Jump to content

136 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Bey'Knight
15 hours ago, The7thStranger said:

Why would I? Link to a proper source.

 

I've already browsed through the documents in the FBI archive. I've heard the rhetoric and conspiracy theories from both Michael's most hardcore detractors on this site and his die-hard fans. All of it is just that: theory.

 

The evidence and complaints filed are severely lacking in reliability, which is nothing came of them other than a court trial and a bunch of accusations. It's been proven time and time again that the evidence collected was not and still is not enough to prove guilt. I'm already fully aware that Michael had inappropriate contact with children. That painfully clear by his well-documented behaviors and choices.What isn't proven is that he sexual assaulted them.

 

People made up their minds about Michael when we lived through the accusations in the 90s and the trial in the 2000s. He wasn't ever fully "cancelled" or "over," and he never will be. His celebrity has transcended both his inappropriate actions and his alleged crimes. His legacy was tarnished, but it will never go away.

There’s never going to be evidence of such heinous acts that occurred decades ago. What we have is as good as it gets and if all of the evidence and witness statements available were stacked against a regular Joe not named MJ, I guarantee the whole world would not think twice before declaring him cancelled. 

 

The public is not the court of law. The fact that he was openly inappropriate with children is enough. The court system is man-made and ultimately subject to flaws. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The7thStranger
1 minute ago, Bey'Knight said:

What we have is as good as it gets and if all of the evidence and witness statements available were stacked against a regular Joe not named MJ, I guarantee the whole world would not think twice before declaring him cancelled. 

Tell that to Brett Kavanaugh, though. Up until his nomination, he was a regular Joe. He's certainly not cancelled.

2 minutes ago, Bey'Knight said:

The public is not the court of law. The fact that he was openly inappropriate with children is enough. The court system is man-made and ultimately subject to flaws.

I agree. But people ultimately have the power to choose who remains a part of their own lives. And the court of public opinion has already determined that Michael Jackson, despite the allegations, is important and almost intrinsic to modern culture. He's not going anywhere. So, for that, I have to say that MJ is not over. And I don't think he ever will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DougAF

I don’t even understand how some of these MJ stans only appear in threads criticizing him. The estate paying you or what? 

 

I’ve seen all of you call the allegations false but still haven’t seen one of you justify his behavior and relationships with little boys. If you can’t defend it, sweep it under the rug I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bey'Knight
3 hours ago, The7thStranger said:

Tell that to Brett Kavanaugh, though. Up until his nomination, he was a regular Joe. He's certainly not cancelled.

I agree. But people ultimately have the power to choose who remains a part of their own lives. And the court of public opinion has already determined that Michael Jackson, despite the allegations, is important and almost intrinsic to modern culture. He's not going anywhere. So, for that, I have to say that MJ is not over. And I don't think he ever will be.

I’m not familiar with that person but how comparable is his case to Michael’s ?  I wouldn’t compare to a politician to a regular Joe anyway. 

 

Yea I know he won’t be “over”. Whatever that really means for a deceased. My point is he isn’t over simply cus of the allure attached to his name. His deferenders are simply not separating the artist from the man. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The7thStranger
2 minutes ago, Bey'Knight said:

I’m not familiar with that person but how comparable is his case to Michael’s ?  I wouldn’t compare to a politician to a regular Joe anyway. 

 

Yea I know he won’t be “over”. Whatever that really means for a deceased. My point is he isn’t over simply cus of the allure attached to his name. His deferenders are simply not separating the artist from the man. 

The Kavanaugh scandal happened a few months ago. He wasn't well known until he was nominated to be on the Supreme Court. Shortly after, a few women accused him of rape and one testified at a nationally broadcast hearing. None of the women, however, could offer solid evidence, so nothing ever came of it other than a bunch of a controversy. Now he's a sitting judge, despite showing overly emotional, irrational, and disgusting behavior during his hearing. I can determine that Kavanaugh is ill-fit for his position the same way I can determine that Jackson acted inappropriately with children according to the expected civil customs and laws of my community. But I cannot call them rapists. :michael:

 

As for MJ's stans, some act as you say and some don't. There's a wide spectrum of those who maintain his innocence, some because he was never proven guilty and no evidence exists to prove otherwise; some because they can't simply fathom that their idol would ever do something like that and so they lash out. I don't think the dialogue of "you're trash for defending him, you little pedo lover" does a whole lot to help. :katie:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mcohen
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, joelovesmusic said:

giphy13.gif?w=245

 

* You stated Living with Michael Jackson as one of the sources, Martin Bashir was the presenter and interviewed MJ. The documentary tried to show MJ in a distorted picture. After Michael died, Bashir went on record on ABC and said "Certainly, when I made the documentary, there was a small part of that which contained a controversy concerning his relationship with other young people. But the truth is that he was never convicted of any crime, I never saw any wrongdoing myself and whilst his lifestyle may have been a bit unorthodox, I don't believe it was criminal and I think the world has now lost the greatest entertainer it's probably ever known"  .

 

* You mentioned Terry George. The allegations suggest that he had phone sex with Michael when he was 13 in 1979. The publication was made by The Sun in 1993, right after Chandler's allegations. In its story about the FBI file, the Sun repeatedly referred to the phonecall between Jackson and Terry George as a matter of fact, even though no evidence has ever been produced to prove that the conversation ever took place.  The other part of the story is that George "allegedly" owned phone sex companies. He was interviewed a few years ago where he has an audio cassette of MJ and him talking on the phone (nothing sexual) (trying to find the link to that story). He also mentioned that it was a friend who sold the story to the sun, not him. Also, in several tweets from 2009-2012, he has been persistent in defending MJ against the press. Just to follow up, In subsequent interviews George has described how he lost touch with Jackson and resorted to behaviour which could be described as stalking - calling the Jackson all the time, hanging around outside his hotels, trying to bluff his way past Jackson's security. More than anything, George's interview with the Sun seemed like an act of jealous revenge by an embittered former acquaintance. Either way, the FBI found no merit to George's claim. 

 

Some sources: http://www.mjfancommunity.com/hel-phantom.htm  about the "Phantom" victims

https://charlesthomsonjournalist.blogspot.com/search?q=michael+jackson - Charles Thomson's blogs are fascinating because it gives very detailed info about all the allegations' myths.  In here you find:

* The inaccuracies on Jordan Chandler's testimony about the genitalia  - https://charlesthomsonjournalist.blogspot.com/2009/10/guardian-columnist-insinuates-that.html

* How the FBI files (not investigation I misspoke) only prove MJ's innocence , including Myth/Fact about each allegation made by media reports (the Mexico 1985 case for example) - https://charlesthomsonjournalist.blogspot.com/2010/01/fbi-files-support-jacksons-innocence.html 

* Where the allegations by Neverland employees came from and why they had no merit - https://charlesthomsonjournalist.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-mirror-people-and-settlement-that.html

 

* Adrian McManus (the maid) made the allegations of seeing MJ kissing boys, including Macaulay Culkin. Culkin has denied those claims saying it never happened. Ralph Chacon (the security guard), made a similar allegations. It was during the 2005 trial that they questioned because they didn't tell the FBI, instead selling their stories to tabloids (they admitted to the latter during the trial) ; they were also found guilty to stealing from MJ's home (items worth $50,000) McManus also confessed that "several employees had banded together to hire a 'media broker' to peddle Jackson sex stories that they made up" https://www.theguardian.com/music/2005/apr/17/michaeljackson.michaeljacksontrial

 

* The Arvizo's and Chandler's (particularly the parents) were proven to be inadequate and incoherent during their testimonies during 2005.  Here's a BBC profile on the Arvizo family http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4584531.stm The Arvizo's also have a bad history with other celebrities such as George Lopez, Jay Leno and Chris Tucker.

 

* The accuser known as John Doe, also showed incoherences in his testimony in 2005, changing it repeatedly along with his brother James Doe. John apparently was so bizarre, he was falling asleep during his testimony. 

* Phillip Lemarque, the chef at Neverland admitted during the trial that he had talks with a tabloid to sell his story for 100k, and that he had been told the story was worth more "if Jackson's hands were inside Culkin's underpants, not outside". https://www.theguardian.com/music/2005/apr/17/michaeljackson.michaeljacksontrial

 

 

Just want to clarify, I never called you a liar in my original post.

I'm really glad you did this. I know its not your fault but there is a lot of fake information out there

 

