Micky Jackson in trouble again

blanch152 wrote: »

There is no doubt that there are serious credible questions around Jackson and sexual abuse of boys. That a court failed to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean that on the balance of probabilities he wasn't an abuser.

blanch152 wrote: »

There is no doubt that there are serious credible questions around Jackson and sexual abuse of boys. That a court failed to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt doesn't mean that on the balance of probabilities he wasn't an abuser.

Boggles wrote: »

I haven't watched anything on OJ in years. So maybe new evidence has come to light

But I had an interest in the trial as did most of the world, as far as I can remember I think it was the BBC who made a documentary a few years after and they were the first to highlight that his son was a very credible suspect and that was never followed up on, the reason given is the prosecution had all ready blown it's wad on OJ and there was no backing down.

His son apparently had a rage problem and a history of extreme violence, drug problem and wasn't too keen on his step mother. He was also a chef.

A credible theory posed at the time, was that the slowest car chases in the history of car chases with the Ford Bronco was not in fact to get away from the police but to lead them away from his son.

Again it's a very long time since I researched the subject but I remember thinking at the time backed with discussion that son was a very credible suspect.

KikiLaRue wrote: »

That's such a weak argument. What would her motivation have been? They say money - but she had plenty surely? And no amount of money in the world would convince me to call my brother a paedophile.

Far more likely she told the truth and retracted it because her entire family disowned her.

batman_oh wrote: »

You might be the only person on Earth that still thinks OJ is innocent. All because he wasn’t found guilty in the criminal trial and these can never be wrong. How do you explain him being found guilty of the 2 deaths in the civil trial? The courts disagreed with each other. That must really confuse!

Since Sundance and HBO & many other media appear to be more interested in salacious fabrications than actual journalism, let me do it for them. This all started in 1993. There was an attempt by Evan Chandler to procure funds from Michael Jackson to pursue his screenwriting dreams. When Michael does not comply, Evan seeks out a private attorney and publicly makes the accusation that Michael molested his son. He is on tape stating such things as “If I go through with this I win big time. I will get everything I want. It will be a massacre if I don’t get what I want.” His son, Jordan, who lives with his mother, repeatedly denies being molested. However, when he goes on visitation to stay with his father, he changes his story and “admits” he was molested. The police open an investigation. They search Michael’s home as well as his entire body. The boy’s description does not match. The boy says Michael is circumcised, we know from his autopsy that he was not. The police convened two separate grand juries to press charges, but both refused due to lack of evidence. Meanwhile, the civil case is proceeding, and Michael is required to give a deposition. But the district attorney refuses to close the criminal case. Michael's lawyers press the court to delay the civil deposition until the criminal case is closed and the other side presses for it to continue. That's right, the accusers want the civil trial, and Michael the criminal investigation. Let that one sink in. Judge, unfortunately, agrees with the accusers and so, Michael must either give a deposition in the civil case and allow the district attorney to try to build a case around his deposition or he must settle. This takes his right to a fair criminal trial, should one ever occur, away. For example, if he gives an alibi, they can change the dates when they press charges. This happened in 2003, they changed the dates on the charge sheet once they found out on TV that Michael had an airtight alibi. Even the state of California eventually agreed and changed their laws so this cannot happen to anyone again. A defendant should have the right to present their defense for the first time, in a criminal court room. Michael had numerous lawsuits that he was dealing with constantly and the overwhelming majority were settled for practical reasons, this was nothing new. Not long after all of this, Jordan Chandler filed for emancipation from his parents, and I have to say, I can’t blame him. And, oh, by the way, the civil settlement did not stop anyone from continuing the criminal investigation, but I suppose since Evan got his money and Jordan wanted emancipation from his parents, no one cared about the criminal pursuit any longer.


Move forward to 2003. Michael appears in a highly slanted documentary made by Bashir where he, at Bashir’s urging, invites a prior cancer victim that he helped up to Neverland for the interview. In the interview, the boy says he and his brother slept in Michael’s bed and Michael and another adult friend of Michael’s on the floor. Media started speculating non-stop on TV that Michael was molesting this child. Both the police and child services begin an investigation. The media is hounding the boy’s family so Michael invites them to stay at a guest house in Neverland for a couple weeks until the media frenzy dies down. The district attorney (same one as from 1993) is out for blood. But he has a problem. For anyone who watches the full, unedited version of this interview and the way they were praising Michael, it would be very hard to believe this boy was molested. So, the story they go to court with as that the molestation occurred after, when the family went back to Neverland. That’s right, Michael has known this child for three years, never molested him, but the police want you to believe that at the height of the world speculating every day on TV that he is molesting this child, in the middle of a police and child services investigation, he suddenly has a realization that he wants to start molesting this child. And then there is the credibility of the witnesses, who previously sewed JC Penny for sexual harassment, who committed welfare fraud, who pursued numerous celebrities for funds, who held fund raisers to pay for medical expenses when they already had insurance, etc. And on the witness stand repeatedly contradicted themselves and each other. It was clear from testimony that only once they were cut out of Michael Jackson’s life, and only once they lost the free ride they were hoping to maintain indefinitely, did they concoct the molestation allegations. And mind you, instead of going to the police they went to the same exact civil attorney that got the 1993 settlement. But as I mentioned above, laws were changed now, and the attorney told them they had to pursue the criminal route prior to the civil route. The list of absurdities that was this case just goes on and on and on. The only reason it got past a grand jury is because the public had at this point been brain washed for 10 years by the media into believing that Michael Jackson is a child molester. Otherwise the grand jury would have given these allegations the same fate two separate grand juries gave the 1993 allegations.


Move forward to a few years after Michael’s passing (RIP). Wade Robson is involved in various tribute shows to MJ, continues to praise him in the press, and before he passed, continued to occasionally spend time with Michael. During the 2005 trial, he, among others, testified that Michael never touched them. They were witnesses called by the defense. What abuser would take the risk of calling a witness to the stand, that he had previously abused, a witness that was in no way integral to the defense? It defies all logic. A few years after Michael’s death Wade petitions the Estate to allow him to be the lead choreographer of the Michael Jackson Cirque Du Soleil show. That’s right, he wants to work every day and night, for years, travelling around the world choreographing a tribute to Michael. He even tells the press he got the job. But the Estate decided to give the job to someone else. Once a choreographer for acts like Britney Spears, his career appears to be on the skids. So, what does he do? He sues Michael Jackson’s estate for child molestation. Notice the same pattern with the prior accusers, then want ‘in’ and only once they are cut ‘out’ do they make molestation accusations. The amount of inconsistent statements and contradictions in the lawsuit are overwhelming, including such blatant lies as Wade claiming he did not know about the existence of the MJ Estate until immediately prior to filing his lawsuit, even though he is on camera and in emails discussing and asking the MJ Estate for the lead job on Michael Jackson Cirque Du Soleil shows. His lawsuit is thrown out of court. So, what does he do then? Has HBO and Sundance give him airtime to share his “story”. In regards to Safechuck, he jumped in on Wade’s lawsuit once he heard about it for what I’m sure he hoped would be an easy payday. If you read Safechuck’s allegations he appears to have copied them from a book from the 1990’s entitled “Michael Jackson was my Lover” written by Victor Gutierrez, who thanks NAMBLA in his book and who was successfully sued by Michael Jackson for defamation for close to $3 million. Gutierrez fled the country and did not pay. Sadly, there are no defamation laws to protect the deceased, which is why Safechuck and HBO can now air this nonsense.


I’m certain that none of this will be covered in the documentary. No, instead we will get salacious claims from discredited individuals and they and Sundance and HBO will all make their profits at the expense of a man who is no longer here to defend himself. Shame on all of them.


Anyone who wants to copy/paste and post this elsewhere, please feel free to do so.


For more detailed info go to https://themichaeljacksonallegations.com (it's not my site, but it's incredibly well done) and for letter from MJ Estate regarding the documentary: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5733176/Letter-to-R-Plepler-Re-Michael-Jackson.pdf.


For other great articles see https://thevioletreality.com/leavingneverland-isnt-a-documentary-it-s-a-work-of-fiction-a6ba55e1a01b or https://www.forbes.com/sites/joevogel/2019/01/29/what-you-should-know-about-the-new-michael-jackson-documentary/#566d2a59640f or http://www.damienshields.com/what-the-media-refuses-to-tell-you/


And for the Estate's lawsuit: https://leavingneverlandfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Petition-to-Compel-Arbitration.pdf


For Brett’s lawsuit against HBO (who HBO claims was molested and he denies): https://twitter.com/tajjackson3/status/1101951494830514177


To help fund a rebuttal documentary: https://www.gofundme.com/untitled-michael-jackson-documentary-series


For the real Michael Jackson, listen to this beautiful speech he gave at Oxford University. https://youtu.be/-TDMiRuhFPg;