Leaving Neverland - Michael Jackson Documentary [HBO]

BorneTobyWilde · 05-03-2019 03:49PM

Watched the first part, if you take away the abuse stories he did so much to help those two families. There seemed to be a bitterness about their stories, a jealously about fact he didn't keep them around and bankroll them forever.
Hard to imagine Michael rimming 7 year old's, those things are just hard to believe, and then to put those same people on the stand to defend him, he must have been mental challenged to put the so called victims on the stand to defend him. Makes no sense whatsoever.
This so called jewellery, they could have had a piece in documentary where they returned to that store and confirm those bespoke pieces indeed where made and bought by Michael Jackson, at least that adds to their story, but they didn't do that either.

sligeach · 05-03-2019 04:05PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Not a fan of Ray, hence not listening to him. But he’s entitled to hold his opinions. What has your bizarre obsession with Ray D’arcy’s thoughts got to do with this thread?

Where's the obsession? I just don't like Ray. He gets paid 100's of thousands a year to talk garbage for a few hours a week. I used to listen in the odd time, as Radio 1 is the main preset. But when he said that he wouldn't play Michael's music again after listening to an obvious MJ hater(like yourself) prattle some BS on Liveline, I said, right, I'm not listening to you again. Hadn't seen the show, wasn't waiting for the mockumentary, didn't do any research, just takes salacious accusations as fact.

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 04:18PM

sligeach wrote: »

Where's the obsession? I just don't like Ray. He gets paid 100's of thousands a year to talk garbage for a few hours a week. I used to listen in the odd time, as Radio 1 is the main preset. But when he said that he wouldn't play Michael's music again after listening to an obvious MJ hater(like yourself) prattle some BS on Liveline, I said, right, I'm not listening to you again. Hadn't seen the show, wasn't waiting for the mockumentary, didn't do any research, just takes salacious accusations as fact.

He’s entitled to his views, as you are entitled to turn the dial or turn off your radio entirely if they infuriate you that much. Failing that, there’s a radio forum where you can vent.

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 04:21PM

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

It's fashionable these days to accuse people of sexual assault, a lot of bitter women and men are making claims these days as an act of revenge.

Watch out Gok Wan, Toby is coming for your job. “Heading out this weekend girls? Don’t forget clashing prints are this seasons latest trend! Also don’t forget to find yourself a man to falsely accuse of sexual assault just to give your outfit that little bit more je ne sais quoi”

Unearthly · 05-03-2019 04:50PM

Agree with others it's a bit long but worth a watch. Grim stuff

brian_t · 05-03-2019 05:02PM

sligeach wrote: »

I heard an ad about 5 or 10 minutes ago during the break on Liveline that Ray Darcy will be interviewing Dan Reed, the director of the farce mockumentary on today's show. What a c*** he is. I told you before that Ray made up his mind on the 31st January that following the g0b$h1t€ spouting lies on Liveline that there and then wouldn't be playing Michael Jackson songs ever again.

I shouldn't be surprised, he's a w@nk€r that talks about common garbage. Look at his guests on radio and TV, most are gutter vermin and Z list celebrities.

Do you think that referring to people you disagree with by the most derogatory of names helps your argument.

Dial Hard · 05-03-2019 05:10PM

sligeach wrote: »

I heard an ad about 5 or 10 minutes ago during the break on Liveline that Ray Darcy will be interviewing Dan Reed, the director of the farce mockumentary on today's show. What a c*** he is. I told you before that Ray made up his mind on the 31st January that following the g0b$h1t€ spouting lies on Liveline that there and then wouldn't be playing Michael Jackson songs ever again.

I shouldn't be surprised, he's a w@nk€r that talks about common garbage. Look at his guests on radio and TV, most are gutter vermin and Z list celebrities.

You seem to be taking this weirdly personally.

Pete Moss · 05-03-2019 05:10PM

sligeach wrote:

Look at his guests on radio and TV, most are gutter vermin and Z list celebrities.

Ah, now, "gutter vermin" is a bit strong. Granted, his guests tend to be further down the rungs of the ladder of fame, but most of his guests seem to be of decent character. I mean, it's not like they're pedophiles or anything.

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 05:18PM

brian_t wrote: »

Do you think that referring to people you disagree with by the most derogatory of names helps your argument.

All because a radio host decided not to play a few tunes. Sure by the time D’arcy has figured out what button he’s meant to press, the time for the song would be over anyway.
Don’t worry sligeach, I’m sure your personal homage and dedicated shrine to The King of Perps will still remain largely intact.

sligeach · 05-03-2019 06:19PM

So will Ray set aside an equal length of time in the next few days to dedicate a 100% pro Jackson slot? We know the answer to that. RTE have a responsibility to provide quality impartial programs. Did anyone listen to the section, was there a balance with counter arguments? Did Ray grill him with intelligent questions like why would Jackson take such a huge risk and put Robson on the stand if he had abused him? Giving him an opportunity to tell the whole world the truth. To call that Russian Roulette would be the understatement of the century. Oh, right, ya, Michael brainwashed the "Master of Deception".

leggo · 05-03-2019 06:25PM

No they don’t. That’s in relation to referenda or elections. Presenters are allowed have their own opinions on issues like this. You’re all over the place with the facts tbh Sligeach.

mcmoustache · 05-03-2019 06:29PM

R Kelly and Chris Brown still have fans who think they did nothing wrong.

I'm not saying that it has anything to do with this but it's just a bit interesting.

sligeach · 05-03-2019 07:19PM

leggo wrote: »

No they don’t. That’s in relation to referenda or elections. Presenters are allowed have their own opinions on issues like this. You’re all over the place with the facts tbh Sligeach.

Ya, I suppose I expect them to be more responsible. I'm not all over the place with the facts. Corey Feldman has been so adamant in his defence of Michael and has slammed Leaving Neverland. Say, If he were to change his story tomorrow, would we automatically believe him? Would he get a Leaving Neverland 2?

And he doesn't have all the dodgy action of Robson prior to appearing in Leaving Neverland.

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 07:28PM

Unless Corey Feldman was in the room when the abuse with these boys was taking place, then he has absolutely no authority to denounce their experiences and state they never happened. Michael was never interested in him or Culkin because they were established stars in their own right. They didn’t fit his criteria for a victim, they weren’t disadvanged enough or from broken homes.

is_that_so · 05-03-2019 07:50PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Unless Corey Feldman was in the room when the abuse with these boys was taking place, then he has absolutely no authority to denounce their experiences and state they never happened. Michael was never interested in him or Culkin because they were established stars in their own right. They didn’t fit his criteria for a victim, they weren’t disadvanged enough or from broken homes.

I'm guessing you were in the room?

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 07:52PM

is_that_so wrote: »

I'm guessing you were in the room?

I’m not stating it didn’t happen

I’m choosing to believe those who state it did, because as someone on another thread perfectly put it..

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Well on the balance of facts, I think it is pretty clear what actually happened.

On the one side we have a man who supposedly loved all children, but had intense friendships with ONLY boys that ended soon after the boys reached puberty when they were replaced with another. Whose home was designed to be appealing to children.Who slept in beds alone with these boys. Who was inappropriately tactile with them, as many photos show. Who lavished the boys and their families with money and gifts. Who had porn openly lying around in areas frequented by children. Who has been accused by several boys of abuse and paid them off.(And I could add even more to that list)

And the other side - the man happens to have been rich and famous so they must be lying.

Doesn't really cut it for me to excuse all the other evidence.

is_that_so · 05-03-2019 08:02PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m not stating it didn’t happen
I’m choosing to believe those who state it did, because as someone on another thread perfectly put it..

Well it is still supposition. I'm down with a very weird childlike man description. I don't know and I don't think anyone can ever know where else it went. That doesn't stop us forming a conclusion though. I think there are dubious elements on both sides. My own view of recent "documentaries" is that many tend to document what they want people to see and believe.

sligeach · 05-03-2019 08:10PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m not stating it didn’t happen
I’m choosing to believe those who state it did, because as someone on another thread perfectly put it..

More rubbish. So that's why he was found not guilty of all 14 charges in 2005? Why the FBI had absolutely nothing on him for 17 years. He outsmarted and outwitted a whole organisation?

You know what I'd like for these 2 liars to do. Take a polygraph test as the private Investigator Scott Ross suggested, he was involved in the 2005 case. He doesn't believe them, putting it mildly, or that they have the wherewithal to get one over on a polygraph.

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 08:13PM

Maybe petition Ray D’arcy to have them on and give them one

sligeach · 05-03-2019 08:19PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Unless Corey Feldman was in the room when the abuse with these boys was taking place, then he has absolutely no authority to denounce their experiences and state they never happened. Michael was never interested in him or Culkin because they were established stars in their own right. They didn’t fit his criteria for a victim, they weren’t disadvanged enough or from broken homes.

Do you hear yourself? You're a knowledgeable expert now on what way Michael thought? Are you a professional psychiatrist?

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 08:32PM

Yes I am. I’ll be on with Ray D’arcy tomorrow afternoon sometime between 3 - 4:30, hope you’ll be listening in.

Unearthly · 05-03-2019 08:38PM

sligeach wrote: »

Where's the obsession? I just don't like Ray. He gets paid 100's of thousands a year to talk garbage for a few hours a week. I used to listen in the odd time, as Radio 1 is the main preset. But when he said that he wouldn't play Michael's music again after listening to an obvious MJ hater(like yourself) prattle some BS on Liveline, I said, right, I'm not listening to you again. Hadn't seen the show, wasn't waiting for the mockumentary, didn't do any research, just takes salacious accusations as fact.

I've seen across online on Twitter and YouTube that Michael Jackson hard core fanatics are going to boycott HBO. Will you be boycotting HBO and Channel 4 same way as Rays show?

mcmoustache · 05-03-2019 08:49PM

I still haven't heard a good explanation for why he was sleeping with kids that weren't his.

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 08:55PM

mcmoustache wrote: »

I still haven't heard a good explanation for why he was sleeping with kids that weren't his.

Because he was a child trapped in a man’s body or something or other. Which is a justification you wouldn’t make for any other man in the history of the planet ever. Especially one who was highly skilled and competent in virtually every other aspect of his life.

sligeach · 05-03-2019 09:00PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Yes I am. I’ll be on with Ray D’arcy tomorrow afternoon sometime between 3 - 4:30, hope you’ll be listening in.

No you're not. Wouldn't surprise me if you were on the show tomorrow though, it's trash and they'll let anybody on.

retro:electro · 05-03-2019 09:03PM

sligeach wrote: »

No you're not. Wouldn't surprise me if you were on the show tomorrow though, it's trash and they'll let anybody on.

I’ll also be discussing the merits of sarcasm, it’s a pity you’ll miss it.

Smertrius · 05-03-2019 09:12PM

But in 2005 these men testimony this wasn't sexual abuse under oath of Law and order now 4 years later they are testimony again its was sexual abuse now I am confuse

Michael was never interested in him, of course not these are men Michael interests for women

sligeach · 05-03-2019 09:19PM

Unearthly wrote: »

I've seen across online on Twitter and YouTube that Michael Jackson hard core fanatics are going to boycott HBO. Will you be boycotting HBO and Channel 4 same way as Rays show?

Ratings: “Leaving Neverland” Not a Ratings Smash for HBO, Beaten by “Real Housewives of Atlanta,” “Beachfront Bargain Hunt,” Survivalists Show

https://www.showbiz411.com/2019/03/05/ratings-leaving-neverland-not-a-ratings-smash-for-hbo-beaten-by-real-housewives-of-atlanta-beachfront-bargain-hunt-survivalists-show

And ironic that Roger Friedman is the author of the article. I'm not alone in the boycott. Channel 4 should have higher viewer figures, it's a bit of a trashy station.

https://twitter.com/SandcastleFugi/status/1102997266682372096

leggo · 05-03-2019 09:37PM

Mate, stop. It got weird like 10 pages ago.

biggebruv · 05-03-2019 09:46PM

Just finished was on the fence before. I’m definitely choosing to believe the 2 guys here it’s just bizarre he was a sick guy

Leaving Neverland - Michael Jackson Documentary [HBO]

Comments