  • Leaving Neverland features DIRECT QUOTES from Michael Jackson. Words he spoke that came out of his mouth and no one else's. That can't be misconstructed. Martin Bashir was also the recipient of hate and death threats from MJ stans at the time. 
  • Here is a video of the lead investigator Bill Dworin and photographer of the incident confirming Jordan Chandler did accurately describe MJ's genitalia. MJ stans at least don't try to fight facts. This is why you lose so much credibility.
  • The files in the FBI website available to the public are proof this statement is not true. This is one of the records. Anyone can access them, and I urge you too. A reasonable person would argue that the files make MJ look like a serial child molester, somehow to MJ stans, it clears his name. The source you put up doesn't say anything and only includes a portion of the 300-page document. 
  • D1rOUkOVYAAl-VS.jpg
  • You can't call 10, 12 or 15 workers liars. That's not only illogical but also why didn't the defense team hold them in content of the court or for perjury? It doesn't make sense that the defense team would allow 10, 12 or 15 different people to go up to the stand and lie. Why didn't they do something about it, like try to charge them with perjury? Just because a WORKER was paid at some point, later on, counter-sued or anything else does not make them unreliable. This argument is ridiculous and one that isn't considered in any other criminal case including R. Kelly's.
  • Adrian McManus testified under oat. No one prosecuted her for perjury.
  • You mean Michael Jackson had the best defense team money could buy, and they managed to confuse and target the credibility of the witnesses? Shocker. Read their FULL testimonies and conclude on your own. Also, explain to me why Michael Jackson settled for $25m, 1/4 of his total worth at the time, the day before his deposition and right after the genital description matched the photos?
  • There is no right or wrong way for people to act. Checks signed by Michael and linked to his bank account confirm Jane Does argument. She also never testified in the 2005 trial nor do we know if she has a brother. So please don't lie. 
  • D1zBx6tXgAAOCk_.jpg

There is also so much more information you didn't acknowledge in my post, and that speaks volume. "Where there's smoke, there's fire," and **** does Michael Jackson emit a lot of smoke. I get it it's tough finding out your idol is a sick man but trying to silence the victims and ignore all of the incriminating evidence is not a good strategy. My sources also included the Santa Barbara Official Court Documents website. All of yours are pro-Jackson websites with NO external sources and only a small portion of the testimonies or court documents used to defend their position. One can make anyone look innocent by doing that. 
 

Please also research who Charles Johnson is and why he has been banned from Twitter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
mcohen

Also, MJ sleeping thousands of nights alone with children (Confirmed by MJ and the testimonies of Brett Barnes, Culkin, Wade Robson, Arvizo) is in itself weird as ****, highly inappropriate, extremely unhealthy and enough reason to want to silence his music. There is absolutely no reason for a grown man to be bed-sharing with pubescent boys. There is only one thing he could possibly want to do for this to make sense. 

 

The fact people don't mention this more honestly worries me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horizon Flame

Michael Jackson's mess of a life and ultimate conclusion was all his own doing. He was never a victim but sure loved playing one. He fed the tabloids all the stories about himself, too, even posing for the oxygen chamber photo. He was a pathological liar and his claims against Sony were also bogus. The man had serious issues. Someone should have taken him aside and told him to grow the hell up and get over it. Go see a shrink and stop whining. The fact of the matter is, he was a predator and a sociopath. Was he talented? Yes. Did he help people? Yes. Did he also help people to get something twisted in return? I'm sure of it. Was everything a manipulation? Probably not. That's the thing. People see pedophiles and even serial killers as having to act like monsters 100% of the time. That's not true. Most of them live double lives and compartmentalize what they're doing. Some have even theorized that Michael was messing with his face to deal with what he was doing to children. Everyone knows he was a drug addict, which later turned to alcoholism. That can help you mentally tune out your actions from over the years. Then again, Michael showed all the signs of sociopathic behavior, so I doubt he cared. He probably just saw himself as a victim and everyone else in the world as stupid. His narcissism was off the charts. Wait until others come forward with their stories. If you think this is the end, think again. It's going to get a million times worse. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
highwind44029

Of course not. As long as his music is accessible to the public, he will never be truly over. Spotify and YouTube alone will keep his legacy alive through his music as long it's available on those platforms. This fact stands regardless of what anyone thinks of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stevyy
53 minutes ago, highwind44029 said:

Of course not. As long as his music is accessible to the public, he will never be truly over. Spotify and YouTube alone will keep his legacy alive through his music as long it's available on those platforms. This fact stands regardless of what anyone thinks of him.

they could ban his music and his physical sales would dramatically increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FreeXone
23 hours ago, Queen Bea. said:

I don’t think any musicians or artists are paragons of good or evil, everyone is in a shade of grey but I, like many other people, cannot in good conscience listen to music made by someone with such an obviously inappropriate relationships with kids.

 

if you can’t picture his exact behaviour in literally anyone, any random man on the street, and see it for what it is then I genuinely feel sorry for you. It’s one thing to appreciate and defend the music, it’s another to continually try and paint an obviously deeply troubled person as a saint who just purely and innocently loved (only male) children. I’m not the one trying to paint anyone as squeaky clean.

Bitch shut up..you talk too much. 

 

Alexa play rock with you by Michael Jackson!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites