Leaving Neverland - heehee

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
This thread right now:

689004


Both sides are entertaining.
 
Oscar Wildean dijo:
@MirnaMinkoff I always thought Lisa wanted to marry Michael because of how rich he was, so she could get his money into the Church of Scientology. I know she pressured him to donate to it.
Presiona para expandir...

Oh definitely, money and also his super star status we’re why Jackson would have been an epic get for the CoS. I always thought his kiddie diddling would have made him a perfect celebrity for the CoS. He had a dark secret that needed protected and that’s like crack cocaine for the CoS, but he wouldn’t play ball. He used Lisa Marie, not vice versa.

I think Jackson wouldn’t get near the CoS. The idea of revealing his secrets in auditing sessions would have been an absolute no go, a total deal killer. Never. The fake marriage was kaput in less than a 18 months so obviously even the CoS decided it was pointless to keep pursuing him, which is unusual for them.

Jackson didn’t need the CoS, he was already famous and already rich. He wasn’t interested in their sales pitch.

If anything shows Jackson was a smooth manipulatior it’s the fact he managed to use the CoS and they got bupkis for pimping out one of their celebrities to buffer MJ’s hetero credibility.
 
It's pretty mindboggling how few autistic ratings are being given in a thread where people keep saying "I know Michael Jackson was a pedo because I can tell from the guy in the documentary's eyes that he had been abused".
 
Saffronette dijo:
Oh well what do you know...

The Truth About What Michael Jackson Had (And Didn't Have) In His Bedroom

m.huffpost.com m.huffpost.com
Looks like that supposedly horrible child porn they found was faked.
Presiona para expandir...

Interesting that you continue to ignore the two “art books” that were found in Jackson's possession during the Chandler raid in 1993.

The Boy: A Photographic Essay and Boys Will Be Boys both feature photographs of male children including shots of their asses and genitals. Two books exclusively devoted to prepubescent and pubescent boys. Here’s a description:

BOYS WILL BE BOYS
This book, found locked in a filing cabinet in Micheal Jackson’s bedroom, is a compilation of photos of boys, shown having fun and in about 90% of pics are naked. Contrary to popular thought, many pedophiles are more attracted to this type of work than child porn. It’s useful that it’s legal to own, too. The book is edited by Georges St. Martin and Ronald C. Nelson.

Georges St. Martin is the psuedonym of Martin Swithinbank. You may not have heard of Martin Swithinbank, because he has also been a major contributor to the NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) Bulletin. He was deported to England after completing a 7 1/2-to-15-year sentence for sodomizing young boys on Long Island. He was released Dec. 19, 1992, after spending more than 10 years in prison.

Ronald C. Nelson is the pseudonym of Ronald Drew, a New York teacher who was arrested and indicted for selling obscene photographs depicting children involved in various forms of deviant sexual conduct and intercourse.
Presiona para expandir...

Link:https://www.mjfacts.com/items-found-in-1993-pedophile-books-and-naked-photos/

And this is straight from the police evidence log, not released to the public until 13 years later, after the Arvizo trial. The 2005 defense never disputed these items belonged to Jackson, rather their argument for excluding them was that they were “stale” evidence.

Why would Jackson have these books, locked away no less, along with what is reported to be a nude Polaroid of a 7-8 year old Jonathan Spence, in his possession? Why would a grown man own two books of naked boys, edited by a NAMBLA member? Why did he feel the need to conceal them in a filing cabinet? If they were given to him by a fan, as he tried to argue, why would you keep such things? If they were merely fan presents that he had yet to peruse, why secure them in a locked filing cabinet? Surely if you’re taking the time to lock them away, you must’ve understood the content of those books.

(Power Level) I have a friend who worked for a rock star- a name everyone would know. His staff cataloged and archived every bit of fan mail, every package (save the perishable items), and bit of ephemera that was sent the guy’s way. I doubt he ever looked at it, much less locked it in a safe.
 
Última edición:
I just got finished watching the documentary, and listening to some of the graphic details really made for an uncomfortable viewing experience. I would say that it definitely swayed me more towards believing the accusers than I did previously, but in the end, I am probably just as uncertain now as I was before.

The biggest trouble with the Jackson case, as I see it, is that no side truly comes out of it looking totally innocent. Jackson himself was clearly an oddball with a deeply peculiar (and frankly disturbing) interest in children, but it's not like his accusers and their families haven't displayed their own fair share of bizarre behavior; as evidenced by their changing stories, financial profiteering, and strange complaisance in allowing their own children to share a bedroom with Jackson with apparently minimal objections.

I honestly don't know what to believe, but I did watch an interview of the filmmaker responsible for making the documentary shortly before viewing it, and he didn't exactly fill me with confidence that he was a man of much journalistic integrity. He mostly came across as opinionated and incurious, which are generally not good signs.
 
Hellbound Hellhound dijo:
I just got finished watching the documentary, and listening to some of the graphic details really made for an uncomfortable viewing experience. I would say that it definitely swayed me more towards believing the accusers than I did previously, but in the end, I am probably just as uncertain now as I was before.

The biggest trouble with the Jackson case, as I see it, is that no side truly comes out of it looking totally innocent. Jackson himself was clearly an oddball with a deeply peculiar (and frankly disturbing) interest in children, but it's not like his accusers and their families haven't displayed their own fair share of bizarre behavior; as evidenced by their changing stories, financial profiteering, and strange complaisance in allowing their own children to share a bedroom with Jackson with apparently minimal objections.

I honestly don't know what to believe, but I did watch an interview of the filmmaker responsible for making the documentary shortly before viewing it, and he didn't exactly fill me with confidence that he was a man of much journalistic integrity. He mostly came across as opinionated and incurious, which are generally not good signs.
Presiona para expandir...

Are you aware of anyone else just considered an “oddball” for having dozens of random ten year olds sleep in his bed over the years? Where I’m from we call that a raging pedophile, not an oddball.

I don’t see how anyone can look at what MJ did to his face think that’s obviously a mentally sound man that can be trusted alone in bed with small boys.
 
MirnaMinkoff dijo:
Are you aware of anyone else just considered an “oddball” for having dozens of random ten year olds sleep in his bed over the years? Where I’m from we call that a raging pedophile, not an oddball.
Presiona para expandir...
The only person that I can think of that remotely resembles Michael Jackson is Jackson's hero, Peter Pan author J.M. Barrie. And Barrie would also likely seem to have be a pederast like Michael Jackson.
 
MirnaMinkoff dijo:
Are you aware of anyone else just considered an “oddball” for having dozens of random ten year olds sleep in his bed over the years? Where I’m from we call that a raging pedophile, not an oddball.

I don’t see how anyone can look at what MJ did to his face think that’s obviously a mentally sound man that can be trusted alone in bed with small boys.
Presiona para expandir...
Living with your siblings in 1 shared room and having to deal with your father raping your sisters almost every day and also being exploited by him ans your older brothers surely isnt good for your mental health
Was MJ a weirdo? Yes
Did he act like a deeply disturbed individual? Yes
Did he diddled kids? Maybe
Unless concrete proof comes out MJ only crime was being a weirdo
Unless you want to start looking up/killing the weird kids because they might do something in the future, i mean just look at him!
 
Michael Jackson having that naked photo of Spence and the nude boys book linked above is more than weird, tbh.
 
Just watched the entire thing.

James’ mom, man. That bitch just happily, unapologetically went along for the ride. Regardless of whether or not her son was abused, she took advantage of the situation.
 
OttoWest dijo:
Interesting that you continue to ignore the two “art books” that were found in Jackson's possession during the Chandler raid in 1993.

The Boy: A Photographic Essay and Boys Will Be Boys both feature photographs of male children including shots of their asses and genitals. Two books exclusively devoted to prepubescent and pubescent boys. Here’s a description:



Link:https://www.mjfacts.com/items-found-in-1993-pedophile-books-and-naked-photos/

And this is straight from the police evidence log, not released to the public until 13 years later, after the Arvizo trial. The 2005 defense never disputed these items belonged to Jackson, rather their argument for excluding them was that they were “stale” evidence.

Why would Jackson have these books, locked away no less, along with what is reported to be a nude Polaroid of a 7-8 year old Jonathan Spence, in his possession? Why would a grown man own two books of naked boys, edited by a NAMBLA member? Why did he feel the need to conceal them in a filing cabinet? If they were given to him by a fan, as he tried to argue, why would you keep such things? If they were merely fan presents that he had yet to peruse, why secure them in a locked filing cabinet? Surely if you’re taking the time to lock them away, you must’ve understood the content of those books.

(Power Level) I have a friend who worked for a rock star- a name everyone would know. His staff cataloged and archived every bit of fan mail, every package (save the perishable items), and bit of ephemera that was sent the guy’s way. I doubt he ever looked at it, much less locked it in a safe.
Presiona para expandir...
It's odd that people focus on those books alone and not the mountains of heterosexual porn that ended up being found along with that. I mentioned the books in an earlier post and how people used them as "evidence" of child porn in the case. If he really was this pedo they would have found more things. They went through his computer and didn't find any child porn on them either; something that would have been more relevant to the case than some old books.
 
People mention James' mom. I was so annoyed at Wade's mom for taking the family and moving to California. Because the father was separated from his family and he killed himself.
That was Wade's family, right?
 
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo