Leaving Neverland

[sistermagpie]

1 minute ago, Umbelina said:

The idea that MJ criticized others for wearing makeup, and accused them of artifice is really the height of hypocrisy. 

LOL. Yeah, I almost added, "She didn't really look like that...unlike him and James, who were BOTH exactly as God made them..."

[icecweem]

Now I understand why everyone in the chat is convinced the claims are true. There are literally no counter arguments addressed throughout this whole documentary hence why HBO is being sued for the documentary now (among other reasons). You have family members of MJ as well as other boys Michael befriended that claim it isn't true as well Wade's cousin who claimed Wade is lying (the cousin claimed to have spent time with MJ too and Wade never addressed his cousins claims). I get the point of MJ being particular about who he touched or violated but lets be honest here; how easy is it for Wade or James to say "yes MJ sexually abused me" nearly 10 years after he passed away. If it truly affected him his whole life, why wait until you get rejected as a lead choreographer in a Jackson themed tribute to write a book or start remembering what MJ did to you (I wonder if this documentary would even exist if he never got rejected). Nothing adds up but no one here believes this because the documentary didn't even attempt to address the other side. When your story constantly changes, it makes it harder for people to believe you. But since it is pretty much the waiting game at this point, we'll see if any money comes out of them doing this. If so then now you know what they did it for. If money was never a factor, you wouldn't need an HBO documentary to come out, that's the power of social media. Oh and before anyone claims that I'm such a fan of MJ that i only want to defend him, wrong, I don't particularly care for him but I wouldn't want his legacy tarnished because of lies.

[A.Ham]

10 hours ago, icecweem said:

Nothing adds up

To me, it all more than adds up.

While a documentary has the responsibility to present the truth, it bears no responsibility to favor a child predator. I can't imagine having watched the  documentary and the Oprah special and still coming away caring more about the legacy of a superstar rather than the effects of child sexual abuse, but that's just me.

Edited March 13, 2019 by A.Ham
Darn autocorrect

[icecweem]

4 minutes ago, A.Ham said:

To me, it all more than adds up.

While a documentary has the responsibility to present the truth, it bears no responsibility to favor a child predator. I can't imagine having watched the  documentary and the Oprah special and still comine away caring more about the legacy of a superstar rather than the effects of child sexual abuse, but that's just me.

I think documentaries should have the responsibility to tell both sides. You can favor whatever side you want but at least the opposing side would still be in there. If neither side has PHYSICAL proof then there's really nothing anyone can do but believe them or not believe them. The term "innocent until proven guilty" is there for a reason.

[Melina22]

37 minutes ago, icecweem said:

of MJ that i only want to defend him, wrong, I don't particularly care for him but I wouldn't want his legacy tarnished because of lies.

Icecweem, I respectfully disagree with you, but I'm actually happy to see a different point of view expressed here. In order to decide what we think about something in an unbiased way, it's so important to hear more than one side,without getting all upset and defensive. I like that we can differ peacefully in this forum. 

[Robert Lynch]

A perfect example would be say a priest abused this boy and this boy hasn't said a word for let us say 20 years ago. Things like that are traumatic for people who experienced this and don't want to tell a soul about what happened. It is because this priest is very important to the community and maybe this priest have a special hold on this certain boy. People do have power on certain individuals, even if that person that did the bad deed is wrong. It is not just MJ, but others that committed more horrible crimes than him. You see it in offices, restaurants, public places, and it doesn't stop there. It is sad when people confessed that this certain person did was wrong and usually that person is long gone. It happens a lot.

 It is not the entertainment industry, but anywhere you could think of that set red flags and not report it a number of years.

Edited March 13, 2019 by Robert Lynch

[Umbelina]

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

Now I understand why everyone in the chat is convinced the claims are true.

Because it's a compelling and believable recount of a very talented, but very troubled strange man who slept in beds with small boys regularly?

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

There are literally no counter arguments addressed throughout this whole documentary hence why HBO is being sued for the documentary now (among other reasons).

The director of this documentary aptly and thoroughly explains this in several articles linked in this thread.  Personally I think the Slate interview is most comprehensive, you might enjoy reading that.  I highly recommend it.

The lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with the structure of the documentary or that "both sides" weren't represented by the way.

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

You have family members of MJ as well as other boys Michael befriended that claim it isn't true as well Wade's cousin who claimed Wade is lying (the cousin claimed to have spent time with MJ too and Wade never addressed his cousins claims).

Those family members have a powerful financial reason to defend MJ, he was their meal ticket, and still is. 

As for the cousin, I haven't seen that one, but certainly the documentary never suggested that every single boy that MJ invited to Neverland was molested.  Among other things, it would have been much too time consuming to groom each family and child, and there are only so many hours in the day.  A few people saying now that it never happened to them doesn't mean a thing.  It's also possible MJ simply was not attracted to them, or that their parents were more vigilant.

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

I get the point of MJ being particular about who he touched or violated but lets be honest here; how easy is it for Wade or James to say "yes MJ sexually abused me" nearly 10 years after he passed away

If you watch the documentary, or the Oprah or Gayle (or several other interviews) it's very apparent that none of this has be "easy" for either young man, or for their families.  As expected, they are now being viciously attacked all over social media, and have had multiple death threats made against them and their families. 

Their pain was heartbreaking to watch.

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

If it truly affected him his whole life, why wait until you get rejected as a lead choreographer in a Jackson themed tribute to write a book or start remembering what MJ did to you (I wonder if this documentary would even exist if he never got rejected). Nothing adds up but no one here believes this because the documentary didn't even attempt to address the other side.

That is also completely addressed in both interviews (the best one is Oprah's) and in the documentary.  Watching their children grow, and seeing them at the same ages they were when molested and groomed and conned sent one into shock at the realization of just how young he really was, how unformed his ability to understand what was really happening to him.

They loved MJ, and lied for him, and kept his endlessly reinforced silences and secrets for years, until they finally had to face the absolute wrecking ball damage he had done to them, and with a lot of therapy, realize how it had all happened, and that it wasn't their fault.  They are still struggling with it, as are their families.

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

When your story constantly changes, it makes it harder for people to believe you.

I agree with that, but not in this case.  Watching the documentary and these men explain and explore how and why they lied for MJ for so long is one of the most believable and powerful parts of this documentary.

La Toya's story sure changed over the years.

I hope it helps other families learn how to avoid predators, and encourages a lot more conversation at early ages between parents and children.  It was extremely enlightening about how all of this can, and does happen.  Usually the predators are not as famous as MJ, so at least the victims can sometimes escape the additional damage these two face because their abuser was famous and beloved.

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

But since it is pretty much the waiting game at this point, we'll see if any money comes out of them doing this.

The Jackson family as well has a powerful interest in money, keeping it flowing in from MJ's estate.

As for Wade and James?  I seriously hope they DO get money, but money will never undo the damaged lives both must lead. 

That is also explained in the documentary and interviews by the way.  Since the statute of limitations has run out, court is the only possible way to seek justice, and since MJ is dead and can't be imprisoned, or punished, money is the only argument courts will hear.

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

If money was never a factor, you wouldn't need an HBO documentary to come out, that's the power of social media.

They didn't seek the documentary, or suggest it, or make a dime from it.  The director sought THEM out, and others, but these two were the only ones brave enough, or ready enough, to finally speak the truth.

1 hour ago, icecweem said:

Oh and before anyone claims that I'm such a fan of MJ that i only want to defend him, wrong, I don't particularly care for him but I wouldn't want his legacy tarnished because of lies.

Why, if you're not a fan, do you care about his legacy?  Just curious.

For me, I always believed the kids, so if there was tarnish, it was because of MJ, not children.

37 minutes ago, icecweem said:

I think documentaries should have the responsibility to tell both sides. You can favor whatever side you want but at least the opposing side would still be in there. If neither side has PHYSICAL proof then there's really nothing anyone can do but believe them or not believe them. The term "innocent until proven guilty" is there for a reason.

Again, read the Slate article. 

There was physical proof in his trial, the child was able to correctly draw the marks on MJ's penis. 

MJ was very smart, very practiced, very careful.  He never had sex with children with witnesses present. 

This documentary was not a court case, it was a powerful story of  child sexual abuse that will hopefully enlighten parents.  It certainly enlightened me about how these disgusting predators prey on children and their parents.  MJ had more money, more toys, more fame, and probably more charisma than most.

Other than that?  He was just another predator.  It was easier for him, but the process is the same for priests, scout leaders, clergymen, uncles, neighbors, sports coaches, and all the others out their abusing children.

Edited March 13, 2019 by Umbelina

[sistermagpie]

8 minutes ago, icecweem said:

I think documentaries should have the responsibility to tell both sides. You can favor whatever side you want but at least the opposing side would still be in there. If neither side has PHYSICAL proof then there's really nothing anyone can do but believe them or not believe them. The term "innocent until proven guilty" is there for a reason.

I think the director's pov on this is pretty reasonable. His interest in the story is the story of grooming and how it works, not proving or not proving MJ's guilt beyond any doubt. Anything that can be confirmed is already confirmed--nobody, including MJ when he was alive, disputed that he spent the time with the kids without supervision, that he slept with them. So he had the opportunity. There's superficial confirmation in things like the faxes or the jewelry or the hand holding etc..

One side is MJ himself saying that it was all innocent--those interviews are widely available. He actually had a bigger platform than they did or do. Then there's these guys being interviewed and saying there was sex. Either of them could be lying since anyone can lie. But WR not getting any particular job doesn't seem like much of a smoking gun to me--MJ obviously had far more motivation to lie if it's true. Innocent until proven guilty is about going to jail, not public opinion.

Both men are being accused of running a con for money as well, after all, without proof. But it actually seems like they've provided more justification and explanation or their position even to people sympathetic to them than has been offered to explain how this is an easy way for anybody to make money or become a celebrity. I'm not really seeing that happening at all.

Knowing or having met Michael Jackson doesn't give anybody special knowledge about what he did with somebody else. The doc and the Oprah special covered the story of why and how the two men changed their story. That doesn't mean they couldn't be lying (anybody could be), but psychologically it's pretty logical in this kind of situation. (And it seems like what we know about their lives supports the timeline etc.) Crimes like this by definition rarely have anything like real proof.  I don't know how Michael Jackson's father's abuse became widely known about--was that, too, just the victims talking about it?

[TigerLynx]

The fact that people kept changing their stories would make me doubt that Jackson was a pedophile, if Jackson himself hadn't given interviews where he makes all the same despicable excuses other child molesters have made when they got caught.

Unfortunately, the prosecutor jumped the gun, and didn't really vet the Arvizo family before he filed charges, and overplayed his hand.  I don't know if any of the other boys would have ever come forward while MJ was alive, but when your witnesses are a family of con-artists who have tried to extort money from other known stars, you've dug a hole for yourself before the trial even gets underway.

[Robert Lynch]

Seeing those photos of James with MJ, I was surprised how much they got away with in the 80s. No way that would happen now. 

