|
Post by respect77 on Feb 22, 2019 10:00:07 GMT
What in the creepy hell?
They should go and collect their honorary medals from NAMBLA at this point.
|
|
|
Post by elusivemoonwalker on Feb 22, 2019 10:27:32 GMT
I guess its public ie all docs/meeting is open to the public. Which is good as it will show HBO etc up
|
|
|
Post by danm on Feb 22, 2019 10:42:29 GMT
What in the creepy hell?
They should go and collect their honorary medals from NAMBLA at this point.
Funny how he never mentioned this during his lawsuit. He is alleging that MJ was involved in the production of child pornography. Absurd.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Feb 22, 2019 10:56:05 GMT
What in the creepy hell?
They should go and collect their honorary medals from NAMBLA at this point.
Funny how he never mentioned this during his lawsuit. He is alleging that MJ was involved in the production of child pornography. Absurd. It isn't in the film either. He just seemed to have made it up recently for the promotional campaign. I wonder if he took the sex tape idea from the R. Kelly case.
Just slightly related:
Wonder if she will suddenly realize the importance of due process, innocent until proven guilty etc...
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Feb 22, 2019 11:09:01 GMT
I get arbitration, what I don't get is what it means if it is public? Yes, it should be publicly available for people to read over. If they wish to. In theory, it should mean the media of all forms will report on it even if via a wee added on paragraph in a future article about LN.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Feb 22, 2019 11:10:21 GMT
That's good!
|
|
|
Post by danm on Feb 22, 2019 11:22:44 GMT
A public arbitration process will be great, however there’s no guarantee it will happen and it would probably be quite some time before it happens.
Therefore, I hope the Estate are gearing up for a PR offensive for after this airs. They need to get on the airwaves, do media interviews, get on the tv etc. If Dan Reed can go around spouting BS to every journalist out there, then the Estate reps (Branca ideally) should be able to get the facts established.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Feb 22, 2019 11:43:18 GMT
Reading Robson and Safechuck's Vanity Fair interview again:
He says in court papers he saw Robson on TV in May 2013 and realized he was abused too. In September 2013 he went to Robson's lawyers. If your goal is to talk to Robson why do you go to his lawyers? Why don't you go to him personally. It is not like Robson is difficult to find. He often advertised himself in public events (dance classes, meditation classes, he even had a short lived "survivors' self-help group"). So why didn't James just go there to talk to him?
Yeah, because you so thought you were alone before. As if MJ wasn't publicly accused before.
This sounds so believable too. Your lawyers were not involved in setting it up at all, I guess. Sure.
|
|
|
Post by danm on Feb 22, 2019 12:07:32 GMT
Reading Robson and Safechuck's Vanity Fair interview again:
He says in court papers he saw Robson on TV in May 2013 and realized he was abused too. In September 2013 he went to Robson's lawyers. If your goal is to talk to Robson why do you go to his lawyers? Why don't you go to him personally. It is not like Robson is difficult to find. He often advertised himself in public events (dance classes, meditation classes, he even had a short lived "survivors' self-help group"). So why didn't James just go there to talk to him?
Yeah, because you so thought you were alone before. As if MJ wasn't publicly accused before.
This sounds so believable too. Your lawyers were not involved in setting it up at all, I guess. Sure.
They’re all playing a very clever game here. Wade, Safechuck and Dan Reed. Trying their best to boost their credibility and make people think their stories align so well. Either journalists are gullible enough to buy this, through a lack of doing the necessary research/fact checking, or they’re complicit in peddling these myths. I think its a combo of the two. Plus, the “always believe the victim” mentality.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Feb 22, 2019 13:24:51 GMT
|
|
TonyR
The Legend Continues
Posts: 8,469
|
Post by TonyR on Feb 22, 2019 14:52:58 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2019 14:56:08 GMT
Move forward = proceed. It was always on those dates. Can that journalist read/understand english!?
|
|
|
Post by danm on Feb 22, 2019 16:03:18 GMT
Another interesting little fact. In one of Wade’s emails to his mum back in 2012 he posts a whole story about a statement given by Charlie T Michaels, ex employee at Neverland, in relation to the ‘93 allegations where it was stated that Joy was crying and was kept away from Wade on mother’s day by MJ in 1990, and that Norma Staikos told Joy that they were rehearsing a dance routine and weren’t to disturb them etc.
Joy replies to Wade in the email in 2012, “wow none of that is true” - yet Wade uses the same statement from Charlie T Michael’s in his lawsuit, trying to implicate Norma Staikos in facilitating abuse as an employee of MJ’s companies.
The length Wade went to. And I wouldn’t be surprised if this story, about MJ and Norma keeping Joy away from Wade, has somehow made it into the doc as further evidence of MJ’s manipulation etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2019 17:17:48 GMT
Another interesting little fact. In one of Wade’s emails to his mum back in 2012 he posts a whole story about a statement given by Charlie T Michaels, ex employee at Neverland, in relation to the ‘93 allegations where it was stated that Joy was crying and was kept away from Wade on mother’s day by MJ in 1990, and that Norma Staikos told Joy that they were rehearsing a dance routine and weren’t to disturb them etc. Joy replies to Wade in the email in 2012, “wow none of that is true” - yet Wade uses the same statement from Charlie T Michael’s in his lawsuit, trying to implicate Norma Staikos in facilitating abuse as an employee of MJ’s companies. The length Wade went to. And I wouldn’t be surprised if this story, about MJ and Norma keeping Joy away from Wade, has somehow made it into the doc as further evidence of MJ’s manipulation etc. Is that resonse definitely in relation to that email? Isnt the rest of the email cut off?
|
|
|
Post by danm on Feb 22, 2019 17:27:18 GMT
Another interesting little fact. In one of Wade’s emails to his mum back in 2012 he posts a whole story about a statement given by Charlie T Michaels, ex employee at Neverland, in relation to the ‘93 allegations where it was stated that Joy was crying and was kept away from Wade on mother’s day by MJ in 1990, and that Norma Staikos told Joy that they were rehearsing a dance routine and weren’t to disturb them etc. Joy replies to Wade in the email in 2012, “wow none of that is true” - yet Wade uses the same statement from Charlie T Michael’s in his lawsuit, trying to implicate Norma Staikos in facilitating abuse as an employee of MJ’s companies. The length Wade went to. And I wouldn’t be surprised if this story, about MJ and Norma keeping Joy away from Wade, has somehow made it into the doc as further evidence of MJ’s manipulation etc. Is that resonse definitely in relation to that email? Isnt the rest of the email cut off? Yep - Wade’s email was at 8.55pm on Feb 15th. Joy’s reply with “wow none of that is true” was at 9.03pm. But yes, the rest of the email is cut off. However, Wade still used that story word for word in his lawsuit.
|
|