|
Post by HIStoric on Jul 19, 2019 23:13:24 GMT
Hey man don’t go insulting Homer like that
|
|
|
Post by SmoothGangsta on Jul 19, 2019 23:22:20 GMT
Of course 🙄🙄
|
|
|
Post by MichaelD on Jul 20, 2019 1:06:04 GMT
Edit: Whoops! SmoothGangsta already posted the estate's statement.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 20, 2019 3:40:57 GMT
Did Wadechuck accuse MJ of giving them alcohol, or was that a one off that he only did with Arvizo? Safechuck did. Wade, on the other hand, said that he was surprised to see MJ drink alcohol at their 2008 BBQ because he's never seen that before. So again evidence that especially Safechuck took stories from previous allegations.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 20, 2019 4:13:04 GMT
The double standards are real. Epstein doc scrapped, Weinstein doc completely buried. So Epstein doc would have been too distasteful? Leaving Neverland borders on child pornography, ffs and it it was plastered everywhere! I guess nothing can be disgusting enough when it comes to bashing a dead MJ who cannot fight back. Meanwhile these powerful men, like Epstein and Weinstein are still protected. Despite of the fact that Epstein is an actual convicted sex offender.
I have heard excuses that he is not that famous. Oh, but I thought the mantra about Leaving Neverland was that "it's not about MJ, but awareness about child sexual abuse". So are they telling us that it IS actually about MJ and how famous the accused is? Not about awareness about CSA like they claimed about LN?
Moreover, you don't have to be famous to get a documentary. Steve Avery got a 2-season documentary series on Netflix (Making A Murderer) and he's not even Epstein or Weinstein famous. And it is a very popular doc.
The thing with Epstein and Weinstein is, that they are extremely powerful. They have connections in the media, they know which strings to pull to stop support for projects.
An Epstein doc could be very interesting to the public regardless of his personal fame. His connections to the rich and famous, high political and econmical circles etc. Probably that's exactly why he does not get a doc.
|
|
|
Post by Vega on Jul 20, 2019 5:35:19 GMT
Sidebar, but in relation to the Epstein case I find it a bit curious that teenagers are being referred to as children. I have a feeling these are the same people who push for 16 year olds to vote and have more rights, yet when it comes to sex they're suddenly little kids.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 20, 2019 6:49:56 GMT
It seems like Wade's story keeps evolving.
|
|
|
Post by WildStyle on Jul 20, 2019 7:31:07 GMT
Did Wadechuck accuse MJ of giving them alcohol, or was that a one off that he only did with Arvizo? Safechuck did. Wade, on the other hand, said that he was surprised to see MJ drink alcohol at their 2008 BBQ because he's never seen that before. So again evidence that especially Safechuck took stories from previous allegations. Then you have Wade and James claiming MJ showed them porn even though Chandler never mentioned that. Safechuck going as far as to say that Neverland was "candy and porn".
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 20, 2019 7:46:52 GMT
Safechuck did. Wade, on the other hand, said that he was surprised to see MJ drink alcohol at their 2008 BBQ because he's never seen that before. So again evidence that especially Safechuck took stories from previous allegations. Then you have Wade and James claiming MJ showed them porn even though Chandler never mentioned that. Safechuck going as far as to say that Neverland was "candy and porn". I do remember such headlines from 2005. Maybe not exactly "candy and porn" but headlines of this type (porn being juxtapositioned with something childlike and innocent) - I have the feeling that's where Safechuck took the idea from.
The porn thing actually shows very well how one accuser builds on the ones before them. It escalates not in the chronological order of when these boys were supposedly abused but in the order of when they made their allegations:
1. Chandler - no porn 2. Francia - no porn 3. Gavin - straight magazines (as they went to MJ's room when he wasnt there and discovered his porn, so they incorporated it in their allegations) 4. Wade - straight porn, nude books, porn videos (Gavin didn't claim MJ showed him nude books and porn videos, but Wade was shown those when he testified in 2005, so interestingly they all find their way in his allegations) 5. James - claims everything Wade claims plus further escalates it with child porn claims and even a claim of MJ making a sex tape of him (no one else claimed MJ showed them cp or made a sex tape).
But this is not the actual order of how the alleged abuses happened. That order goes like this and if we put it in this order it doesn't show an escalation on the part of the abuser, but an extremely patternless abuser.
1. Safechuck - although he is the first in line of the alleged abuse, but he claims the most extreme stuff in terms of porn (and also the sexual acts supposedly being done to him)
2. Francia - nothing 3. Wade - porn magazines, nude books, videos 4. Chandler - nothing 5. Gavin - only straight magazines (no books or videos)
This doesn't make sense. Pedophiles tend to escalate over time, not go from most extreme stuff to milder stuff.
This reveals how these stories are created in the hindsight with later accusers always building on the ones before them and further escalating the claim.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2019 8:27:42 GMT
Then you have Wade and James claiming MJ showed them porn even though Chandler never mentioned that. Safechuck going as far as to say that Neverland was "candy and porn". I do remember such headlines from 2005. Maybe not exactly "candy and porn" but headlines of this type (porn being juxtapositioned with something childlike and innocent) - I have the feeling that's where Safechuck took the idea from.
The porn thing actually shows very well how one accuser builds on the ones before them. It escalates not in the chronological order of when these boys were supposedly abused but in the order of when they made their allegations:
1. Chandler - no porn 2. Francia - no porn 3. Gavin - straight magazines (as they went to MJ's room when he wasnt there and discovered his porn, so they incorporated it in their allegations) 4. Wade - straight porn, nude books, porn videos (Gavin didn't claim MJ showed him nude books and porn videos, but Wade was shown those when he testified in 2005, so interestingly they all find their way in his allegations) 5. James - claims everything Wade claims plus further escalates it with child porn claims and even a claim of MJ making a sex tape of him (no one else claimed MJ showed them cp or made a sex tape).
But this is not the actual order of how the alleged abuses happened. That order goes like this and if we put it in this order it doesn't show an escalation on the part of the abuser, but an extremely patternless abuser.
1. Safechuck - although he is the first in line of the alleged abuse, but he claims the most extreme stuff in terms of porn (and also the sexual acts supposedly being done to him)
2. Francia - nothing 3. Wade - porn magazines, nude books, videos 4. Chandler - nothing 5. Gavin - only straight magazines (no books or videos)
This doesn't make sense. Pedophiles tend to escalate over time, not go from most extreme stuff to milder stuff.
This reveals how these stories are created in the hindsight with later accusers always building on the ones before them and further escalating the claim.
One thing that's struck me is that no one in the media has picked up on MJ's scattered MO. It's like he supposedly tried a completely different tactic with each "victim". Years apart. Clowns.
|
|
|
Post by SmoothGangsta on Jul 20, 2019 11:14:22 GMT
This video is great
|
|
|
Post by SmoothGangsta on Jul 20, 2019 18:23:03 GMT
I feel like this is just gonna go on forever man.
|
|
|
Post by WildStyle on Jul 21, 2019 14:29:35 GMT
I do remember such headlines from 2005. Maybe not exactly "candy and porn" but headlines of this type (porn being juxtapositioned with something childlike and innocent) - I have the feeling that's where Safechuck took the idea from.
The porn thing actually shows very well how one accuser builds on the ones before them. It escalates not in the chronological order of when these boys were supposedly abused but in the order of when they made their allegations:
1. Chandler - no porn 2. Francia - no porn 3. Gavin - straight magazines (as they went to MJ's room when he wasnt there and discovered his porn, so they incorporated it in their allegations) 4. Wade - straight porn, nude books, porn videos (Gavin didn't claim MJ showed him nude books and porn videos, but Wade was shown those when he testified in 2005, so interestingly they all find their way in his allegations) 5. James - claims everything Wade claims plus further escalates it with child porn claims and even a claim of MJ making a sex tape of him (no one else claimed MJ showed them cp or made a sex tape).
But this is not the actual order of how the alleged abuses happened. That order goes like this and if we put it in this order it doesn't show an escalation on the part of the abuser, but an extremely patternless abuser.
1. Safechuck - although he is the first in line of the alleged abuse, but he claims the most extreme stuff in terms of porn (and also the sexual acts supposedly being done to him)
2. Francia - nothing 3. Wade - porn magazines, nude books, videos 4. Chandler - nothing 5. Gavin - only straight magazines (no books or videos)
This doesn't make sense. Pedophiles tend to escalate over time, not go from most extreme stuff to milder stuff.
This reveals how these stories are created in the hindsight with later accusers always building on the ones before them and further escalating the claim.
One thing that's struck me is that no one in the media has picked up on MJ's scattered MO. It's like he supposedly tried a completely different tactic with each "victim". Years apart. Clowns. This is from an interview with screenwriter Paul Hernandez who worked in a comic book shop in the 90's that was visited by MJ and Jordan. There is an adult book section within the Golden Apple, Paul explained and “Jordan had wandered back there and I said, ‘You really don’t want to go over there — there’s nothing really good over there,’” Hernandez recalled. “Michael then asked, ‘What’s over there?’ and I said, ‘Well it’s like the adult books, the X-rated books.’
Michael said, ‘Jordan, don’t go near that section– that’s where the bad books are.’ I remember he did say ‘bad books,’’ recalled Hernandez, but “Jordan giggled…he acted like he was moving over there and [Michael] said, ‘I’m serious Jordan, if you go near there I’m not going to buy you anything.’ And [Jordan] said, ‘No, no, okay, okay.’”
So he went from showing porn to Safechuck and Robson years earlier to trying to keep Jordan away from it years later. Right.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 21, 2019 18:41:35 GMT
One thing that's struck me is that no one in the media has picked up on MJ's scattered MO. It's like he supposedly tried a completely different tactic with each "victim". Years apart. Clowns. This is from an interview with screenwriter Paul Hernandez who worked in a comic book shop in the 90's that was visited by MJ and Jordan. There is an adult book section within the Golden Apple, Paul explained and “Jordan had wandered back there and I said, ‘You really don’t want to go over there — there’s nothing really good over there,’” Hernandez recalled. “Michael then asked, ‘What’s over there?’ and I said, ‘Well it’s like the adult books, the X-rated books.’
Michael said, ‘Jordan, don’t go near that section– that’s where the bad books are.’ I remember he did say ‘bad books,’’ recalled Hernandez, but “Jordan giggled…he acted like he was moving over there and [Michael] said, ‘I’m serious Jordan, if you go near there I’m not going to buy you anything.’ And [Jordan] said, ‘No, no, okay, okay.’”
So he went from showing porn to Safechuck and Robson years earlier to trying to keep Jordan away from it years later. Right. This too is completely at odds with the behavior Safechuck and Robson describe.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jul 22, 2019 17:08:22 GMT
One is a trauma victim. The other is a false accuser.
|
|