Micky Jackson in trouble again

Hannibal_Smith · 09-03-2019 02:30PM

innuendo141 wrote: »

Chandler can actually say what he likes, he just refuses to speak about it. There's no NDA involved.

Jackson said in the Bashir interview that they weren't allowed to talk about It. Are you sure theres not NDA? Why would Jackson pay $20m and leave Vhandler being able to talk about It?

8-10 · 09-03-2019 02:31PM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Jackson said in the Bashir interview that they weren't allowed to talk about It. Are you sure theres not NDA? Why would Jackson pay $20m and leave Vhandler being able to talk about It?

Well he could have filed a criminal charge after it but surprisingly didn't....

Hannibal_Smith · 09-03-2019 02:32PM

Boggles wrote: »

Yeah, the problem with that though is it was the Jackson estate that essentially made this public, citing they would not be extorted by 2 liars.

Look at it this way, if it were the 'most sophisticated paedo ring in the history of the world', surely keeping Wade sweet with some work and money would be the most prudent thing to do?

I thought someone said the guys went public...Wade because he lost his role as the choreographer of the History thing?

joe40 · 09-03-2019 02:35PM

In the absence of DNA evidence or photographic evidence it will never be possible to conclusively prove if abuse took place.
In my mind though the act of putting kids in that position was in itself "abusive" not neccessarily sexual.
However it was Jackson himself who iniated the contact. Jackson himself who slept with the boys!!
Just repeat that last sentence in your head.

The public are totally justfied in the suspicions directed at MJ. It was irresponsible to say the least and why someone did not put a stop to it is beyond belief.
Just show what wealth and power allows you to get away with.

Hannibal_Smith · 09-03-2019 02:36PM

8-10 wrote: »

Well he could have filed a criminal charge after it but surprisingly didn't....

Chandler could have? He did, didn't he? They settled out of court? Or was it a civil action, rather than a criminal one?

Necro · 09-03-2019 02:37PM

Hannibal_Smith wrote:

Chandler could have? He did, didn't he? They settled out of court? Or was it a civil action, rather than a criminal one?

Both I think, the civil settlement meant the claims were dropped for the criminal case.

Convenient that.

Hannibal_Smith · 09-03-2019 02:37PM

joe40 wrote: »

In the absence of DNA evidence or photographic evidence it will never be possible to conclusively prove if abuse took place.
However it was Jackson himself who iniated the contact. Jackson himself who slept with the boys.
Just repeat that last sentence in your head.

The public are totally justfied in the suspicions directed at MJ. It was irresponsible to say the least and why someone did not put a stop to it is beyond belief.
Just show what wealth and power allows you to get away with.

Not with wade it wasnt. Wades mother tracked Jackson down and handed her kid over. When he was 7

Boggles · 09-03-2019 02:41PM

Necro wrote: »

Both I think, the civil settlement meant the claims were dropped for the criminal case.

Convenient that.

Well no actually. The settlement did not prevent any future criminal case.

It was a grand jury and DA that dropped it.

PokeHerKing · 09-03-2019 02:41PM

fin12 wrote:

Ah hello it was the same after the Martin Bashir documentary. This is nothing new, just another scandalous piece of trash to get ratings.

I can see a pretty BIG difference between this Doc and the Bashir Doc.

16 years on and a deceased Jackson also change the optics. So again I remain sceptical of the whole thing.

But the complete dismissal of all accusations by people who only knew Jackson through a screen the same as myself is surreal.

Nobody here knew him. Children who spent time in his home on their own with him, all of which is not disputed, knew him.

I couldn't in good conscious dismiss their claims so flippantly.

Boggles · 09-03-2019 02:41PM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

I thought someone said the guys went public...Wade because he lost his role as the choreographer of the History thing?

Wade sealed his suit. The Jackson Estate unsealed it (made it public).

Boggles · 09-03-2019 02:43PM

joe40 wrote: »

In the absence of DNA evidence or photographic evidence it will never be possible to conclusively prove if abuse took place.

Remember Jackson is dead.

The suit is against 2 companies.

KikiLaRue · 09-03-2019 02:54PM

Boggles wrote: »

NDAs don't prevent people from giving evidence in court or depositions.

Also who are "most of the people who could provide answers"? Names?

I’ll leave you to have a think about how I wouldn’t know the names of people who are legally forbidden to speak out...

Boggles · 09-03-2019 02:58PM

KikiLaRue wrote: »

I’ll leave you to have a think about how I wouldn’t know the names of people who are legally forbidden to speak out...

Because they don't exist?

Necro · 09-03-2019 03:00PM

PokeHerKing wrote:

But the complete dismissal of all accusations by people who only knew Jackson through a screen the same as myself is surreal.

I think that's the thing that's most surprising to me about this thread. I tend to agree that Robson in particular isn't particularly credible due to his past actions, but realistically the focus on the recent documentary and flagrant refusal to accept actual factual documented evidence that points to Jackson being - at best a very depraved individual - and at worst a monster along the lines of Saville...

It's really bizarre behaviour.

joe40 · 09-03-2019 03:01PM

Boggles wrote: »

joe40 wrote: »

In the absence of DNA evidence or photographic evidence it will never be possible to conclusively prove if abuse took place.

Remember Jackson is dead.

The suit is against 2 companies.

Well yeah I kinda know that. Which is why there can't be a confession and no physical evidence so no conclusive proof is possible.

KikiLaRue · 09-03-2019 03:09PM

Boggles wrote: »

Because they don't exist?

How are you *so* sure of yourself?

You know for a fact that he had bizarre, inappropriate relationships with young boys.

So how are you certain?

joe40 · 09-03-2019 03:11PM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

joe40 wrote: »

In the absence of DNA evidence or photographic evidence it will never be possible to conclusively prove if abuse took place.
However it was Jackson himself who iniated the contact. Jackson himself who slept with the boys.
Just repeat that last sentence in your head.

The public are totally justfied in the suspicions directed at MJ. It was irresponsible to say the least and why someone did not put a stop to it is beyond belief.
Just show what wealth and power allows you to get away with.

Not with wade it wasnt. Wades mother tracked Jackson down and handed her kid over. When he was 7

I'm not sure if that comment is a defence of Jackson or not.
The boys mother was despicable but that in no way absolves Michael Jackson

Mr.Wemmick · 09-03-2019 03:16PM

I think the Jackson family will fight tooth and nail to keep deep secrets of their family well hidden. They do not want it delved into, any more than it has, how the patriarch of their family terrorize and abused the kids when they were young, and how it might have led to Michael’s inability to develop a normal adulthood, after all he didn’t have a childhood: he was raised to be a star, nothing else mattered.

I also think that if it all unravels and becomes fact that Jackson did what he did, a lot of Paedos are going to be very upset. He must be an icon to them: the idea of being able to live with children openly, marry or have a sexual relationship with a child under the gaze of the public eye and not get imprisioned for it. That sort of world must be be like a promised land to a Paedo.. no wonder they blindly want MJ to remain innocent to keep the fantasy alive.

Innocent or guilty, I would like to know the facts of what did happened with all those kids over the years.. and yeah, like anyone on this thread with working brain cells, I am deeply suspicious about what went on.

Boggles · 09-03-2019 03:20PM

joe40 wrote: »

Well yeah I kinda know that. Which is why there can't be a confession and no physical evidence so no conclusive proof is possible.

2 companies accused of being the most sophisticated paedo ring in the world would not have any physical evidence, communications, documents, placement evidence, etc?

The FBI would not be able to put pressure on the people cited and get evidence, confessions, etc?

I doubt it TBH.

Boggles · 09-03-2019 03:22PM

KikiLaRue wrote: »

How are you *so* sure of yourself?

You know for a fact that he had bizarre, inappropriate relationships with young boys.

So how are you certain?

I'm basing my opinion on the available evidence.

It was you who threw out a claim, I merely asked you to clarify it.

"most of the people who could provide answers"

I asked you who these people were, or at the very least how you know these people exist.

You seem to suggest you didn't because there is no way you could.

So you don't know and you made it up, correct?

KikiLaRue · 09-03-2019 03:24PM

Boggles wrote: »

I'm basing my opinion on the available evidence.

It was you who threw out a claim, I merely asked you to clarify it.

I asked you who these people were, or at the very least how you know these people exist.

You seem to suggest you didn't because there is no way you could.

So you don't know and you made it up, correct?

But can you accept the possibility that you’re wrong?

Here you say opinion but you’re posting as if it’s a fact that he’s innocent.

I think he’s guilty but I know there’s a possibility I’m wrong.

And no, I didn’t make it up.

If, as many sources including his sister claim, he’s paid people off, it would be on the condition that they can’t speak out.

micks_address · 09-03-2019 03:25PM

I think it's quite telling that as soon as wade didnt get the Cirque du Soleil job he broke the story in 2013. I didn't realize it he had spoken out then. Kinda makes this documentary less relevant. Most what he said he said back then.. not debating mj was super strange and what he may have done but I don't for some reason find either of the guys in the documentary believable..

Boggles · 09-03-2019 03:26PM

KikiLaRue wrote: »

Here you say opinion but you’re posting as if it’s a fact that he’s innocent.

Well no, I'm giving my opinion based on actual evidence.

My opinion isn't a fact.

KikiLaRue wrote: »

If, as many sources including his sister claim, he’s paid people off, it would be on the condition that they can’t speak out.

His sister retracted her claim, she was beaten half to death by her loon husband who tried to extort money from Jackson., we have been over this several times.

What other sources?

But again, there is nothing stopping people from speaking out, which has all ready been established.

Boggles · 09-03-2019 03:35PM

micks_address wrote: »

I think it's quite telling that as soon as wade didnt get the Cirque du Soleil job he broke the story in 2013

It must have been fair embarrassing because he was telling anyone that would listen he all ready had the Cirque du Soleil job.

innuendo141 · 09-03-2019 03:38PM

micks_address wrote: »

I think it's quite telling that as soon as wade didnt get the Cirque du Soleil job he broke the story in 2013. I didn't realize it he had spoken out then. Kinda makes this documentary less relevant. Most what he said he said back then.. not debating mj was super strange and what he may have done but I don't for some reason find either of the guys in the documentary believable..

And not once was Robson questioned on TV about this during their several promo tour interviews for this film. Piers Morgan, of all people, was the only TV host to question the director Reed on leaving out critical background information.

hetuzozaho · 09-03-2019 03:43PM

Just watched the documentary. Mad stuff if true. I'd heard stuff said over the years but didn't know the ins and outs etc.

Is it factual that he slept in hotel rooms with these kids unsupervised? And on multiple occasions?

innuendo141 · 09-03-2019 03:50PM

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Just watched the documentary. Mad stuff if true. I'd heard stuff said over the years but didn't know the ins and outs etc.

Is it factual that he slept in hotel rooms with these kids unsupervised? And on multiple occasions?

According to the parents and kids at the very least, regarding hotel rooms. And they had no problems. Mental to think that today.

hetuzozaho · 09-03-2019 03:52PM

innuendo141 wrote: »

According to the parents and kids at the very least, regarding hotel rooms. And they had no problems. Mental to think that today.

So none of the talk(by the two guys in doc) of him sleeping in hotel rooms or in his home bedroom, unsupervised with the children, is confirmed by the Jackson side?

innuendo141 · 09-03-2019 03:56PM

hetuzozaho wrote: »

So none of the talk(by the two guys in doc) of him sleeping in hotel rooms or in his home bedroom, unsupervised with the children, is confirmed by the Jackson side?

I don't think they've acknowledged it regarding the doc but its been common knowledge for years, he said so himself in 2003 (about his house at least. Not sure about hotels)

hetuzozaho · 09-03-2019 04:05PM

innuendo141 wrote: »

I don't think they've acknowledged it regarding the doc but its been common knowledge for years, he said so himself in 2003 (about his house at least. Not sure about hotels)

Ah right.

Just catching up with this thread and the two lads being called liars. Is that in relation to the sexual acts? And all the other things they say are true, ie the number of nights they spent in a bedroom unsupervised with only him.

Micky Jackson in trouble again

Comments