Micky Jackson in trouble again

KikiLaRue · 12-03-2019 05:26PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

We've been over the Saville v Jackson comparison repeatedly.

Hundreds of victims came forward against Saville after his death.

2 came forward after Jackson's death. 1 a self confessed master of deception, the other whose made claims in the past that turned out to be patently false.

Next...

Does Jordan Chandler not exist any more?

So that's three. How many do you need?

ceadaoin. · 12-03-2019 05:26PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

We've been over the Saville v Jackson comparison repeatedly.

Hundreds of victims came forward against Saville after his death.

2 came forward after Jackson's death. 1 a self confessed master of deception, the other whose made claims in the past that turned out to be patently false.

Next...

Not all abusers have hundreds of victims. Savile seems to be on a scale all of his own nearly.

Next

Jerichoholic · 12-03-2019 05:29PM

Jackson fans were always weird, but defending him over this is on it's own level. Have a word with yourself.

ceadaoin. · 12-03-2019 05:35PM

Jerichoholic wrote: »

Jackson fans were always weird, but defending him over this is on it's own level. Have a word with yourself.

Yes, the vehemence of certain posters and others online in their arguments against these two men is..disturbing. it's more than just leaning one way based on the facts out there. You'd think it was personal almost. Weird

Boggles · 12-03-2019 05:45PM

Jerichoholic wrote: »

Jackson fans were always weird,

You mean Robson and Safechuck?

They are not that weird, people have always done extraordinary things for money, the more money on offer the more extraordinary these things seem to be.

hetuzozaho · 12-03-2019 05:48PM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Yes, the vehemence of certain posters and others online in their arguments against these two men is..disturbing. it's more than just leaning one way based on the facts out there. You'd think it was personal almost. Weird

Its interesting. Like who knows what happened behind those bedroom doors.

Master of deception this, master of deception that. Master of deception helps defend jackson in court where he is found not guilty. Was he a master of deception that day? Jackson is innocent. Master of deception said so!

ToddyDoody · 12-03-2019 05:55PM

Problem solved.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-asia-37694475

ToBeFrank123 · 12-03-2019 06:01PM

KikiLaRue wrote: »

Does Jordan Chandler not exist any more?

So that's three. How many do you need?

After his death I said. :mad:

ToBeFrank123 · 12-03-2019 06:02PM

Jerichoholic wrote: »

Jackson fans were always weird, but defending him over this is on it's own level. Have a word with yourself.

New to the thread? Welcome.

So care to name the Jackson fans on here? You know, the ones who bought every album, etc.

ToBeFrank123 · 12-03-2019 06:07PM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Yes, the vehemence of certain posters and others online in their arguments against these two men is..disturbing. it's more than just leaning one way based on the facts out there. You'd think it was personal almost. Weird

Not personal.

I think people are daft to base their opinion on a one sided documentary with no cross examination of witnesses.

Its this daftness I have issue with. I don't think I could put it more simpler than that.

But people are free to make up their own minds.

Labelling someone whose skeptical about details of the documentary as rabid Jackson fans is just barrel scraping to be honest. I guess if they believe that however, there is nothing they won't believe!

12-03-2019 06:11PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

After his death I said. :mad:

Why does it matter if it was before or after his death? One massive settlement and one court case does not prove his innocence. All we know is that a jury cleared him in a trial with regard to one accuser. And some of those jurors have since spoken out and said they knew he was a paedophile but couldn't convict beyond reasonable doubt.

hetuzozaho · 12-03-2019 06:13PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Not personal.

I think people are daft to base their opinion on a one sided documentary with no cross examination of witnesses.

Its this daftness I have issue with. I don't think I could put it more simpler than that.

But people are free to make up their own minds.

Labelling someone whose skeptical about details of the documentary as rabid Jackson fans is just barrel scraping to be honest. I guess if they believe that however, there is nothing they won't believe!

Do you think it's possible he abused them?

MD1990 · 12-03-2019 06:16PM

All I ever see is ToBeFrank posting in here.

Think you might be a bit obsessed with the case.

ToBeFrank123 · 12-03-2019 06:17PM

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Do you think it's possible he abused them?

I'm still on the fence about these two guys. I'd love to take them at face value but its hard when one is a self proclaimed master of deception who omitted stuff from the documentary that would blow a hole in his account. He said MJ tried to turn him off girls in the documentary. In reality we know MJ set him up with his niece who he dated for 9 years. So that's one lie we are sure of. How many more are there?

ToBeFrank123 · 12-03-2019 06:19PM

MD1990 wrote: »

All I ever see is ToBeFrank posting in here.

Think you might be a bit obsessed with the case.

Ah come on man. There's dozens of posters in here. There's no need to tell a lie like that is there?

If I don't respond to posters, they say I'm being evasive etc. If I respond people like you say I'm the only one posting.

Can't win!

ceadaoin. · 12-03-2019 06:20PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Not personal.

I think people are daft to base their opinion on a one sided documentary with no cross examination of witnesses.

Its this daftness I have issue with. I don't think I could put it more simpler than that.

But people are free to make up their own minds.

Labelling someone whose skeptical about details of the documentary as rabid Jackson fans is just barrel scraping to be honest. I guess if they believe that however, there is nothing they won't believe!

I'm not just basing it on this though. I'm basing it on jacksons own behaviour, the stuff found during the search, and the stories of the previous accusers and detectives involved in the case. Staff members who witnessed stuff, even members of the public who made complaints based on his behaviour with kids, before even any accusations were made public. One couple on a train did this after seeing strange behaviour and hearing "questionable" noises coming from his cabin that he was sharing with a child. All of it together points to one thing, like it's literally the only logical explanation

hetuzozaho · 12-03-2019 06:20PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

I'm still on the fence about these two guys. I'd love to take them at face value but its hard when one is a self proclaimed master of deception who omitted stuff from the documentary that would blow a hole in his account. He said MJ tried to turn him off girls in the documentary. In reality we know MJ set him up with his niece who he dated for 9 years. So that's one lie we are sure of. How many more are there?

But do you think its a possibility?

ToBeFrank123 · 12-03-2019 06:22PM

hetuzozaho wrote: »

But do you think its a possibility?

There's a slim possibility. Unfortunately these two guys lack credibility. So basing anything on them is difficult if not impossible.

I wish more credible witnesses came forward tbh, ones not proven to have lied in the past about issues relating to the whole thing.

I'm going to take the advice of a previous poster and take a break from this thread for a while. Might be back later, might not be.

ceadaoin. · 12-03-2019 06:24PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

I'm still on the fence about these two guys. I'd love to take them at face value but its hard when one is a self proclaimed master of deception who omitted stuff from the documentary that would blow a hole in his account. He said MJ tried to turn him off girls in the documentary. In reality we know MJ set him up with his niece who he dated for 9 years. So that's one lie we are sure of. How many more are there?

Set them up at 9 years of age. That's not normal and could just be seen as another way of controlling wade and keeping tabs on him

12-03-2019 06:30PM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I'm not just basing it on this though. I'm basing it on jacksons own behaviour, the stuff found during the search, and the stories of the previous accusers and detectives involved in the case. Staff members who witnessed stuff, even members of the public who made complaints based on his behaviour with kids, before even any accusations were made public. One couple on a train did this after seeing strange behaviour and hearing "questionable" noises coming from his cabin that he was sharing with a child. All of it together points to one thing, like it's literally the only logical explanation

That poster has been told this many many times on the thread, but just ignores it and then a few pages later repeats the claim that we're all making assumptions based on one documentary. Like a broken record.

Flippyfloppy · 12-03-2019 06:31PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

After his death I said. :mad:

So weird. Not every celebrity paedophile situation has to play out exactly like Jimmy Saville you know.

Flippyfloppy · 12-03-2019 06:36PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

That poster has been told this many many times on the thread, but just ignores it and then a few pages later repeats the claim that we're all making assumptions based on one documentary. Like a broken record.

A broken record or something else entirely.

hetuzozaho · 12-03-2019 06:38PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

There's a slim possibility.

Yep it's looking like a possibility alright. Lot of people speaking about it leaning that way too.

Awful stuff if true. Their testimonies are an even more difficult watch for me then.

Jerichoholic · 12-03-2019 06:43PM

ToddyDoody wrote: »

Problem solved.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-asia-37694475

They should use that on every single repeat criminal offender. The world would be a better place.

joe40 · 12-03-2019 06:48PM

ToBeFrank123 wrote: »

Jerichoholic wrote: »

Hey guys Jimmy Saville was innocent because he wasn't found guilty in court!

**** sake man.

We've been over the Saville v Jackson comparison repeatedly.

Hundreds of victims came forward against Saville after his death.

2 came forward after Jackson's death. 1 a self confessed master of deception, the other whose made claims in the past that turned out to be patently false. In other words both guys with question credibility who have avoided a criminal trial and police interviews like the plague. Except of course when Robson went out of his way to deliver the performance of a lifetime in 2005 to perjure himself, underlining his skills as a master of deception. They also claimed Jackson tried to turn them off girls, when the evidence is he set one of them up with his niece (an odd fact but doesn't tally with their version of events and a fact conveniently left out of the documentary as were any facts that might blow a hole in their story).

Next...

Stock answer. You can't be guilty unless there are hundreds of victims.

fryup · 12-03-2019 06:52PM

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Yes, the vehemence of certain posters and others online in their arguments against these two men is..disturbing. it's more than just leaning one way based on the facts out there. You'd think it was personal almost. Weird

its not weird if you look at the broader picture of this case...there's a definite sinister agenda behind Robson & Safechuck's reason for doing this documentary and its got nothing to do with sex abuse

research it online,

marklazarcovic · 12-03-2019 07:08PM

fryup wrote: »

its not weird if you look at the broader picture of this case...there's a definite sinister agenda behind Robson & Safechuck's reason for doing this documentary and its got nothing to do with sex abuse

research it online,

even if all they are after now is money,im ok with that, they can never get back what was taken from them (if true),and they will never ever live a normal life, if they can get every cent off that jackson estate great.

id put all the victims in with them too,share it amongst them. (if true allegations)

shut down the estate,and all the complicit fckers can fend for themselves if they are not doing time.

his kids will be looked after anyways.

Boggles · 12-03-2019 07:12PM

marklazarcovic wrote: »

even if all they are after now is money,im ok with that,

Personally I'd prefer them to seek justice through the criminal system, sends out a more severe message.

hetuzozaho · 12-03-2019 07:17PM

Boggles wrote: »

Personally I'd prefer them to seek justice through the criminal system, sends out a more severe message.

I feel they've a good message out there now regarding grooming and abuse victims etc. People talking about it and engaging with it.

A good thing for society to know more about. So many victims live silently among us. It's tough for them.

joe40 · 12-03-2019 07:21PM

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Boggles wrote: »

Personally I'd prefer them to seek justice through the criminal system, sends out a more severe message.

I feel they've a good message out there now regarding grooming and abuse victims etc. People talking about it and engaging with it.

A good thing for society to know more about. So many victims live silently among us. It's tough for them.

Yeah I agree with that.
Plenty of people complain about metoo, and PC gone mad but the simple fact is there would be no way Jackson's behaviour with kids in the 90s would be tolerated today.
If he is in fact innocent and was simply naive that would still have been good for him.

Micky Jackson in trouble again

Comments