[ruby24]

37 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

 As for the cousin, I haven't seen that one, but certainly the documentary never suggested that every single boy that MJ invited to Neverland was molested.  Among other things, it would have been much too time consuming to groom each family and child, and there are only so many hours in the day.  A few people saying now that it never happened to them doesn't mean a thing.  It's also possible MJ simply was not attracted to them, or that their parents were more vigilant.

Yes, this is why I believe his victim count, while high, was probably something like two or three dozen, rather than in the hundreds, like say, the Jimmy Savile situation.

His style of grooming mandated more time with the victim and the families in order to reel them in and then keep them in this "relationship" for longer periods of time. To inspire the kind of loyalty to him that he did, he had to really form a strong connection with these kids.

I think the cops at the time of the 1993 investigation suspected that there had been seven victims over the previous ten years. There may have been more of course, but then if he kept abusing boys for the following ten years (until the trial at least), that probably adds up to at least two or three dozen.

Edited March 13, 2019 by ruby24

[Kostgard]

People use the phrase “they keep changing their stories” and I feel like that’s not really an accurate description. The story “changed” once, when they stopped lying. They haven’t flip-flopped back and forth.

As a true crime fan, I always kinda approach these things to see how easily doubts can be explained. If the doubts can’t be explained or it takes a lot of work to explain them, then those doubts are probably legit in my mind. But in this case, the “holes” or issues with their stories are easily explainable, and frequently fit typical patterns for people who have been abused. It seems weird that someone would defend their abuser for decades, but it happens all the time. Gayle King said she asked a child psychologist why the hell Wade would still associate with MJ, go to his funeral, try to get a job with his estate if he had been abused, and the psychologist said that happens all the time because the victim still feels like they have a relationship with the abuser (Did not getting the job have anything to do with him coming forward? Who knows. He doesn’t dispute the timeline of events. But that doesn’t confirm or deny anything. Even if it did, doesn’t mean he’s lying). James reported that he severed contact with MJ himself in 2005 when he refused to testify, but was still very saddened at his death because it meant they would never be friends again. This is how the abuse effs people up.

[Umbelina]

30 minutes ago, Robert Lynch said:

Seeing those photos of James with MJ, I was surprised how much they got away with in the 80s. No way that would happen now. 

It happens every day.

The pedophile may not be as famous as MJ, but the methods (without the massive cash and fame) are the same. 

I'm really hoping that more people become aware how it happens now.  It's not just about which people you trust with your kids, but also about really talking to them, preparing them without scaring them, and being more watchful, looking for these signs.

The camp counselor, the bishop, the sports coach, the relatives, the next door neighbor, the pastor, the family friend...it goes on every single day. 

[biakbiak]

2 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

LOL. Yeah, I almost added, "She didn't really look like that...unlike him and James, who were BOTH exactly as God made them..."

Yeah I mean I don’t think Sheryl Crow is super unattractive or anything it just seems weird thing to do about her of all people who was never horribly made up or considered a great beauty. 

Edited March 13, 2019 by biakbiak

[Neko]

39 minutes ago, Kostgard said:

People use the phrase “they keep changing their stories” and I feel like that’s not really an accurate description. The story “changed” once, when they stopped lying. They haven’t flip-flopped back and forth.

THANK YOU.   Couldn't have said it better, myself.

Edited March 13, 2019 by Shakma

[Simon Boccanegra]

All I can say is that if Safechuck and Robson are lying, they truly missed their calling. They should be in the running annually for Oscars, Emmys, Tonys. I found their accounts and those of their family members both believable and heartbreaking. There were times when Safechuck literally appeared to be regressing to a 10-year-old boy before our eyes, or when Wade was getting that "occluded" quality to his voice that is hard to do on cue, as they recalled things they claimed happened. 

Full disclosure, though: I've believed Michael had sexually inappropriate relationships with children at least as far back as the Jordan Chandler episode of 1993-94. I remember debating that case with people at my first job, who said, "Michael is like a child himself!" etc. My position then was my position now: when your friends (e.g., Liz Taylor) make as troubling a case for you as your foes make against you, it's a big problem. It was no surprise at all to me when he settled to make it go away. And I do get that a settlement is not an admission of guilt, and sometimes is the most pragmatic option, but I believed what I believed.  

I do think MJ had legitimate childishness and adult "animal cunning," combined with limitless resources, and this was a lethal combination.  

On a lighter note (God knows they're in short supply!), I did find it amusing that Oprah kept referring to the documentary as Leaving Netherland. It's not about a flight out of Holland, girl.  😉

Edited March 13, 2019 by Simon Boccanegra

[AgentRXS]

8 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

Anyway, someone pointed out this news report where the singer was spotted buying a wedding ring in a Simi Valley Zales, buying a wedding ring for "Sheryl Crow". You can see what is likely Jimmy Safechuck along his side there, I'm assuming to "help him" pick out the wedding ring. Holy shit.

Craziness. What was a dumb throwaway story that was fly-by-night at the time turns out to be video evidence of the depths of MJ's pedophilia years later. Hard to believe that not one reporter would question why Michael Jackson would be buying wedding rings at a mall store.

Re: Aaron Carter.  Nick Carter admitted that he and a few other members of the BSB were molested by Lou Pearlman when the group first got together. The Carter parents were white trash that happened to luck out that Nick had stereotypical All-American boy good looks at the exact moment when boy bands were making a comeback. No way were they about protecting their kids---Jane Carter was a classic stage mom if there ever was one. If Aaron wasn't molested by Lou, it would have to be because Nick protected him. I doubt MJ molested Aaron at 15 as that would have been too old for MJ's preferences. Blech.

It is weird that people think that other people should or will just decide to hate MJ because of this documentary. Wade and James themselves admit they still have love for him, among their mixed emotions. Janet, for instance, is not going to bash her brother whom she was fairly close with nor is she going to condone his actions. I am sure she was aware of what was going on but was powerless to stop it. What do you do when that is your brother, whom you love deeply, and he is one of the most powerful men in the world? I am frustrated with her that she would turn a blind eye, but I get it. People aren't perfect.

As for me, I wasn't an obsessed MJ fan, but I was pretty huge. MJ died 5 days before my birthday, and not only did I damn near faint when I heard of his passing, I had no desire to celebrate my birthday that year because I was pretty down about it. I got banned on TWOP for arguing with his detractors who were talking shit about him on his funeral's forum, heh. Billie Jean was the first video I remember watching, I remember excitedly looking forward to his music video premieres which were Big Events that aired on all 3 broadcast networks. Music was a big part of my difficult childhood, and MJ was there for me through every stage. Even as angry and as sickened as I am about realizing what he is as an adult, I just can't shake my love for his music and his art. It doesn't bother me to listen to his music, and I really can't explain why.

The thing is though, I am Wade's age. I was too young to fully grasp all the scandals as they were happening and didn't look to closely into his personal life, until the whole Debbie Rowe stuff. I don't know how I would view him if I was of his generation or older. Seeing the footage of him constantly holding hands and dressed identically with various young boys, the Zales footage, the 1st case....it's kind of crazy what the media and the adults of that time handwaved away as MJ just being eccentric. No way would it fly in this day and age.

[biakbiak]

10 minutes ago, AgentRXS said:

Nick Carter admitted that he and a few other members of the BSB were molested by Lou Pearlman when the group first got togethe

Did he? A quick google search only has rumors and vague comments made by his mother Jane. I know AJ and a few others have denied they were abused by Lou. 

[TigerLynx]

It wasn't just the children that changed their stories.  There were people who worked at Neverland that originally said they hadn't seen anything inappropriate with Jackson and the children who visited.  They then testified they had seen Jackson molesting young boys, only for it to be revealed that they had been fired from Neverland for stealing.  The prosecutor was so intent on convicting Jackson, he didn't build a solid case.

[AgentRXS]

6 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

Did he?

I could have sworn he and few guys mentioned in in their documentary a few years back but I could be remembering wrong....it's been awhile since I saw it. Or maybe it was on his brief reality show. I just have this memory of him talking about it....but again I could be wrong.

Edited March 13, 2019 by AgentRXS

[Umbelina]

Feldman clarifies stopping his support for MJ, and says he couldn't watch the entire thing, it was too painful.

[biakbiak]

4 minutes ago, Umbelina said:

Feldman clarifies stopping his support for MJ, and says he couldn't watch the entire thing, it was too painful.

If he didn’t watch the whole thing than he should keep his mouth shut! People you don’t have to talk to the media about everything even if you are tangentially related. 

[methodwriter85]

1 hour ago, AgentRXS said:

Craziness. What was a dumb throwaway story that was fly-by-night at the time turns out to be video evidence of the depths of MJ's pedophilia years later. Hard to believe that not one reporter would question why Michael Jackson would be buying wedding rings at a mall store.

I think my favorite comments are the people who are insisting that this was planted by the documentary despite the fact that this was posted in July 2015. I also really like the comments that it's not Jimmy Safechuck. Because it's got to be another 11-year old white kid with a light brown mullet who lived in Simi Valley with his family in 1989. And even if it's not Safechuck, it's another boy that's going jewelry shopping for a "wedding ring for Sheryl Crow." And again, why would someone who could drop massive coin at secluded high-end jewelry store without a second thought go shopping at a middle class Zales?

Look, in any event, watching this documentary, you see a SHIT ton of footage/photos that shows that Jimmy Safechuck was glued to Michael's side during the Bad tour. He's not just a kid that took a few photos with Michael Jackson during some Make A Wish fantasy weekend at Neverland and is now claiming rape. At the very base truth, they had a very close relationship in the late 80's.

2 hours ago, AgentRXS said:

I doubt MJ molested Aaron at 15 as that would have been too old for MJ's preferences. Blech.

Maybe it's possible the fact that Aaron is pretty short made him more attractive despite being "too old"? Jimmy and Wade both look like they clear 6 feet and they probably got to their heights relatively early (Wade said he was almost 6 foot by 14) but Aaron looks about 5'7" at best. I do wonder if Michael set up "decoys" of famous kids  as has been speculated in this thread that he didn't touch so that he could step back and say, "Look, nothing happened!"

[Robert Lynch]

Former maid of MJ comes forward

Not surprised at this.

Edited March 13, 2019 by Robert Lynch

[ruby24]

I don't think the maid would know if Michael consummated the relationship with Lisa Marie- according to Lisa herself they spent most of the time they were together at her place, not Neverland. 

And she's always insisted that she did love him- I kinda think she was probably the perfect person to be snowed by him, because of her own issues, like I said before (marrying two men with pedophilic tendencies is one unfortunate coincidence, especially given her father's history with this as well- and then her third husband was another notorious Elvis worshipper Nicolas Cage, so yeah... issues).

I'm guessing that Michael probably did consummate that marriage, if only to try to show that he liked women. But to this day she's the only (adult) person who's ever claimed to have been intimate with him, so because of that I think there's more curiosity about what she might have seen. Not just how he behaved with kids, but in general. If he didn't like women and had no history being in an adult relationship, how was he at even pretending to do this? She must have had some clue that he wasn't into it, right? Or was he that good of an actor?

Most people think spouses would be the ones close enough to know or see something, so if she insists that they really were intimate (and she's the only person who has) I can understand why people wonder what she saw, and what he was like with her. I think she's said before that he wasn't so much the childlike Peter Pan image that he put on in public, so did he actually behave more like an adult with her? Or was that just an act as well? Maybe he really was that good a manipulator, and he managed to fool her the same way he did the kids.

Edited March 13, 2019 by ruby24

[Robert Lynch]

That's a good argument there. I wish to hear more from the other staff members than the typical maid fired by Jackson. 

[methodwriter85]

6 hours ago, ruby24 said:

And she's always insisted that she did love him- I kinda think she was probably the perfect person to be snowed by him, because of her own issues, like I said before (marrying two men with pedophilic tendencies is one unfortunate coincidence, especially given her father's history with this as well- and then her third husband was another notorious Elvis worshipper Nicolas Cage, so yeah... issues).

If anything, she was probably convinced by her cult that it was her destiny to recruit Michael Jackson to the fold.

Lisa has said that Michael's actual speaking voice is lower than what he portrayed publicly, which I always thought was an interesting detail. Totally fits his Peter Pan persona.

The Martin Bashir 2005 documentary touched on Jimmy Safechuck for a few minutes.

That was a really nice lifestyle you got there, Safechucks, and all it took was pimping out your 10-year old son.

I do think it's interesting to contrast Jimmy's story and Wade's story, because Wade didn't get nearly as much of the swag that Jimmy got, but it kind of seemed like Wade's function was to be the reliable "side piece"(ugh) and they became more like the hangers-on that were always counted to be in Michael's corner. I do think the fact that Wade actually did turn out to be a very talented whiz kid choreographer probably kept him in Micheal's orbit into adulthood,

Edited March 13, 2019 by methodwriter85

[car54]

I read one interview with Lisa Marie and I got the impression she wanted to take care of Michael.    Maybe growing up the daughter of another "King" that she lost, she married one.

I just saw this article about pro MJ people running ads against the documentary.

https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-47551316?ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_mchannel=social&ocid=socialflow_twitter

[Drogo]

Footage has surfaced of a badly-disguised MJ taking James Safechuck jewelry shopping in 1989, possibly to buy one or more of the rings in the documentary. 

[Melina22]

I just read a rumour on a site that I'm actually embarrassed to name (a truly guilty pleasure) implying Macaulay C. has decided to come forward and admit that MJ abused him. If this is true, imagine how vindicated Wade and James will feel! (There were further really shocking allegations about the family included in the article, that if true, will rock the entertainment world. I'm not going into them now because it's not confirmed (this site is correct about 70% of the time) , and also because honestly, just writing about this stuff makes me feel like the worst sort of internet person. But I'm sort of on tenterhooks, waiting to see if this comes out.) 

I can't deny any more that since watching Leaving Neverland, a part of my brain has been taken over by this stuff. I'm hoping it's a temporary condition, but if the above info proves true, I won't be getting my whole brain back for awhile. I'm not sure how I feel about this. 

[sistermagpie]

14 hours ago, Kostgard said:

People use the phrase “they keep changing their stories” and I feel like that’s not really an accurate description. The story “changed” once, when they stopped lying. They haven’t flip-flopped back and forth.

As a true crime fan, I always kinda approach these things to see how easily doubts can be explained. If the doubts can’t be explained or it takes a lot of work to explain them, then those doubts are probably legit in my mind. But in this case, the “holes” or issues with their stories are easily explainable, and frequently fit typical patterns for people who have been abused. It seems weird that someone would defend their abuser for decades, but it happens all the time. Gayle King said she asked a child psychologist why the hell Wade would still associate with MJ, go to his funeral, try to get a job with his estate if he had been abused, and the psychologist said that happens all the time because the victim still feels like they have a relationship with the abuser (Did not getting the job have anything to do with him coming forward? Who knows. He doesn’t dispute the timeline of events. But that doesn’t confirm or deny anything. Even if it did, doesn’t mean he’s lying). James reported that he severed contact with MJ himself in 2005 when he refused to testify, but was still very saddened at his death because it meant they would never be friends again. This is how the abuse effs people up.

Yes! That's the thing, the boys' stories don't seem particularly convoluted at all. All the basic facts remain the same. The difference is just that they used to vehemently deny any abuse and now they say it happened and give detail as to what it was like including their motivations that are really very straightforward.

In fact, the whole story's been the same since people started making jokes about in in the 80s. There was always the two narratives: 

1) MJ had no childhood and now has the soul of an innocent child. He loves children, loves touching them in affectionate but non-sexual ways and loves sleeping with them in affectionate but non-sexual ways every night. If you say it's sexual you're sullying the innocence or you're out to get him.

2) Y'ever noticed how Michael Jackson has a string of child boyfriends? 

2 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

I do think it's interesting to contrast Jimmy's story and Wade's story, because Wade didn't get nearly as much of the swag that Jimmy got, but it kind of seemed like Wade's function was to be the reliable "side piece"(ugh) and they became more like the hangers-on that were always counted to be in Michael's corner. I do think the fact that Wade actually did turn out to be a very talented whiz kid choreographer probably kept him in Micheal's orbit into adulthood,

That sticks out to me too. It makes it all the more ironic to me in a way because it's like...Joy, if you'd just waited and let him develop freely he might have had the same success without the breakdowns. Maybe.

[icecweem]

These are all fairly good points you guys are pointing out and it is actually shifting my original opinions of the whole situation. It is a sad and unfortunate thing that this even has to be talked about. I would hate for any of this to be true because MJ was someone A LOT of people looked up to yet to find out that he's this predator is mind blowing. I wish all this would've been settled while he was alive because now the only people left that this will have a damning affect on is his family and they certainly don't deserved to be punished because of MJ's actions (unless of course they knew about it and still protected him). 

[ruby24]

1 minute ago, icecweem said:

These are all fairly good points you guys are pointing out and it is actually shifting my original opinions of the whole situation. It is a sad and unfortunate thing that this even has to be talked about. I would hate for any of this to be true because MJ was someone A LOT of people looked up to yet to find out that he's this predator is mind blowing. I wish all this would've been settled while he was alive because now the only people left that this will have a damning affect on is his family and they certainly don't deserved to be punished because of MJ's actions (unless of course they knew about it and still protected him). 

Most of them I don't think were close enough to him (as an adult) to have seen anything, but like I said before, I believed Latoya's initial interviews in 93, which suggests that his mother did know, or at least strongly suspected it.

[Melina22]

I totally know what you mean, icecweem. Years ago when someone my family knew well and trusted was charged as a pedophile, my first reaction was denial. Then eventually I thought maybe he did it but I really didn't want it to be true. It was probably a year before I fully processed that it was true, and even now, years later, the truth of it shocks me. And I still wonder who in his family knew, and who else his victims were. 

It's a great tragedy and very painful when someone we respect and/or love turns out to be, not just human, but capable of doing evil. 

[Guest]

19 hours ago, icecweem said:

If money was never a factor, you wouldn't need an HBO documentary to come out

As subjects of a documentary, they don't earn income from the film. And I feel it necessary to point this again but HBO did not commission this film. It was purchased by HBO after it premiered at Sundance. 

ETA: Excellent article at Jezebel: Was La Toya Jackson Right About Her Family All Along?

[doodlebug]

2 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

Yes! That's the thing, the boys' stories don't seem particularly convoluted at all. All the basic facts remain the same. The difference is just that they used to vehemently deny any abuse and now they say it happened and give detail as to what it was like including their motivations that are really very straightforward.

In fact, the whole story's been the same since people started making jokes about in in the 80s. There was always the two narratives: 

1) MJ had no childhood and now has the soul of an innocent child. He loves children, loves touching them in affectionate but non-sexual ways and loves sleeping with them in affectionate but non-sexual ways every night. If you say it's sexual you're sullying the innocence or you're out to get him.

2) Y'ever noticed how Michael Jackson has a string of child boyfriends? 

That sticks out to me too. It makes it all the more ironic to me in a way because it's like...Joy, if you'd just waited and let him develop freely he might have had the same success without the breakdowns. Maybe.

As was mentioned upthread, the Jackson family is complaining that they haven't been allowed to give their side of the story.  Because, of course, despite not having been there, they know what happened and that Michael was pure as the driven snow.  Someone linked upthread to a 'journalist' named Ziegler who does a podcast.  He's a pal of right wing radio host Glenn Beck, for what that is worth.  Ziegler interviewed, Michael's niece, Jackie's daughter, Brandi, who claims to have 'proof' that Robson is lying.    I took one for the team and listened to it.  First off, Ziegler fawns all over Brandi, praising the family to the high heavens for their tolerance and suffering.  He also completely agrees with every single point that Brandi makes about how Leaving Neverland is completely unfair to the Jackson family and Michael's legacy and how, if the documentarians had been interested in the real story and not a smear, they would've come to a different conclusion entirely and how blatantly wrong it was that Brandi, keeper of all truth and wisdom, was not featured in the film.  There are a bunch of tabloid-type websites now praising this podcast and insisting  Finding Neverland is a con job.  Ziegler repeatedly refers to it as a 'documentary' complete with quote marks.

She also claims that GMA was going to interview her so she could refute Wade's claims but it was mysteriously canceled at the last minute and no one else will interview her on TV, either which is proof of a vast media conspiracy to assassinate MJ's character posthumously.

Here's what I got from it.

1.  Ziegler claims that Brandi and the rest of the Jacksons have absolutely no financial interest in Michael's estate, except for Michael's kids.  They are all upstanding citizens with well paying jobs.  They conveniently do not mention that Brandi's own father, Jackie Jackson, has been employed by Michael's estate full time since MJ's death  As for her career, Brandi is a free lance artist or something which undoubtedly pays a bundle.

2.  The reason why Brandi knows that Wade is not telling the truth is because she was his first girlfriend, from age 12-20 or so.  She is just about the same age as Wade, like 8 months younger.  Nobody disputes this basic fact nor that she spent a fair amount of time hanging out at Neverland as a kid.

Her 'Proof': 

-Wade became interested in her at age 12 and asked Uncle Michael if it would be ok to date her.  Uncle Michael not only said 'yes', but encouraged the relationship, which was your typical pre-teen handholding, going to the movies thing at first.  So, Michael never would have wanted Wade to date his niece if he was still molesting him, would he?  (yeah, Brandi, he would.  She obviously also didn't see the documentary where Wade said that by that age, his sexual contact with Michael was sporadic because he'd moved on to other kids and that the very last time, he was 14)

-Wade was her closest friend and companion; they told each other everything.  There is no way he could have kept the secret that Michael was a pedophile from her. (the fact that he didn't tell his own wife or mother until years after Michael died was irrelevant, I guess.  The fact that MJ was virtually supporting his entire extended family would also not matter either).

-She says the underwear story cannot possibly be true because, she knows for a fact that Wade never, ever did his own laundry as a teen.  His mother did it and he would've never left dirty underwear where it could be seen by her. (say what?)  Also, Wade claims that Michael summoned him to the studio to tell him to get rid of the underwear when he could easily have called him and told him which makes the story obviously untrue. (What is this lady smoking?)  She also says that Wade claims the blood on the underwear was Michael's which, no.

-Thoughout the interview, she and the podcaster refer to the molestation as violent and brutal.  Again, they haven't watched the documentary although they pretend that they did.

-Brandi and Wade didn't have sex until she turned 18 because she wanted to wait.  But, when they did start to sleep together, Wade did all the regular heterosexual stuff; not once did he do anything odd, which obviously means he never experienced childhood sexual abuse because, if so, he would have tried some of that stuff with her (I cannot even with this one)

- Brandi eventually broke up with Wade because he cheated on her with several women including Brittney Spears (this is actually a rumor that has been around for years, Wade is supposedly the reason Justin Timberlake broke up with Brittney and wrote 'Cry Me a River').  She later found out there were other women, too.  Wade has admitted to being sexually promiscuous in his late teens and early 20's.  Brandi's conclusion: Wade was a bad boyfriend who cheated and lied to her.  So, he never tells the truth to anyone ever and therefore the documentary must be false.  And, secondly, someone who has undergone such 'brutal and violent' sexual abuse as a child would never be promiscuous.  (Brandi was obviously not a psych major and knows less than nothing about the behavior of people who were abused as kids)

-Wade testified and supported Michael all the way through the trials and up until his death.  He went to the funeral (the family invited him, but she left that out).  Shortly after the funeral, Wade called Brandi for the first time in years to express sympathy and ask her to dinner.  Obviously, he was worried that he was not going to be able to get a job without the family's help.  He also asked how Michael's kids were doing and expressed interest in seeing them sometime.  Once again, Wade was nothing without Michael and was trying to make sure he was not shut out of the goodies, specifically, he wanted to do the Cirque du Soleil show and wanted the family to get it for him.  She refused to see him and hasn't spoken to him since.

 -Wade's career as a choreographer is over because he didn't do the MJ Cirque du Soleil show.  He didn't resign, he was never in the running.  Also, both Brittney and Justin know what a horrible human being he is and would never hire him again because of what he did and they've managed to blackball him in the entire industry. (tell me another fairy tale, Mother Goose).

Link to a tabloid article about it:

https://www.showbiz411.com/2019/03/09/michael-jacksons-niece-brandi-says-in-interview-wade-robson-is-lying-about-sexual-abuse-that-gma-cancelled-interview-with-her

[Razzberry]

Jackson was hardly a master of disguise, he did everything but wear a T-shirt with "PEDOPHILE" on it.  Anyone in his circle had to know, or they'd be too dumb to live.  Fuck Corey Feldman.

[Robert Lynch]

28 minutes ago, Giant Misfit said:

As subjects of a documentary, they don't earn income from the film. And I feel it necessary to point this again but HBO did not commission this film. It was purchased by HBO after it premiered at Sundance. 

ETA: Excellent article at Jezebel: Was La Toya Jackson Right About Her Family All Along?

Excellent article, Giant Misfit. 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, doodlebug said:

Link to a tabloid article about it:

https://www.showbiz411.com/2019/03/09/michael-jacksons-niece-brandi-says-in-interview-wade-robson-is-lying-about-sexual-abuse-that-gma-cancelled-interview-with-her

Thanks for the terrific summary, @doodlebug. I didn't click the link as I saw the showbiz411 in that URL and immediately identified it as MJ Truther, Roger Friedman who I followed on Twitter for a long time (partly because he used to have a good gossip column before getting fired but mostly because I felt sorry for him because he seemed like such a sycophantic loser) but unfollowed him after he started with the "Michael is Innocent" crap.

[Scarlett45]

18 minutes ago, doodlebug said:

Brandi and Wade didn't have sex until she turned 18 because she wanted to wait.  But, when they did start to sleep together, Wade did all the regular heterosexual stuff; not once did he do anything odd, which obviously means he never experienced childhood sexual abuse because, if so, he would have tried some of that stuff with her (I cannot even with this one)

What

 

I cannot even either. 

[Melina22]

21 minutes ago, Robert Lynch said:

ETA: Excellent article at Jezebel: Was La Toya Jackson Right About Her Family All Along?

It's so weird that I barely remember any of this. Sadly, I think it's because La Toya always came across as a fruit loop, with her extreme plastic surgery and nude photoshoots and needy attention seeking. It was impossible to discern what was and wasn't true. If Janet had made the same accusations it would have been a totally different story. 

Imagine if people had believed her? Wade and James's stories would have been so different. I wonder what they were thinking during that time? Probably terrified La Toya would reveal their secrets and they'd all end up in jail. 

Edited March 13, 2019 by Melina22

[Snewtsie]

3 hours ago, Melina22 said:

I just read a rumour on a site that I'm actually embarrassed to name (a truly guilty pleasure) implying Macaulay C. has decided to come forward and admit that MJ abused him. If this is true, imagine how vindicated Wade and James will feel! (There were further really shocking allegations about the family included in the article, that if true, will rock the entertainment world. I'm not going into them now because it's not confirmed (this site is correct about 70% of the time) , and also because honestly, just writing about this stuff makes me feel like the worst sort of internet person. But I'm sort of on tenterhooks, waiting to see if this comes out.) 

I can't deny any more that since watching Leaving Neverland, a part of my brain has been taken over by this stuff. I'm hoping it's a temporary condition, but if the above info proves true, I won't be getting my whole brain back for awhile. I'm not sure how I feel about this. 

I really hope this rumor is true because I am convinced McCauley was molested and has not been able to face it. I hope this helps him come to terms with it and step forward.

And I'm with you- my brain has been taken over with this.  I can't stop thinking about it.

[ruby24]

That Brandi Jackson stuff is complete nonsense. I mean, if every word she said was true, that has NOTHING to do with a single accusation that Wade and James made against him! Nothing. It's completely irrelevant.

There is no value in talking to that person about any of this. Which is probably why that GMA interview was canceled, I mean obviously if they see what she's going to say, they must have realized none of that has any bearing on what Wade said. It means absolutely nothing. It doesn't even tell anyone anything new. It's the equivalent of an ex-girlfriend of an abuse victim trying to scream out that "I dated him for years and he didn't act weird and he never told me any of that, therefore he's lying!"

Um, no? It means he didn't tell you. And you saw absolutely nothing to refute what he's saying about something that happened in his life when you weren't even there. Why is anyone giving her the time of day?

Edited March 13, 2019 by ruby24

[Umbelina]

This is new to me, but a pretty dang comprehensive recap of MJ and sex with kids, and what it did to his finances, etc.

Thought I'd put it here, because it does answer some questions raised in this thread.

[Snewtsie]

1 hour ago, Umbelina said:

This is new to me, but a pretty dang comprehensive recap of MJ and sex with kids, and what it did to his finances, etc.

Thought I'd put it here, because it does answer some questions raised in this thread.

WOW.  Just wow.  What a good video.  Thank you for posting.

[Kostgard]

3 hours ago, icecweem said:

These are all fairly good points you guys are pointing out and it is actually shifting my original opinions of the whole situation. It is a sad and unfortunate thing that this even has to be talked about. I would hate for any of this to be true because MJ was someone A LOT of people looked up to yet to find out that he's this predator is mind blowing. I wish all this would've been settled while he was alive because now the only people left that this will have a damning affect on is his family and they certainly don't deserved to be punished because of MJ's actions (unless of course they knew about it and still protected him). 

It is true that this situation sucks all around. It sucks that this terrible thing happened to James and Wade, and Jordan and Gavin (and who knows who else). It sucks for people for whom MJ and his music really meant something. It really sucks for MJ's kids (behind MJ's victims, I feel bad for them most of all). It sucks to an extent with the rest of MJ's family, but for me, it is tempered by the fact that even though they were most definitely abused themselves (physically and emotionally, at least) by Joe, they were adults, they had to have at least suspected what was happening (and according to La Toya - at least at one point in time - at least Katherine did), but they didn't want to rock the boat because MJ was the one generating income.

Yet, I feel like this is so important. We need to be able to recognize this stuff to stop it from happening again. We can't turn a blind eye to troubling behavior just because we really, really like the person who did it, or because they are talented/successful, or has a lot of money. We can no longer be blinded by that sort of stuff, and we need to recognize the signs of grooming and abuse so that we can recognize it in everyday people as well to prevent it from happening. 

Edited March 13, 2019 by Kostgard

[icecweem]

4 minutes ago, Kostgard said:

Quote

Yet, I feel like this is so important. We need to be able to recognize this stuff to stop it from happening again. We can't turn a blind eye to troubling behavior just because we really, really like the person who did it, or because they are talented/successful, or has a lot of money. We can no longer be blinded by that sort of stuff, and we need to recognize the signs of grooming and abuse so that we can recognize it in every day people as well to prevent it from happening. 

I agree, people need to value their live's over money but sadly some cannot which is why a lot of times people do turn a blind eye because they can't fathom the idea of having financial troubles. I feel like at the end of the day everything stems back to money hence why Wade's parents kept allowing him to go back there. 

[Robert Lynch]

I am glad GMA cancelled Brandi's interview. They made a wise choice. Hell, Gayle would have wore rose-tinted glasses throughout the whole thing. 

On a lighter note, Wade's wife is very pretty. 

[Calamity Jane]

21 hours ago, Kostgard said:

People use the phrase “they keep changing their stories” and I feel like that’s not really an accurate description. The story “changed” once, when they stopped lying. They haven’t flip-flopped back and forth.

Finally finished Part II, and was just knocked off my feet. I spent many years trying to persuade myself that MJ was just a one-of-a-kind, childlike, unintentionally inappropriate guy who had such a weird background he just didn't understand societal norms.  My daughter was a dancer and, like most her age, loved dancing to his music.  Then I met the friend whose son was invited to Neverland but wouldn't go, and that planted a big seed of doubt.  And then I started thinking about it all a bit more critically.  Honestly, if he'd never done anything sexual, all the other stuff was out of the norm enough to qualify as abuse (and it's a pretty big stretch to believe he did nothing sexual in that set-up).  If anyone else were doing it, people would have been raising an outcry like villagers with torches and pitchforks.  

I agree with whoever said that if those two men were lying, they're in the wrong profession and should definitely be acting. They fully convinced me.  It makes sense to me that they didn't really grasp what was done to them until they had children of their own.  And in a funny way, it makes sense that they denied they were abused for so long because it didn't feel like abuse, it felt like love and affection.  Not brutal, not violent, but seduction.  People, myself included, gave Michael way too much of a pass, and it makes me sick and sad.  He was telling us who and what he was, and we listened to his words instead of paying attention to his actions.  

Edited March 14, 2019 by Calamity Jane

[TigerLynx]

In 1993, when the charges were dropped/or never filed, and the Chandlers took money to go away, I did think MJ was innocent, and they were just extorting money from him.  I probably would have thought the same thing from the trial in 2003/2005 because all of the prosecution's witnesses were shady to say the least, but MJ's interviews and documentaries he willingly participated in, was what changed my mind.