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
Their moms shouldn't have been in the documentary. They claim they "knew" but coincidentally both of them didn't find out until 2013 when their sons told them (which was mentioned in part 2). On top of that, their stories are copied from the 2005 allegations and a book (Michael Jackson Was My Lover) and can easily be disproven.

The fact that the moms are smiling should tip you off. It's almost like they're trying desperately to convince you with their bad acting that Michael totally did all this stuff. Wade wasn't a scared little boy at 22 when he begged to be a witness during the 2005 trial and defended him in court. At that time, he was desperate for the spotlight because the boybands he worked with weren't popular anymore.

Wade also implies that he abused his 3 kids which is weird, because his kids don't show signs of abuse or talk badly about him.

No doubt Michael was weird but that was due to him pretty much being a social autist. He didn't understand certain things like hanging around kids all the time as an adult would look very questionable to the public. But when I did look at the evidence, I didn't end up seeing this manipulative pedophile, just someone who's kindness was taken advantage of for monetary gain.

I don't think it was ever implied MJ abused his Frankenstein test tube babies in the documentary. All Wade said was that he passed out drunk and left the kids alone in the living room. I don't ever recall him saying he was abusing them.

Of course the moms and family members needed to be in the documentary, they gave it all context from an adult perspective and all the information about the travel, trips, gifts, Neverland stay overs, etc.. Kids wouldn't have been able to recall or know anything about that stuff. I mean holy shit the pedo-defense force doesn't believe all their details about Michael molesting them, without the mothers there I'm sure they'd all be doubting the guys ever met Michael Jackson for spent any time with him.

I think the moms were both told to talk about MJ from how the remembered feeling at that time in 1987 and 1988. Remember all this stuff was very fond memories for them up until a few years ago when their kids revealed they had been molested. Those years had been imprinted for a very long time as happy, fun memories for them. Shit that Australian mom moved all the way to LA to be near Michael - she was enamored with him and fame.

I think it was quite easy for the mothers to slip back into the past and talk about their experiences, forgetting things from the perspective they've now gained. The interviewer had to tackle an issue that has always cropped up - how could parents allow their kids to be alone with a grown man. I remember in years ago people saying "yeah Mike's a pedo but it's really the parents fault for giving him access." This seemed to be the opinion of most people. Mike fucks little boys, but the blame is really on the parents giving him their little boys to fuck.

The doco interviewer had to explain the process of how Mike gained their trust, dazzled them with his fame, integrated into their lives which eventually resulted in them allowing their kids to stay alone with Mike, repeatedly alone overnight. The details of this were enlightening to me because I, like everyone else, wonder why the fuck any parent was giving MJ access to their kids. I'm not saying I agree with the moms, I think they are both crazy to let their boys stay overnight with MJ, but at least now i have a better understanding of how he gained access to so many young boys over the years - with their parents blessings.

Most of the victims of pedo priests didn't come out and admit what had happened to them until they were in their 30's and 40's. If you don't understand how someone at 22 could still be protecting their abuser, then you don't understand how abuse works - esp sexual abuse. Males from 16-25 are trying to establish themselves as men in the world and pursuing romantic relationships. What could be worse than admitting, before a nation, that you were molested by a man? It causes a lot of shame in young men - it shouldn't -but it does. These guys like MJ, they didn't think of themselves as victims for many years because they enjoyed what he did to them on some level and admired him.

One thing I'm realizing is quite a few people defending him are under 30. Anyone over 30 remembers the news coverage, all the details about Neverland, the endless footage of him with little boys, the super creepy interviews, etc.. People over 40 literally watched MJ transform from a totally normal looking, super talented black musician to a horrifying melty-face drug addicted white woman. There was no doubt that MJ was a very, very disturbed man and very easy to believe pedophilia was part of his disturbed psyche when all the footage of him traveling with little boys rolled endlessly in the media.

I'm still actually kind of shocked there's even a debate about Michael's unbridled enthusiasm for raping little boys. I thought this thread would be more about the pedo defense force on SM trying to distract from the documentary, but lo and behold pedo defense force members are even on KF.
 
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.

Lol. The fact you’re NOT getting paid for shoveling this shit only makes it more pathetic. I’m not sure you understand how evidence works: you see, it doesn’t matter that Jackson had dozens of Hustlers and Barely Legal rags in his collection because he isn’t being accused of raping or sexually harassing or asssulting adult women. He is accused of abusing prepubescent boy ages 7-12. That is very specific victim set for which there is a very limited source of “legal” pornography. And guess what? Jackson owned some!

As others have pointed out, multiple boys testified that Jackson exposed them to straight porn- including magazines like Hustler and Barely Legal- as part of his grooming routine. Those magazines had a purpose. They also arguably worked as a cover for Jackson’s sexual proclivities. Any snooping maid or security guard could say, “Oh, he has a ton of girlie mags lying around the house, yup our Michael sure is a 100% heterosexual red blooded alpha male”

Why do you put weight on accusations but not on "not guilty" verdicts?

Verdict, singular. There was only one trial featuring one child accuser. OJ was found not guilty. So was Robert Blake. Your point?
 
I'm still actually kind of shocked there's even a debate about Michael's unbridled enthusiasm for raping little boys. I thought this thread would be more about the pedo defense force on SM trying to distract from the documentary, but lo and behold pedo defense force members are even on KF.

There's a debate because the documenty presents no new information, simply things that were thrown out of a court of law. Twice. That doesn't mean he is absolutely guaranteed to be innocent, but going on about how there's a pedo defence force is just childish namecalling. Nobody in this thread is trying to defend pedos, the discussion is whether this is a case of pedophilia or false allegations. If you go to the #MeToo thread you will see the exact same thing with each case that gets brought up there, because they all have varying degrees of credibility.

In my opinion, the credibility in this case is disgustingly low, and the only counterargument I've been presented with in the thread is "watch the documentary because it's creepy" and "you can tell from the look in their eyes they were abused". That's the type of shit we usually make fun of on KF in my experience, but to each their own.

Verdict, singular. There was only one trial featuring one child accuser. OJ was found not guilty. So was Robert Blake. Your point?

Right, the first one was settled, sorry. You're moving goalposts and sidestepping the question. Why are accusations credible but "not guilty" verdicts have known to be wrong in a few instances so they are not? I can promise you there are way more false allegations than there are mistaken "not guilty" verdicts, so I'm not sure that's an argument you want to try and stand on.
 
Última edición:
I don't think it was ever implied MJ abused his Frankenstein test tube babies in the documentary. All Wade said was that he passed out drunk and left the kids alone in the living room. I don't ever recall him saying he was abusing them.

Of course the moms and family members needed to be in the documentary, they gave it all context from an adult perspective and all the information about the travel, trips, gifts, Neverland stay overs, etc.. Kids wouldn't have been able to recall or know anything about that stuff. I mean holy shit the pedo-defense force doesn't believe all their details about Michael molesting them, without the mothers there I'm sure they'd all be doubting the guys ever met Michael Jackson for spent any time with him.

I think the moms were both told to talk about MJ from how the remembered feeling at that time in 1987 and 1988. Remember all this stuff was very fond memories for them up until a few years ago when their kids revealed they had been molested. Those years had been imprinted for a very long time as happy, fun memories for them. Shit that Australian mom moved all the way to LA to be near Michael - she was enamored with him and fame.

I think it was quite easy for the mothers to slip back into the past and talk about their experiences, forgetting things from the perspective they've now gained. The interviewer had to tackle an issue that has always cropped up - how could parents allow their kids to be alone with a grown man. I remember in years ago people saying "yeah Mike's a pedo but it's really the parents fault for giving him access." This seemed to be the opinion of most people. Mike fucks little boys, but the blame is really on the parents giving him their little boys to fuck.

The doco interviewer had to explain the process of how Mike gained their trust, dazzled them with his fame, integrated into their lives which eventually resulted in them allowing their kids to stay alone with Mike, repeatedly alone overnight. The details of this were enlightening to me because I, like everyone else, wonder why the fuck any parent was giving MJ access to their kids. I'm not saying I agree with the moms, I think they are both crazy to let their boys stay overnight with MJ, but at least now i have a better understanding of how he gained access to so many young boys over the years - with their parents blessings.

Most of the victims of pedo priests didn't come out and admit what had happened to them until they were in their 30's and 40's. If you don't understand how someone at 22 could still be protecting their abuser, then you don't understand how abuse works - esp sexual abuse. Males from 16-25 are trying to establish themselves as men in the world and pursuing romantic relationships. What could be worse than admitting, before a nation, that you were molested by a man? It causes a lot of shame in young men - it shouldn't -but it does. These guys like MJ, they didn't think of themselves as victims for many years because they enjoyed what he did to them on some level and admired him.

One thing I'm realizing is quite a few people defending him are under 30. Anyone over 30 remembers the news coverage, all the details about Neverland, the endless footage of him with little boys, the super creepy interviews, etc.. People over 40 literally watched MJ transform from a totally normal looking, super talented black musician to a horrifying melty-face drug addicted white woman. There was no doubt that MJ was a very, very disturbed man and very easy to believe pedophilia was part of his disturbed psyche when all the footage of him traveling with little boys rolled endlessly in the media.

I'm still actually kind of shocked there's even a debate about Michael's unbridled enthusiasm for raping little boys. I thought this thread would be more about the pedo defense force on SM trying to distract from the documentary, but lo and behold pedo defense force members are even on KF.

The comments in this Oprah interview video are really something.



People are really nasty about defending MJ. Whether you believe it or not what is the point about going crazy and hurling abuse at people who disagree with you? These fans are mindless if they can't even entertain the idea that there was something seriously wrong with a grown man having sleepovers with little boys. It should at least make you think that there is a possibility something wasn't kosher.

Latoya may have recanted her story, saying she lied and her abusive husband made her say those things. But I think it was really pressure from the family that made her do that. Nobody wants off the Jackson teat. It's just too comfy.

I know I's being optimistic. But maybe once Katherine des something else might come out from within the Jackson camp. She's the one holding the reigns now.
 
The comments in this Oprah interview video are really something.


https://youtube.com/watch?v=_aWjKDih1G8
People are really nasty about defending MJ. Whether you believe it or not what is the point about going crazy and hurling abuse at people who disagree with you? These fans are mindless if they can't even entertain the idea that there was something seriously wrong with a grown man having sleepovers with little boys. It should at least make you think that there is a possibility something wasn't kosher.

Latoya may have recanted her story, saying she lied and her abusive husband made her say those things. But I think it was really pressure from the family that made her do that. Nobody wants off the Jackson teat. It's just too comfy.

I know I's being optimistic. But maybe once Katherine des something else might come out from within the Jackson camp. She's the one holding the reigns now.

Katherine is senile and has been out of it for many years. There was a saga bout five years ago where half the Jackson camp was accused of kidnapping her, and entire fight between Janet and Mike's kids ensued. They called the cops to locate Katherine. Janet and some other Jackson's claimed they had her at a spa for her own well being. A big part of the fight was because, at least then, Katherine still had the financial reigns over MJ's estate because she was the guardian of MJ's kids.

Apparently Janet lost her bid at controlling Katherine and MJ's estate because soon she fucked off and married some rich gay Arab guy (heir to his family's fashion empire) and created a test-tube baby. (Janet claimed to be pregnant at 50, which is laughable. Technically she could have had some woman donate eggs, do the IVF thing and carried a pregnancy, but she didn't even do that but pretended to be pregnant anyway. Keeping it bizarre is the Jackson way. She needed that baby to make sure she could get a stake of rich muslim husband's money and promptly separated and filed for divorce less than three months after the surrogate had the child-support baby for her.)

The Jackson clan could win for one of the most incredibly fucked up families in the entire USA.

I think the truly interesting information could come from Jackson's test tube kids in the next decade. I think they are still to young and trying to find their way in the world. Dealing with the legacy of their dead, crazzy pedo-dad is too much for them to handle right now, but maybe not in ten years.
 
I don't think it was ever implied MJ abused his Frankenstein test tube babies in the documentary. All Wade said was that he passed out drunk and left the kids alone in the living room. I don't ever recall him saying he was abusing them.

Of course the moms and family members needed to be in the documentary, they gave it all context from an adult perspective and all the information about the travel, trips, gifts, Neverland stay overs, etc.. Kids wouldn't have been able to recall or know anything about that stuff. I mean holy shit the pedo-defense force doesn't believe all their details about Michael molesting them, without the mothers there I'm sure they'd all be doubting the guys ever met Michael Jackson for spent any time with him.

I think the moms were both told to talk about MJ from how the remembered feeling at that time in 1987 and 1988. Remember all this stuff was very fond memories for them up until a few years ago when their kids revealed they had been molested. Those years had been imprinted for a very long time as happy, fun memories for them. Shit that Australian mom moved all the way to LA to be near Michael - she was enamored with him and fame.

I think it was quite easy for the mothers to slip back into the past and talk about their experiences, forgetting things from the perspective they've now gained. The interviewer had to tackle an issue that has always cropped up - how could parents allow their kids to be alone with a grown man. I remember in years ago people saying "yeah Mike's a pedo but it's really the parents fault for giving him access." This seemed to be the opinion of most people. Mike fucks little boys, but the blame is really on the parents giving him their little boys to fuck.

The doco interviewer had to explain the process of how Mike gained their trust, dazzled them with his fame, integrated into their lives which eventually resulted in them allowing their kids to stay alone with Mike, repeatedly alone overnight. The details of this were enlightening to me because I, like everyone else, wonder why the fuck any parent was giving MJ access to their kids. I'm not saying I agree with the moms, I think they are both crazy to let their boys stay overnight with MJ, but at least now i have a better understanding of how he gained access to so many young boys over the years - with their parents blessings.

Most of the victims of pedo priests didn't come out and admit what had happened to them until they were in their 30's and 40's. If you don't understand how someone at 22 could still be protecting their abuser, then you don't understand how abuse works - esp sexual abuse. Males from 16-25 are trying to establish themselves as men in the world and pursuing romantic relationships. What could be worse than admitting, before a nation, that you were molested by a man? It causes a lot of shame in young men - it shouldn't -but it does. These guys like MJ, they didn't think of themselves as victims for many years because they enjoyed what he did to them on some level and admired him.

One thing I'm realizing is quite a few people defending him are under 30. Anyone over 30 remembers the news coverage, all the details about Neverland, the endless footage of him with little boys, the super creepy interviews, etc.. People over 40 literally watched MJ transform from a totally normal looking, super talented black musician to a horrifying melty-face drug addicted white woman. There was no doubt that MJ was a very, very disturbed man and very easy to believe pedophilia was part of his disturbed psyche when all the footage of him traveling with little boys rolled endlessly in the media.

I'm still actually kind of shocked there's even a debate about Michael's unbridled enthusiasm for raping little boys. I thought this thread would be more about the pedo defense force on SM trying to distract from the documentary, but lo and behold pedo defense force members are even on KF.
There's people older than me who knows this whole thing is bullshit. The art teacher that I work with is in his 60s and knows that these people are doing it for money. He could careless about what these guys claim because they're obviously opportunistic. They just manage using #metoo as an excuse to get people to feel sorry for them and it's not working on everyone like they thought it would.

I'm sympathetic towards victims of abuse because I know what it's like. But I absolutely cannot stand people lying about it. It's hard to believe, but yes people do lie about it for whatever fucking reason. In this case, it was for money and attention.
People are really nasty about defending MJ. Whether you believe it or not what is the point about going crazy and hurling abuse at people who disagree with you?
I've seen people on both sides act this way about MJ's situation. I don't agree with it and I think some need to calm their tits and take a breather. As for Oprah; I don't have any ill will towards her, but I do think she's trying to save face because she was friends with Harvey Winestein. And we can't have people talking about him at all oh no.
 
Here's Latoya on Regis & Kathie Lee talking about how Joe sexually abused Rebbie and caused her to leave home at age 16 because of it. He then turned his attentions towards Latoya. She mentions that she didn't know if Janet was also abused. But she does say that Michael was the only one who fought back against Joe's physical abuse and the abuse of the children carried on when they were adults. They were all afraid of Joe. He would punch his sons and push them down the stairs. Even in the Thriller era Joe was still physically abusing Michael.

Latoya doesn't understand why Katherine never left Joe and says when asked Katherine had no answer.


Latoya on Today with Katie Couric talking about MJ sexually abusing little boys. She says that Katherine herself was outraged over substantial checks written to the parents of the boys MJ had sleepovers with.


Latoya admits she has no real evidence of this. However, I do not buy her recant or that her husband forced her to make things up. I think since Layoya was already on thin ice the threat of the gravy train being cut off made her say it was all made up.

The checks in question were made out around 1984 and Latoya claims Katherine said that MJ was "nothing But a fag. I can't stand this".

Latoya said that Katherine started to deny this because she had no support and would be out in the street. Michael was supporting everyone financially. Latoya mentions Jermaine living at the Jackson compound with his children. No one wanted to be cut off. Everyone was afraid they would actually have to get real jobs.

She also says that while she never saw Michael in bed with a boy she did witness single boys going into his bedroom for days and then coming back out to be replaced with another boy. They slept in the same bed. Latoya asks Katie what 35 year old man would do this.

Latoya says that Katherine was aware of all the boys Michael was spending time with and would say "That damn faggot. I can't stand him".

Latoya says that the elder brothers all married young and that she and Michael lived in the house without them for 10-15 years. So they don't know the sameMichael that she does. When the brothers would visit Michael would tell Latoya to tell them he was busy. He didn't want to see them.

Latoya says that her mother and Michael know that she knows too much and Latoya thinks it is time to put an end to this. She claims Joe doesn't know anything. At this time Michael wasn't returning her calls and Katherine was claiming Latoya's husband was a con man trying to get money and publicity out of the scandal.

It's all very interesting if true. Latoya spilled tons of beans then suddenly said it was all lies. That alone is very suspect.
 
Here's Latoya on Regis & Kathie Lee talking about how Joe sexually abused Rebbie and caused her to leave home at age 16 because of it. He then turned his attentions towards Latoya. She mentions that she didn't know if Janet was also abused. But she does say that Michael was the only one who fought back against Joe's physical abuse and the abuse of the children carried on when they were adults. They were all afraid of Joe. He would punch his sons and push them down the stairs. Even in the Thriller era Joe was still physically abusing Michael.

Latoya doesn't understand why Katherine never left Joe and says when asked Katherine had no answer.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=yYQs5wF8UMI
Latoya on Today with Katie Couric talking about MJ sexually abusing little boys. She says that Katherine herself was outraged over substantial checks written to the parents of the boys MJ had sleepovers with.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=9_1tGqn4jXc
Latoya admits she has no real evidence of this. However, I do not buy her recant or that her husband forced her to make things up. I think since Layoya was already on thin ice the threat of the gravy train being cut off made her say it was all made up.

The checks in question were made out around 1984 and Latoya claims Katherine said that MJ was "nothing But a fag. I can't stand this".

Latoya said that Katherine started to deny this because she had no support and would be out in the street. Michael was supporting everyone financially. Latoya mentions Jermaine living at the Jackson compound with his children. No one wanted to be cut off. Everyone was afraid they would actually have to get real jobs.

She also says that while she never saw Michael in bed with a boy she did witness single boys going into his bedroom for days and then coming back out to be replaced with another boy. They slept in the same bed. Latoya asks Katie what 35 year old man would do this.

Latoya says that Katherine was aware of all the boys Michael was spending time with and would say "That damn faggot. I can't stand him".

