Leaving Neverland = totally convincing
The accusers and their family members were all totally convincing, as far as I'm concerned.
shareYes ...
share
MovieChat Forums > Michael Jackson Discussion > Leaving Neverland = totally convincing
Yes. Circumstantial evidence seems to be convincing to sheep.
shareBut it's presumably the witness testimonies that everyone is convinced by, and people often have an instinct for that sort of thing and the credibility of an accuser.
share... and insulting people is a great way to convince them of your superior intellect. Sheesh, go stick your head in a well!
shareIf zero substantive facts and hallow emotional arguments are conclusive to you, yeah, I don't need to pretend I'm smarter than you.
shareDarn, I was hoping you got stuck in the well. With all that exceptional brain power, I'm sure that you have trouble remembering the simple things. Maybe you'll forget how to breathe.
shareI'm really on the fence about this. On one hand, they seem genuine, but both of them DECIDED, very cunningly, to say that they only REALISED it was abuse via therapy. Why? It gets around the statute of limitations. It's like hitting a reset on the time of abuse, moving it to the day you REALISED it was abuse.
Now why do that? Well if you want to sue an estate for 1.6 billion (an absurd amount!) then you better have your legalities lined up and ready to go.
1. They did not sue the estate for 1.6 billion. The fact is no amount was ever named. You can look that up yourself. I don't know where that figure came from, but my guess is it came from the Jackson estate in an attempt to discredit them.
2. They did not "decide" to say they only realised it was abuse through therapy. Wade has made it very clear this wasn't a matter of repressed memory. He was in a downward spiral, and had no idea why, so eventually he went to see a therapist, but even so for quite a while he only talked about the positive aspects of his relationship with MJ. Eventually he realised he had to tell him or her about the negative, and that started the process of his coming to terms with it having been abuse.
I don't remember what the trigger was for James' revelation, but don't recall it being about therapy. I don't recall his mentioning therapy. I do recall him saying it had to do with learning about Wade's finally coming out. Which makes sense. He was terribly alone and isolated, not feeling he could tell anyone about what happened.
"I'm really on the fence about this." - Couldn't agree more. I found it incredibly hard to get a read on the accusers. At times I felt they were lying, other times they seemed wholly credible. Bizarre. At the very least it seems *something* happened.
shareTotally agree. I don't blame anyone for not wanted to disclose this type of victimization. It's not just the child victim, but also the parents. The Child-- even as an adult-- feels compelled to defend the idiotic decisions of his parents.
Michael Jackson was a pedophile. If he hadn't been famous, he would have been locked up for the things he did.
Evidence? Where's the evidence that he's a pedophile?
shareHow did you get free from the well? Are we going to have to find a more suitable punishment for you?
sharesee this: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/music/artists/michael-jacksons-2005-child-molestation-trial-odd-damning-details/.
What adult man who is NOT a pedophile shares his porn with his child "friends"?
I found it all terribly convincing, the testimony from the young men, and from their families. Heartbreaking.
Which isn't the same as absolute proof, there will never be absolute, unarguable proof in this case, not when the only witnesses to these crimes were a child, and a man who is now dead. But I believe that Jackson was a pedo, have for a very long time.
Yes, the fact that they didn't come forward earlier or even denied the abuse charges when younger doesn't make me doubt them.
It's not unusual for abused kids to keep abuse to themselves out of fear. Often they are threatened by the abuser and Jackson was a powerful man in the entertainment business.
Honestly, I came across a video in 2010 that detailed about the Jordan Chandler case. What convinced me (and this is a graphic statement) is that the boy was able to identify the exact pattern of the brown spots on the back of Michael Jackson's penis by drawing them. Something he could have never have seen unless it was erected right in front of him. This really was what convinced me personally.
share