Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Take the money or report the crime!

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Tommybojangles
    Registered Users Posts: 388 ✭✭Tommybojangles


    Money all day everyday. Desperately selfish I know and I'm sorry


  • Options
    #63
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Donnielighto wrote: »
    You were either implying he abused the kid sexually or communicated poorly.
    I don't think they slept in the same bed btw, the same room based on what macauley Culkin said and it was huge with 2 floors. They were on different floors.

    I don’t know about Culkin specifically but MJ confirmed himself that he shared beds with children. There’s a lot that can be debated but that’s not one of them.


  • Options
    #64
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    It was hugely inappropriate. And I believe the LN guys. I had no strong feelings about the documentary. I just heard about the day it aired and only watched it because my husband wanted to. The clincher for me was them both describing something that happened to them. It took them both to finish their account of the thing they were talking about to make me realise that they were describing the same thing. The very same thing. But in different wording. There was a convincing and compelling granularity to their accounts. The fact that they weren’t in histrionics convinced me too (histrionics would read more fake to me).

    You said the documentary made you angry. Well, to upset you further, there are over 22,000 votes on IMDb for LN and it holds a rating of 7.0 out of 10. That’s a considerable sample size. If you look at the breakdown of votes, predictably there are a lot of 1/10 and 10/10 votes. It wouldn’t surprise me if many of these opposite end votes were disregarded. If you remove the 10/10 and 1/10 ratings, the 7.0 rating holds.

    This documentary has been well-received based off that. Maybe we’re all stupid or maybe, just maybe, they tell a compelling account.


    Listen, you believe what they say in the documentary...That's fine.
    What they said in their own depostions in 2016 and 2017 contradicts everything said in the documentary and that's before everything else they've said for the last 30 years. I thought he was guilty before the documentary but, came out of it with more questions than answers, done the research and now I don't believe them for a second. There is literally no evidence. I may as well tell the world I was abused too if that's the case

    Not going to tell you what to read or look up. It's there for you to search if you want. It's irrelevant, you have your mind made up. However, if you ever do decide to do so, I think you'll have your doubts.

    The fact you said them telling the same story made you believe them, speaks volumes to me...Not as if they had months of pre production to get things right and post editing and shooting to tidy things up or that they met as kids in 1991 and met again in 2014...Or that one of their companies went bust to the tune of 24 million dollars and decided to sue the estate a few days after...Or that Wade Robson wrote gushing tributes about MJ and begged for jobs from the estate


  • Options
    #65
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MOR316 wrote: »
    Listen, you believe what they say in the documentary...That's fine.
    What they said in their own depostions in 2016 and 2017 contradicts everything said in the documentary and that's before everything else they've said for the last 30 years. I thought he was guilty before the documentary but, came out of it with more questions than answers, done the research and now I don't believe them for a second

    Not going to tell you what to read or look up. It's there for you to search if you want. It's irrelevant, you have your mind made up. However, if you ever do decide to do so, you'll change your mind

    I have and I believe them, not him. :) The mantra is “if you believe him guilty then you obviously haven’t done your research”. Nope, many people have read about it and still believe him guilty. It’s so arrogant of you to assume that somebody who disagrees with you holds an uneducated opinion.


  • Options
    #66
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    I have and I believe them, not him. :) The mantra is “if you believe him guilty then you obviously haven’t done your research”. Nope, many people have read about it and still believe him guilty. It’s so arrogant of you to assume that somebody who disagrees with you holds an uneducated opinion.

    That's a bit rich coming from you. "To upset you further" Hypocrite much?

    This is the guy you believe? Good luck with that so

    https://youtu.be/mWtvYzsbtjc


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MOR316 wrote: »
    That's a bit rich coming from you. Hypocrite much?

    This is the guy you believe? Good luck with that so

    https://youtu.be/mWtvYzsbtjc

    How so? You’re welcome to direct me to where I said or implied that your opinions were uneducated.

    Oh goody, YouTube spam.


  • Options
    #68
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    It was hugely inappropriate. And I believe the LN guys. I had no strong feelings about the documentary. I just heard about the day it aired and only watched it because my husband wanted to. The clincher for me was them both describing something that happened to them. It took them both to finish their account of the thing they were talking about to make me realise that they were describing the same thing. The very same thing. But in different wording. There was a convincing and compelling granularity to their accounts. The fact that they weren’t in histrionics convinced me too (histrionics would read more fake to me).

    You said the documentary made you angry. Well, to upset you further, there are over 22,000 votes on IMDb for LN and it holds a rating of 7.0 out of 10. That’s a considerable sample size. If you look at the breakdown of votes, predictably there are a lot of 1/10 and 10/10 votes. It wouldn’t surprise me if many of these opposite end votes were disregarded. If you remove the 10/10 and 1/10 ratings, the 7.0 rating holds.

    This documentary has been well-received based off that. Maybe we’re all stupid or maybe, just maybe, they tell a compelling account.

    That documentary was a total stitch up, plenty of people countering it including people who spent time with MJ as kids.

    Motivated by some people thinking they can fill their bank accounts simple as that.


  • Options
    #69
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    How so? You’re welcome to direct me to where I said or implied that your opinions were uneducated.

    Oh goody, YouTube spam.

    You just did.

    That just shows the kind of you. You want to believe something. Even though the accuser in that video, that you believe, is clearly lying (again)

    So what's the point in discussing this with you if you're just going to be patronsing and thinking you're holier than thou on the topic?


  • Options
    #70
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MOR316 wrote: »
    You just did.

    That just shows the kind of you. You want to believe something. Even though the accuser in that video, that you believe, is clearly lying (again)

    So what's the point in discussing this with you if you're just going to be patronsing and thinking you're holier than thou on the topic?

    “The kind of you” - that makes the kind of sense that doesn’t. Stop mashing the keyboard.

    You are the one who assumed I was coming from an uneducated place. I wouldn’t be calling anyone else holier-than-thou, if I were you.


  • Options
    #71
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Cade Acidic Sentinel wrote: »
    That documentary was a total stitch up, plenty of people countering it including people who spent time with MJ as kids.

    Motivated by some people thinking they can fill their bank accounts simple as that.

    It’s been very well-received.

    I have no idea why anyone thinks “I hung around him as a child and he didn’t touch me” is compelling or in any way useful. No molesters molests every child they encounter.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    “The kind of you” - that makes the kind of sense that doesn’t. Stop mashing the keyboard.

    You are the one who assumed I was coming from an uneducated place. I wouldn’t be calling anyone else holier-than-thou, if I were you.

    Judging from your posts, I was correct. Thanks


  • Options
    #73
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MOR316 wrote: »
    Judging from your posts, I was correct. Thanks

    Meh, if that’s how I’m coming across, I can live with that. I’m happy in my position.


  • Options
    #74
    Raconteuse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭Raconteuse


    Cade Acidic Sentinel wrote: »
    That documentary was a total stitch up, plenty of people countering it including people who spent time with MJ as kids.
    Oh well that's me convinced.

    You have absolutely zero grounds to state as fact that he didn't abuse children, and that the documentary is bogus. You have the opinion that he did not abuse children and that the documentary is bogus, but you do not have evidence that either assertion is fact.

    I can't state as fact that he abused children either but I have reason to believe that he may have. And so does everyone, whether in denial or not.


  • Options
    #75
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Raconteuse wrote: »
    Oh well that's me convinced.

    You have absolutely zero grounds to state as fact that he didn't abuse children, and that the documentary is bogus. You have the opinion that he did not abuse children and that the documentary is bogus, but you do not have evidence that either assertion is fact.

    I can't state as fact that he abused children either but I have reason to believe that he may have. And so does everyone, whether in denial or not.

    But, that's the thing about it.
    They were caught out lying about a lot of things they said in it. In fact, their own mothers contradicted what they said in the documentary.

    Not sure where the confusing arises as to why people are questioning them. They even lied in their civil cases in 2016 and 2017 and their stories are different in LN than their own depositions.

    Personally, I see that as evidence as something shady is going on and indeed, bogus! Especially when the director is caught out lying on several TV interviews

    Maybe it's an agenda thing? I mean, why do you find it so easy to believe them now, with their accusations, as opposed to them staunchly defending him, all those years. To the point of even volunteering to testify in his defence in 2005?

    I can't imagine it going like this...

    "OK, Michael....The prosecution have messed up with their over zealous approach. We have this. Who do you want as your first defended?"
    "Oh jeez...How about Wade Robson? The kid I molested for all those years."

    Logically...It makes no sense


  • Options
    #76
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MOR316 wrote: »
    But, that's the thing about it.
    They were caught out lying about a lot of things they said in it. In fact, their own mothers contradicted what they said in the documentary.

    Not sure where the confusing arises as to why people are questioning them. They even lied in their civil cases in 2016 and 2017 and their stories are different in LN than their own depositions.

    Personally, I see that as evidence as something shady is going on and indeed, bogus! Especially when the director is caught out lying on several TV interviews

    Maybe it's an agenda thing? I mean, why do you find it so easy to believe them now, with their accusations, as opposed to them staunchly defending him, all those years. To the point of even volunteering to testify in his defence in 2005?

    I can't imagine it going like this...

    "OK, Michael....The prosecution have messed up with their over zealous approach. We have this. Who do you want as your first defended?"
    "Oh jeez...How about Wade Robson? The kid I molested for all those years."

    Logically...It makes no sense

    Why would people have an agenda against a long-dead man? Seriously, what do you think would be fuelling that? The ‘poor persecuted Michael’ narrative is so bizarre. But kudos to him for having to the star power to have a coterie of people ready to jealously defend him still, I guess.

    You don’t believe them. Others do. That’s it.

    Consider this. If you’re wrong, think of what you are defending.


  • Options
    #77
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Why would people have an agenda against a long-dead man? Seriously, what do you think would be fuelling that? The ‘poor persecuted Michael’ narrative is so bizarre. But kudos to him for having to the star power to have a coterie of people ready to jealously defend him still, I guess.

    You don’t believe them. Others do. That’s it.

    Consider this. If you’re wrong, think of what you are defending.

    Considering you can't answer anything I've asked, considering you're accusing me of defending paedophilia when I'm actually not, I know you're just trying to antagonise me to get some sort of response out of me but, ain't happening. Sorry. I also find your last line absolutely disgusting and you should think before you type. Very out of line.

    Enjoy your weekend


  • Options
    #78
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MOR316 wrote: »
    Considering you can't answer anything I've asked, considering you're accusing me of defending paedophilia when I'm actually not, I know you're just trying to antagonise me to get some sort of response out of me but, ain't happening. Sorry. I also find your last line absolutely disgusting and you should think before you type. Very out of line.

    Enjoy your weekend

    Sure, why would I be answering to you? Who are you?

    I think that line was pertinent. If you are wrong, think of what and who you are defending. What’s so offensive about that?

    If the mods think I’m out of line, I’ll listen. Other than that, I won’t feel bad about what I write.


  • Options
    #79
    MOR316
    Registered Users Posts: 2,205 ✭✭✭MOR316


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Sure, why would I be answering to you? Who are you?

    I think that line was pertinent. If you are wrong, think of what and who you are defending. What’s so offensive about that?

    With an obnoxiously abusive attitude like that, I won't be responding to you any longer. Thank you


  • Options
    #80
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    MOR316 wrote: »
    With an obnoxiously abusive attitude like that, I won't be responding to you any longer. Thank you

    So you keep saying. :D

    If my post was abusive, I’d have been infracted. The dramatics. No wonder this documentary got you riled.


Advertisement