Latoya says that the elder brothers all married young and that she and Michael lived in the house without them for 10-15 years. So they don't know the sameMichael that she does. When the brothers would visit Michael would tell Latoya to tell them he was busy. He didn't want to see them.

Latoya says that her mother and Michael know that she knows too much and Latoya thinks it is time to put an end to this. She claims Joe doesn't know anything. At this time Michael wasn't returning her calls and Katherine was claiming Latoya's husband was a con man trying to get money and publicity out of the scandal.

It's all very interesting if true. Latoya spilled tons of beans then suddenly said it was all lies. That alone is very suspect.

LaToya was telling the truth. I think she tried to escape her crazy family, but unfortunately married a slime ball to do it. But given she was raised by an abusive father, marrying an abusive guy is par for the course. It’s rather sad she got sucked back in and they’ve had her on a short leash ever since.

It’s too bad they got her back on the reservation but MJ ensures the silence of the entire family with his financial power and their greed/ laziness. From all reports MJ supported the entire family ever since Thriller. Joe even forced him to do a “Jackson 5” reunion tour after Thriller.

I mean he was the biggest pop star in the world and still lived with his parents. Neverland is when he finally moved out - in his 30s.

Seriously, the Jacksons are the ultimate Lolcow family. They managed to embarrass themselves and attention whore before the internet and SM, no small feat.
 
Heard about this documentary. How bad/good is it?

I've got it downloading on my server right now.

By all accounts, it seems to be disturbing but good, though again, it doesn't reveal any new information but only piggybacks on things that have been said for 10 years, with one of the kids even taking all of his stories from a debunked book. I'm sure it's a good watch, but it doesn't really do anything new.
 
Heard about this documentary. How bad/good is it?

I've got it downloading on my server right now.
It's a good albeit disturbing watch. It goes into how Jackson insinuated and love bombed his way into star struck families and got access to their children, and how he subsequently groomed and manipulated those children for years afterwards. It gives us two separate victims to compare and contrast Jackson's MO to each other. There's a lot on the freaky shit that happened on the Neverland Ranch and how Jackson had it almost purpose built to seperate children from their families. All in all I recommend it; the devil is in the myriad of details that the documentary offers.
 
Heard about this documentary. How bad/good is it?

I've got it downloading on my server right now.

Very good and riveting. Great insight into how serial child predators seduce kids, get them to remain silent and maintain loyalty.

By all accounts, it seems to be disturbing but good, though again, it doesn't reveal any new information but only piggybacks on things that have been said for 10 years, with one of the kids even taking all of his stories from a debunked book. I'm sure it's a good watch, but it doesn't really do anything new.

Safechuck had never publicly spoken about his abuse.

I’’m not sure where you are getting one kid getting everything from a “debunked book” either. Which book is the Jackson estate claiming these guys needed to read to describe child sexual abuse?

It’s a good thing the trips and relationship with MJ were photographed and documented. I swear the estate would claim Wade and James never met MJ and are just imagining everything.
 
Última edición:
Very good and riveting. Great insight into how serial child predators seduce kids, get them to remain silent and maintain loyalty.



Safechuck had never publicly spoken about his abuse.

I’’m not sure where you are getting one kid getting everything from a “debunked book” either. Which book is the Jackson estate claiming these guys needed to read to describe child sexual abuse?

It’s a good thing the trips and relationship with MJ were photographed and documented. I swear the estate would claim Wade and James never met MJ and are just imagining everything.
You mean this book?
690575 690576

690577
ec-d-2.jpg
ec-d-4.jpg

Victor Gutierrez was someone who claimed to know the Chandler family and that's how he was able to get all of this "information". If you read these journal entries they're rather similar to the stories Wade and Safechuck told in the documentary.

And look who he credits!
authors-notes-page-11.jpg

If you wanted your NAMBLA connection, Gutierrez is your guy.
 
You mean this book?
Ver archivo adjunto 690575Ver archivo adjunto 690576

Ver archivo adjunto 690577Ver archivo adjunto 690607Ver archivo adjunto 690608
Victor Gutierrez was someone who claimed to know the Chandler family and that's how he was able to get all of this "information". If you read these journal entries they're rather similar to the stories Wade and Safechuck told in the documentary.

And look who he credits!
Ver archivo adjunto 690594
If you wanted your NAMBLA connection, Gutierrez is your guy.

Many of the people thanked defended or have never publicly spoken about MJ - like Spence. I’d bet him thanking was because he got them to give interviews where they thought they were helping MJ. 1997 Wade Robeson was still very much defending MJ.

MJ, like all molesters, had a standard way grooming victims. It worked and he stuck with it. I have zero doubt all the kids he molested would tell very similar stories, it actually reinforces the fact he was a molester not refuted it. Sex predators don’t change tactics unless they are caught.

Im mean details for MJ are pretty standard for stuff for a pedophile, except he had way more money for the gifts/trips stuff and was famous. He was just doing on a grand scale what most pedos do on a small scale.

One pedo case I’m very familiar with all involved older man, who was a school principal, preying on boys who were from broken homes. The mothers thought he was a good role model because he was a school principal and church leader. He bought them gifts. He took them on trips. Then he took them on weekend camping trip and one boy ended up dead. He was giving the boys sleeping pills and booze. One kid started vomiting in his sleep and choked to death. No one thought he was a molester after the kids death, just terrible accident. Then questions arise why there was booze/ drugs in his system. Then it’s discovered the principal had been run out of or fired from at least four different school districts on the east coast in the 70s and 80s for inappropriate behavior and molesting boys. His tactics were the same in every district and he didn’t change them till he charged with murder.

The principals name was Edgar Friedrich Jr. in Mercer County, W.Va. just in case you think he’s innocent too since he was engaging in the same totally not pedo behavior with little boys as Micheal Jackson. The court case is easy to find with his name.

The pedo playbook doesn’t vary much because most young boys are similar - show them attention, give them gifts, develop a bond and then take advantage of that bond. Be sure to tell them jail/death/ losing their families will happen if they ever tell anyone they’ve been raped.

But what’s most interesting to me is how your post is pretty much repeated by about 15 different blogs and websites on google’s first two pages. I’ve never heard of the book but The Jackson estate has spent a lot of money to rig search engines on subjects to make sure the only thing you read about it is smearing the author and how it’s all outrageous lies.

My main interest in starting this thread was stuff like this. How the estate has and is trying to change public opinion of MJ as a child rapist and smear anyone who says anything to the contrary.

Do you think all these incredibly detailed blogs are run by amateurs or adoring fans? Do you understand that all these websites you are getting information from are all run by paid PR firms and defense teams for the Jackson estate? It’s interesting that there is almost never any information about who is publishing these exhaustive sites.

One of my main reasons for starting the thread was just to examine the tactics the MJ estate is using to effect public opinion. It’s not like they just have one site, they have dozens. They never reveal that they are behind the sites and try to give the impression there are just dedicated “truth seekers” who are publishing these (obviously very professional) blogs. If they were upfront about these paid sites it wouldn’t bother me, but they never are.

I find it interesting that as soon as any debate about MJ’s child rape surfaces online these paid “defense” websites are always cited. They have totally overtaken many of the search results on the more obscure players (like this book author) on google and other engines.

The only people who still maintain a strong interest in a book written twenty years ago is the Jackson estate.

I just find it fascinating to watch a billion dollar machine try and alter reality and use all it’s resources to protect their asset. My biggest problem is just the fact they try to hide these sites origins and motives.
 
Many of the people thanked defended or have never publicly spoken about MJ - like Spence. I’d bet him thanking was because he got them to give interviews where they thought they were helping MJ. 1997 Wade Robeson was still very much defending MJ.

MJ, like all molesters, had a standard way grooming victims. It worked and he stuck with it. I have zero doubt all the kids he molested would tell very similar stories, it actually reinforces the fact he was a molester not refuted it. Sex predators don’t change tactics unless they are caught.

Im mean details for MJ are pretty standard for stuff for a pedophile, except he had way more money for the gifts/trips stuff and was famous. He was just doing on a grand scale what most pedos do on a small scale.

One pedo case I’m very familiar with all involved older man, who was a school principal, preying on boys who were from broken homes. The mothers thought he was a good role model because he was a school principal and church leader. He bought them gifts. He took them on trips. Then he took them on weekend camping trip and one boy ended up dead. He was giving the boys sleeping pills and booze. One kid started vomiting in his sleep and choked to death. No one thought he was a molester after the kids death, just terrible accident. Then questions arise why there was booze/ drugs in his system. Then it’s discovered the principal had been run out of or fired from at least four different school districts on the east coast in the 70s and 80s for inappropriate behavior and molesting boys. His tactics were the same in every district and he didn’t change them till he charged with murder.

The principals name was Edgar Friedrich Jr. in Mercer County, W.Va. just in case you think he’s innocent too since he was engaging in the same totally not pedo behavior with little boys as Micheal Jackson. The court case is easy to find with his name.

The pedo playbook doesn’t vary much because most young boys are similar - show them attention, give them gifts, develop a bond and then take advantage of that bond. Be sure to tell them jail/death/ losing their families will happen if they ever tell anyone they’ve been raped.

But what’s most interesting to me is how your post is pretty much repeated by about 15 different blogs and websites on google’s first two pages. I’ve never heard of the book but The Jackson estate has spent a lot of money to rig search engines on subjects to make sure the only thing you read about it is smearing the author and how it’s all outrageous lies.

My main interest in starting this thread was stuff like this. How the estate has and is trying to change public opinion of MJ as a child rapist and smear anyone who says anything to the contrary.

Do you think all these incredibly detailed blogs are run by amateurs or adoring fans? Do you understand that all these websites you are getting information from are all run by paid PR firms and defense teams for the Jackson estate? It’s interesting that there is almost never any information about who is publishing these exhaustive sites.

One of my main reasons for starting the thread was just to examine the tactics the MJ estate is using to effect public opinion. It’s not like they just have one site, they have dozens. They never reveal that they are behind the sites and try to give the impression there are just dedicated “truth seekers” who are publishing these (obviously very professional) blogs. If they were upfront about these paid sites it wouldn’t bother me, but they never are.

I find it interesting that as soon as any debate about MJ’s child rape surfaces online these paid “defense” websites are always cited. They have totally overtaken many of the search results on the more obscure players (like this book author) on google and other engines.

The only people who still maintain a strong interest in a book written twenty years ago is the Jackson estate.

I just find it fascinating to watch a billion dollar machine try and alter reality and use all it’s resources to protect their asset. My biggest problem is just the fact they try to hide these sites origins and motives.
What the fuck are you on about? The Jackson estate has nothing to do with this situation. And I'm highly doubtful they're paying people to make "Pro MJ" blogs or altering search results. This is the most conspiracy theory tier bullshit I've ever seen. You still don't cite your sources and didn't even read the pages that pretty much show they rehearsed many things from this book. So do you think the author who is associated with NAMBLA is telling the truth about Michael?
 
There's that one detail about Jordan identifying Michael's penis. Of course there's some things saying it was wrong and other experts saying it was correct.

The biggest conspirancy theory bullshit I've seen on this forum involving a celebrity is that Tom Hanks is a sex predator.
 
Última edición:
Why do you put weight on accusations but not on "not guilty" verdicts? I think these two videos do a much better job of painting the picture than proven liars in a sobstory documentary, especially considering one of them ripped his whole story from the first accuser - who was proven to have made everything up. But it's up to you if you want to watch them or not.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=6pnoQqlygQs
https://youtube.com/watch?v=9yTTEwBLfUQ
you're shifting the goal posts around. I replied to you with the accusations and settlements when you said "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". " I pointed out that people think he is a child molester because he kept settling child molestation lawsuits and had been publicly accused by 5 people. Do you understand why someone could reasonably assume he is a child molester?

Not guilty isn't an "innocent" verdict. It means the state could not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. That's all it means.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo