Take the money or report the crime!

Raconteuse · 05-12-2019 3:02pm

I'd pass my Christmas party invite to you if I could.

No I was only aiming my post at Nox, and I agree people can't be saying he definitely did it. But I believe equally there are no grounds for saying he definitely DIDN'T do it either. His behaviour was downright weird and skirting inappropriate. And while this doesn't mean he abused children for certain, there are grounds to believe he might have

Also, abuse survivors repress these things or have distorted memories or even feel guilty. So coming forward is not straightforward for them, and it makes sense that they'd lie in denial.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 3:07pm

Raconteuse wrote: »

I'd pass my Christmas party invite to you if I could.

No I was only aiming my post at Nox, and I agree people can't be saying he definitely did it. But I believe equally there are no grounds for saying he definitely DIDN'T do it either. His behaviour was downright weird and skirting inappropriate. And while this doesn't mean he abused children for certain, there are grounds to believe he might have

Also, abuse survivors repress these things or have distorted memories or even feel guilty. So coming forward is not straightforward for them, and it makes sense that they'd lie in denial.

The last line, I don't buy it in regards the two accusers in LN

They testified on his behalf, twice in one of thier cases. One of them asked directly in court, repeatedly if anything even slightly sexual occured, he shot it down and said no, explaining he knows it's wrong and terrible but, Jackson never done anything to him. All this under oath. Footage of him on talk shows singing his praises etc

His own depositon from 2017, contradicts everything he and his mother said in LN. It's actually disgusting.

Nah, not for a second I'm buying it. Not from those two. A clear cash grab in my opinion

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 3:57pm

Cade Acidic Sentinel wrote: »

It’s common knowledge that it’s bull and lies to tarnish his name and/or extract money from him by sh1tty individuals.

Also define slept with? Innocent sleepovers are not a crime, unusual but you have to look at MJ as a child in a mans body. If you mean had sexual relations then you are talking out your arse like many on the subject.

Skateboarding is a kids activity, you partake in it don’t you.....??

I can’t believe anyone stills comes out with this dreck. What’s this totally unique condition - MJ Syndrome? Oh noes, why him?

Edit: and it most certainty isn’t “common knowledge”. Many people believe the allegations. And, well, people are free to think what they like.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 4:02pm

Raconteuse wrote: »

I understand people saying there's no evidence so it can't be said for certain that he abused boys, but how deluded and pigheaded does a person have to be to claim confidently that he definitely didn't, when he had sleepovers with young boys and when he was fixated with young boys, then lost interest as they got older, and moved on to the next young boys.

Just because of liking his music.

The weirdest thing is people speaking like them know him. Stuff like “Michael would never do that.” And he has literally admitted to sharing beds with unrelated children. That’s confirmed and it’s wildly inappropriate. Who would seek to defend that?

theguzman · 05-12-2019 4:04pm

I'd take the money and use that money to enact my own revenge upon the person responsible, there is no justice or law and order in Ireland, the Gardai and Judiciary are corrupt.

If someone murdered my loved-one or did some extreme form of crime (like Rape or Pedophilia) to them then I would have absolutely no problem or hesitation to kill who was responsible for that firstly because that is natural and proper justice and secondary because when there is no law I have nothing to fear. I might get a 10 year sentence and be out after 6-7 years of good behaviour a small price to pay for to end the life of the perpetrator when the state won't deliver justice.

Boggles · 05-12-2019 4:10pm

theguzman wrote: »

I'd take the money and use that money to enact my own revenge upon the person responsible, there is no justice or law and order in Ireland, the Gardai and Judiciary are corrupt.

If someone murdered my loved-one or did some extreme form of crime (like Rape or Pedophilia) to them then I would have absolutely no problem or hesitation to kill who was responsible for that firstly because that is natural and proper justice and secondary because when there is no law I have nothing to fear. I might get a 10 year sentence and be out after 6-7 years of good behaviour a small price to pay for to end the life of the perpetrator when the state won't deliver justice.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 4:16pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The weirdest thing is people speaking like them know him. Stuff like “Michael would never do that.” And he has literally admitted to sharing beds with unrelated children. That’s confirmed and it’s wildly inappropriate. Who would seek to defend that?

Last thing I'm saying on this.

You're right, it was very inappropriate. By his own words, that stopped in 1993 and didn't happen again after that. Regardless, still inappropriate and something he was rightfully pushed on, no matter how innocent either party said it was.

If people wish to defend it by saying nothing sexual happened, of course that's fine. But, you cannot defend the actions of putting themselves in that position. No matter how innocent, it raises questions and is inapproprioate. He probably thought it was fine as it was how he grew up, as pictures show but, not the way society thinks

Donnielighto · 05-12-2019 5:06pm

MOR316 wrote: »

Last thing I'm saying on this.

You're right, it was very inappropriate. By his own words, that stopped in 1993 and didn't happen again after that. Regardless, still inappropriate and something he was rightfully pushed on, no matter how innocent either party said it was.

If people wish to defend it by saying nothing sexual happened, of course that's fine. But, you cannot defend the actions of putting themselves in that position. No matter how innocent, it raises questions and is inapproprioate. He probably thought it was fine as it was how he grew up, as pictures show but, not the way society thinks

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.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 5:15pm

MOR316 wrote: »

Last thing I'm saying on this.

You're right, it was very inappropriate. By his own words, that stopped in 1993 and didn't happen again after that. Regardless, still inappropriate and something he was rightfully pushed on, no matter how innocent either party said it was.

If people wish to defend it by saying nothing sexual happened, of course that's fine. But, you cannot defend the actions of putting themselves in that position. No matter how innocent, it raises questions and is inapproprioate. He probably thought it was fine as it was how he grew up, as pictures show but, not the way society thinks

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.

xzanti · 05-12-2019 6:06pm

Show me the money.

Tommybojangles · 05-12-2019 6:10pm

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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 6:11pm

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.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 6:24pm

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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 6:28pm

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.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 6:32pm

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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 6:35pm

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.

05-12-2019 6:41pm

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.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 6:46pm

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?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 6:54pm

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.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 6:55pm

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.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 6:56pm

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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 6:58pm

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.

Raconteuse · 05-12-2019 9:27pm

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.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 10:19pm

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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 10:57pm

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.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 11:32pm

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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 05-12-2019 11:43pm

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.

MOR316 · 05-12-2019 11:50pm

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

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 06-12-2019 12:07am

MOR316 wrote: »

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

So you keep saying.

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

Take the money or report the crime!

Comments