless to allow it to ever happen! Again, don’t think he’s innocent but I don’t think he’s fully guilty and clearly had issues. I think he was on the spectrum if im honest and didn’t fully comprehend he was a grown adult.

With Weinstein and Epstein it was very black and white with evidence so it’s just so bizarre to me that MJ’s case lack a shred of something, like nothing at all. Even the 2005 trial had next to nothing and Sony settled not MJ , he didn’t want to settle. It’s just not adding up, it’s what I can’t get my head around.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6

Tangerine Dream

VIP Member
The film is being absolutely panned . Kinda disappointed but expected nothing less to be fair :(
I've almost never enjoyed any of these big biopics.

I couldn't get through half an hour of Elivs because it was making me feel like I was on an acid trip. I normally like the director but not here, and Tom Hanks was terrible from what I saw.

I didn't bother with the Whitney or Amy films because Whitney managed to find someone who couldn't look anything less like Whintey and the Amy one looked so so cheap and cringe.

I skipped the Bruce Springsteen one when it was said to leave loads and loads out including some of his best music. What's the point?

It's a genre I've largely given up on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

Dexy

VIP Member
I can only see the marriage as an absolute sham. Married in May 94, Presley filed for divorce in January 96.
I have scented diffusers that lasted longer.

There is nothing to suggest that the marriage was authentic in any way, but then it looked very orchestrated - following allegations against him.
Same. I really wanted to believe it was real but then the timing and then her explanation of how they got together and she was still with Danny was crazy! It sounded made up to me, surely he wouldn’t be ok with that! Having said that in the interview her and MJ did with Diane Sawyer their love looked genuine. She spoke in interviews about how their relationship was real. I mean she’s Elvis’s daughter she doesn’t need the publicity? She said she was nervous about having kids with him because of a custody battle. I can see why she was worried about that. She was devastated when he died too. So I don’t know. Maybe it was genuine but just a typical Hollywood flash in the pan marriage where two big egos come together but have issues and the relationship just doesn’t have staying power.

*edited to add the diffuser comment really made me laugh 🤣
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 6

shellie

VIP Member
She was 11 she will remember him well. His only daughter isn't supporting this and one of her brothers didn't turn up either. It's very telling because they used to go to anything.
Paris has made it clear she thinks it's nothing more than a cash grab from people who were already wasting his money who don't care if some if not a lot of it is fiction.


Pop Bitch is also talking about him today with some known stories that used to go around about him.

1.jpg

2.jpg
 
  • Wow
  • Sick
  • Like
Reactions: 6

Islawight

VIP Member
The standard of proof in a criminal trial is beyond all reasonable doubt. The jury had reasonable doubt.

I think having cameras and recordings of the bedroom if MJ was innocent of the abuse would open up another can of worms...

I feel that Michael was innocent but I also understand why people think he isn't. To me the stories of the alleged victims just don't add up and they have some shady behaviours around MJ (selling his underwear...seriously...it is totally fucked up).
I find it difficult to believe that someone who is innocent of these allegations would continually put himself in a situation without backup proof that it’s just an innocent cuddle in bed. 👀
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

Belleeyes

Well-known member
I haven't had a chance to see the doc yet, but from what I've heard it could be convincing.

There's definitely something wrong, everyone can agree that sleeping with young boys is wrong even if nothing happened. Boundaries were crossed.

What I don't understand though, is the fact that the parents were okay with these sleepovers? Everyone is having a go at the parents of the Abuducted in Plain Sight documentary, quite rightly. Why isn't it as clear cut in this case?

I still am in two minds, having heard that there were lawsuits against Jackson's estate that didn't come to anything, and that they testified for him but now are coming out and saying they lied under oath?

It seems a bit suspect that now they aren't benefiting from their relationship with him, now they have produced this documentary.

Also I hate that on Twitter and elsewhere that people are saying that if I dont believe these two particular people I am victim blaming, and I am contributing to why victims don't come forward in a general sense.

I have no doubt the relationships were not conventional and definitely crossed some boundarys. But I also don't want to ignore that the parents continued to support these 'friendships' as they benefited from them on a lot of ways, as did these two men. Plus their testimonials under oath. I just don't think it is as clear cut I'm afraid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

KINGAA

VIP Member
I watched it, it added nothing new at all. Just felt like a reminder that this thing potentially happened. I still cannot bring myself to believe either of them. They’ve lied waaaay too much and changed stories too many times. I don’t think MJ was innocent but Wade especially is dodgy AF.

I get the fact why it’s thrown out, MJ Productions is not and never was Michael is was his business to run his music and tours therefore nothing to do with the situation so suing that for the hundreds of millions they’re asking for is kinda pointless - esp as MJ was broke so where is that money coming from???? It’s like suing the whole company because of a CEO, when it should be the CEO. Of whom is dead and cannot defend.

what has never added up to me, is how the FBI watched MJ for years, tapped in on everything and found absolutely nothing, not a shred of evidence… it’s just odd!
 
  • Like
  • Heart
Reactions: 6

Miss Havisham

VIP Member
But he never got away? And wasn’t hiding in plain sight like Saville - the conversation has been ongoing for years, he went to court, he went under the FBI investigations multiple times, he was never convicted.

He has been in the public court of law for 33 years and it will never ever end because as the public we see him generally as guilty because it’s hard to fathom why a grown ass man was having sleep overs and giving minors alcohol etc. It’s all layers of messed up but he never got away with anything really, he was done and over since that first case. The only thing people want now is millions of dollars, but these families were fine with shipping their kids off to him though at the time… like I know grooming is a thing but come on, really letting a grown man be alone and share a bed with your child. They wanted his money, the parents of these children who are suing should also be cross examined if these go to court.
I agree - the parents of those (then) children, should be answerable. He played on the notion that he was a Peter Pan figure and an odd ball. I now find him to be very manipulative. He was probably right when he said he was falsely accused, as it is sort of inevitable that someone will falsely accuse a man of his wealth and fame. I feel he conveniently hid behind a couple of false accusations, whilst he was actually abusing children.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6

Pretty Hate Machine

Well-known member
To me he seemed like the most asexual man on the planet. I know he had supposed relationships but nothing of any substance. They looked like publicity stunts for both parties. The marriage to Lisa Marie was weird. His obsession with looking like Liz Taylor and Liza minelli was in line with feeling more feminine than masculine. I think if anything he was a gay man in the closet. Am I right in that no girl children were invited into his bed? Not a question just to you but a general question.
I always thought the same about no girl children, but I read an article the other day that talked about a payoff to a female child. It was accompanied by a 90 something page court document which talked quite graphically about the abuse (I would highly recommend not reading or scanning it) I'll have a quick look later and see if I can find where I saw it.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: 6

Twinkle6

VIP Member
People are starting to notice every time there is something MJ lucrative there’s media slander and some sort of law suit/grifter asking for money. There is a definite pattern.

1993 – Chandler allegations: Emerged during the Dangerous Tour, at a time when the tour was generating massive revenue and Michael Jackson was consolidating control over his catalog assets.

2003 – Arvizo allegations: Surfaced as Jackson was preparing the Number Ones compilation and negotiating his exit from Sony, positioning himself for independent monetization of his catalog as a free agent.

2013–2014 – Robson and Safechuck civil filings: Filed amid a surge in posthumous estate revenue, with Cirque du Soleil shows running and catalog valuation rising toward the eventual $750 million Sony buyout.

2019 – Leaving Neverland: Released as the estate was preparing a Broadway musical and finalizing the latter phase of the Sony/ATV transaction.

2026 – Cascio lawsuit: Surfaced the same weekend Lionsgate released the estate-partnered biopic, which was projected to significantly boost catalog interest and merchandising.

Also Leaving Neverland rushed into Toronto film festival the day Harvey Weinsteins trial started.
I’ve always been on the fence with everything but is it true that not one of the accusers pushed for criminalisation, it was always about compensation? If he was such a bastard wouldn’t you want him off the streets?

This is where I fear one of two things - that none of it were true, or that some of it was and others have hopped onto the whole thing of the back of true victims. The Cascios are at it. They even named one of their daughters after him.

I don’t think the media has helped at all. The truth is so far buried under sensationalism at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6