|
|
Post by amaya on Mar 27, 2024 4:20:29 GMT
Meanwhile Dan Reed. From Reed's article: My god, this guy is dumb af. How does this even make sense? If you don't believe his accusers then you don't believe he's a pedophile. And didn't they claim they don't care if MJ is cancelled or not? I guess that was another lie because now they are now foaming from their mouth that he's not. More guilt-tripping, virtue signaling, emotional manipulation. How fucking hard is it for him and others to comprehend that: - The police investigations ultimately turned up nothing that 100% proved his guilt.
- The "payouts" were for a civil suit, not criminal, so no legal proceedings were halted.
- Sleeping in the same room as someone does not automatically mean assault happened.
- As said by respect77, if a person doesn't believe the accusations, then it means that person does not believe Michael is a pedophile. Which means that person and everyone else like that person aren't fucking sending any message about society endorsing pedophilia you ignorant, arrogant fool.
|
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Mar 27, 2024 6:43:26 GMT
Is it me, or so far this new lawyer doesn't seem very confident in Wade and James's own case? All he does is whining about the biopic, musical and supposed celebrity justice in the media and now fishing for evidence that has nothing to do with Wade and James, let alone the MJ companies. Jordan never made any claims re. the companies and he made it clear he wants nothing to do with this case. So what are they planning to use the photos for?
1. They are irrelevant to Robson and Safechuck's case, ie. the case against the companies.
2. Are they not only going to essentially try a dead man (which is a legal scandal in itself IMO) but try it in a case where the accuser is not even willing to show up and subject himself to cross examination? Would be totally unconstitutional.
But this shows what I've always said that all these false allegations against MJ heavily rely on the Chandler case. All of them stand on his shoulders and without him there's nothing else. Had he confessed all of this would collapse. This is why Sneddon felt the need to bring in the Chandlers in 2005, even though Jordan didn't even testify (and it was a very questionable decision by Melville to allow that in under those circumstances) and this is why Finaldi and now Carpenter is so desperate to make it about the Chandler case. They probably don't realize that once we open that can of worms it's as weak as their own case.
|
|
|
|
Post by elusivemoonwalker on Mar 27, 2024 16:19:53 GMT
Poor ole Dan is getting really upset😆😁
They only want those photos as they think its a tool to push for a settlement. Because whoops what if we get hold of those photos and whoops what happens if they get leaked to the press or they want to show them in court. They have nothing to do with this case but they can be very much used as a “blackmail” tool towards a settlement
|
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Mar 29, 2024 5:49:13 GMT
As a sidenote. Even Sneddon knew it's unfair to introduce anything from 1993 without Jordan testifying. It's another matter that eventually he still did, knowing it's unfair... And Judge Melville allowed it, knowing it's unfair and potentially unconstitutional... (Had MJ been convicted I think he would have had good grounds for appeal due to some questionable decisions by Melville.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Snow White on Mar 29, 2024 6:27:15 GMT
The prior bad acts move showed the Arvizo allegations were so weak and ridiculous that it didn't stand on its own merit since the DAs resorted to bring the allegations that started it all, I can't wrap my head how the grand jury decided to indict Michael, the ones in 93 got it right. Sneddon was so desperate for a conviction that he didn't care to violate Michael's constitutional rights or breaking the law and Melville admitting it during the trial was beyond me even though Jordan refused to testify.
It was indeed witnessing a sick of obsessive pursuit of Javert to Jean Valjean in real life.
|
|
|
|
Post by pg13 on Mar 29, 2024 6:56:35 GMT
Poor ole Dan is getting really upset😆😁 They only want those photos as they think its a tool to push for a settlement. Because whoops what if we get hold of those photos and whoops what happens if they get leaked to the press or they want to show them in court. They have nothing to do with this case but they can be very much used as a “blackmail” tool towards a settlement They might well think it, but the world has already seen MJ at his most vulnerable, naked state post 2009. And I don't think many people will be wanting to see that or agree with it. IMO, the shock value those might have had is gone and so has any blackmail value. They're desperate. And it shows. |
|
|
|
Post by LindavG on Apr 5, 2024 13:43:03 GMT
Poor ole Dan is getting really upset😆😁 They only want those photos as they think its a tool to push for a settlement. Because whoops what if we get hold of those photos and whoops what happens if they get leaked to the press or they want to show them in court. They have nothing to do with this case but they can be very much used as a “blackmail” tool towards a settlement That's exactly it. It's frustrating that others can't see this for the obvious attempt at blackmail that it is, though. I just saw a thread about this on Reddit (r/Music). I usually don't even read posts about Michael on Reddit because it's 99% hate but I was curious what people would say about this. And all the comments were about how supposedly Michael had a "unique looking penis" and that several of his victims accurately described it, and such. And that he was chemically castrated?? To my knowledge, the only description of Michael's penis was by Jordy Chandler, who claimed Michael was circumcised (he wasn't) and that he had blotches on the skin (which anyone could've known since Michael publicly said he had vitiligo all over his body). He made a drawing which looked like a 5 year-old drew a mushroom. That was the whole basis for the strip search afaik. This evidence was presented to two Grand Juries who decided not to indict Michael*. Surely if Chandler gave a detailed, accurate description of Michael's genitalia that matched the photographs, there would at least be grounds for a criminal trial against him? There is so much misinformation out there, it feels like a hopeless cause. And if you try to mention these facts you'll just be downvoted to oblivion because people don't want to hear it. *Edit: Now that I think about it, I'm not sure these pictures were ever entered into evidence. Which suggests they didn't match because otherwise, the prosecution would have definitely used them to build their case. |
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Apr 5, 2024 14:16:58 GMT
Yeah, the only accuser who ever gave a description of MJ's penis was Jordan and putting together the information we know about it was most likely wrong. Details here: themichaeljacksonallegationsblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/26/did-jordan-chandlers-description-of-michael-jacksons-penis-match-the-photographs-taken-of-the-stars-genitalia-by-the-police/I guess this discussion came up now again, because there was a TMZ article this week about how MJ's law team is "fighting to block Robson and Safechuck from getting access to the pictures". The headline was deliberately designed in a way to give the impression they are trying to hide some huge evidence, when in reality Carpenter (Wade and James's lawyer) asking to get access to those pictures is nothing but desperate fishing that no sane Court would allow. Firstly, because it has nothing to do with their csse. Wade and James never gave a description of MJ's privates so what is even their reasoning to get access to them? It has no relevance to their case against MJ's companies. Second, because it would be a complete violation of constitutional rights. The whole case is already problematic because essentially it tries a dead man, but now this would add the element to introducing "evidence" from a case from which the accuser won't be available for cross examination. So what are they trying to pull here? Deflection from their own case and instead of focusing on that trying a case in which neither the defendant or the accuser will be available? I'm sorry, but this reeks of desperation. I suspect Carpenter knows he doesn't have any chance to get it introduced, he's just playing the exact same media games that Sneddon did in 2005, ie. leaking to the press how MJ's lawyers are fighting the introducing of this "crucial evidence" and get bottom feeding press like TMZ write salacious headlines about it, just like they did. The reality is that it has nothing to do with their case and MJ's team is fighting against it because of that and because it would be completely unconstitutional to have them introduced while Jordan is not available for cross examination. Even Sneddon admitted it in 2005 that such a thing would be unfair. (It's another question that later he still tried to do it out of desperation.) |
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Apr 5, 2024 14:34:30 GMT
BTW, they have already been rejected several times by the court from getting access to those pictures and even LA police rejected their request in 2013.
It's nothing but fishing. Those pictures have nothing to do with them and they have no business accessing them. They never gave a description and Jordan never made allegations against MJ's companies.
I also wouldn't trust them on not "accidentally" leaking them to the press if they had them just to create salacious headlines.
Here's a thread about the MJ companies opposition:
Re. chemical castration. Of course it's another BS myth stemming from an article a few years ago written by a transwoman (projecting much?), speculating based on false premises whether MJ was castrated. Her "evidence" of her theory were things like MJ's high voice (ignoring that several other male members of MJ's family have a high voice, like Jackie for example. Or that MJ's singing voice wasn't high the same way as a castrato's) and that supposedly he didn’t grow facial hair (which is dead wrong). But she was so in love with her own theory that she ignored information contrary to her wrong premises.
|
|
|
|
Post by amaya on Apr 5, 2024 23:57:54 GMT
Poor ole Dan is getting really upset😆😁 They only want those photos as they think its a tool to push for a settlement. Because whoops what if we get hold of those photos and whoops what happens if they get leaked to the press or they want to show them in court. They have nothing to do with this case but they can be very much used as a “blackmail” tool towards a settlement That's exactly it. It's frustrating that others can't see this for the obvious attempt at blackmail that it is, though. I just saw a thread about this on Reddit (r/Music). I usually don't even read posts about Michael on Reddit because it's 99% hate but I was curious what people would say about this. And all the comments were about how supposedly Michael had a "unique looking penis" and that several of his victims accurately described it, and such. And that he was chemically castrated?? To my knowledge, the only description of Michael's penis was by Jordy Chandler, who claimed Michael was circumcised (he wasn't) and that he had blotches on the skin (which anyone could've known since Michael publicly said he had vitiligo all over his body). He made a drawing which looked like a 5 year-old drew a mushroom. That was the whole basis for the strip search afaik. This evidence was presented to two Grand Juries who decided not to indict Michael*. Surely if Chandler gave a detailed, accurate description of Michael's genitalia that matched the photographs, there would at least be grounds for a criminal trial against him? There is so much misinformation out there, it feels like a hopeless cause. And if you try to mention these facts you'll just be downvoted to oblivion because people don't want to hear it. *Edit: Now that I think about it, I'm not sure these pictures were ever entered into evidence. Which suggests they didn't match because otherwise, the prosecution would have definitely used them to build their case. I saw that Reddit post on the front page and it made me sick. I had a bad feeling the comments would be anti-Michael.  Why can't we win for once? I'm so fucking tired. I hate everything. |
|
Yaza
Wondering Who
Posts: 54 
|
Post by Yaza on Apr 6, 2024 11:36:16 GMT
Yeah, the only accuser who ever gave a description of MJ's penis was Jordan and putting together the information we know about it was most likely wrong. Details here: themichaeljacksonallegationsblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/26/did-jordan-chandlers-description-of-michael-jacksons-penis-match-the-photographs-taken-of-the-stars-genitalia-by-the-police/I guess this discussion came up now again, because there was a TMZ article this week about how MJ's law team is "fighting to block Robson and Safechuck from getting access to the pictures". The headline was deliberately designed in a way to give the impression they are trying to hide some huge evidence, when in reality Carpenter (Wade and James's lawyer) asking to get access to those pictures is nothing but desperate fishing that no sane Court would allow. Firstly, because it has nothing to do with their csse. Wade and James never gave a description of MJ's privates so what is even their reasoning to get access to them? It has no relevance to their case against MJ's companies. Second, because it would be a complete violation of constitutional rights. The whole case is already problematic because essentially it tries a dead man, but now this would add the element to introducing "evidence" from a case from which the accuser won't be available for cross examination. So what are they trying to pull here? Deflection from their own case and instead of focusing on that trying a case in which neither the defendant or the accuser will be available? I'm sorry, but this reeks of desperation. I suspect Carpenter knows he doesn't have any chance to get it introduced, he's just playing the exact same media games that Sneddon did in 2005, ie. leaking to the press how MJ's lawyers are fighting the introducing of this "crucial evidence" and get bottom feeding press like TMZ write salacious headlines about it, just like they did. The reality is that it has nothing to do with their case and MJ's team is fighting against it because of that and because it would be completely unconstitutional to have them introduced while Jordan is not available for cross examination. Even Sneddon admitted it in 2005 that such a thing would be unfair. (It's another question that later he still tried to do it out of desperation.) The absurdity of this whole debacle is even being noticed by those who are neutral. Wanting to dig up photos of a dead mans genitalia from over 30 years ago is disturbing no matter how you slice it, especially when neither have made a description and the one person who did is not involved, so these photos are not relevant to their case against the companies. Wade and James are inflicted with grandiose hubris so are unable to understand the bad optics. |
|
|
|
Post by SmoothGangsta on Apr 16, 2024 10:45:29 GMT
That's exactly it. It's frustrating that others can't see this for the obvious attempt at blackmail that it is, though. I just saw a thread about this on Reddit (r/Music). I usually don't even read posts about Michael on Reddit because it's 99% hate but I was curious what people would say about this. And all the comments were about how supposedly Michael had a "unique looking penis" and that several of his victims accurately described it, and such. And that he was chemically castrated?? To my knowledge, the only description of Michael's penis was by Jordy Chandler, who claimed Michael was circumcised (he wasn't) and that he had blotches on the skin (which anyone could've known since Michael publicly said he had vitiligo all over his body). He made a drawing which looked like a 5 year-old drew a mushroom. That was the whole basis for the strip search afaik. This evidence was presented to two Grand Juries who decided not to indict Michael*. Surely if Chandler gave a detailed, accurate description of Michael's genitalia that matched the photographs, there would at least be grounds for a criminal trial against him? There is so much misinformation out there, it feels like a hopeless cause. And if you try to mention these facts you'll just be downvoted to oblivion because people don't want to hear it. *Edit: Now that I think about it, I'm not sure these pictures were ever entered into evidence. Which suggests they didn't match because otherwise, the prosecution would have definitely used them to build their case. I saw that Reddit post on the front page and it made me sick. I had a bad feeling the comments would be anti-Michael. Why can't we win for once? I'm so fucking tired. I hate everything. I don't know why when it comes to MJ there are so many people who know absolutely nothing talking loudly like they're experts. I've said it before but it amounts to a whole lot of "I reckon". There's no talking to these people most of the time because they think they know what they're talking about but are just ignorant and obnoxious. |
|
|
|
Post by elusivemoonwalker on Apr 28, 2024 7:14:55 GMT
andjustice4some - Michael Jackson FAN account
@andjustice4some
Breaking: The judge in the Robson/Safechuck case against the MJ companies has ruled that the case does not qualify for the Complex Litigation Program, and therefore will remain with this judge in Beverly Hills.
|
|
|
|
Post by MattyJam on May 15, 2024 17:37:13 GMT
Saw an article from the mainstream media reporting about a new "trauma podcast" which Wade and James have taken part in. The article was ripe with cynicism, just a few paragraphs in writing about how Wade charges €50 per email as a life coach and charges €150 an hour for a video call.
Glancing at the comments, at least 80% were calling bs on them.
And to think how panicked we all were back in 2019, isn't it funny how the reputations they ended up tarnishing most were their own?
|
|
|
|
Post by SoCav on May 15, 2024 21:07:25 GMT
Saw an article from the mainstream media reporting about a new "trauma podcast" which Wade and James have taken part in. The article was ripe with cynicism, just a few paragraphs in writing about how Wade charges €50 per email as a life coach and charges €150 an hour for a video call. Glancing at the comments, at least 80% were calling bs on them. And to think how panicked we all were back in 2019, isn't it funny how the reputations they ended up tarnishing most were their own? I'm sort of in the middle on this. It is definitely true that MJ's reputation is nowhere near as bad as we thought it might be in 2019 - a big relief. Maybe it's just my perception, but to me it seems like the amount of comments in support of him under articles like this has actually been increasing over the past 1 or 2 years. At the same time, I still think Leaving Neverland did a lot of damage. From 2009 until the airing of LN, MJ's reputation was better than it had been in a really long time. His music could be played anywhere and people would just enjoy it - there'd be nothing controversial about it. I don't think that's the case now. Hopefully the biopic can help to restore it some more, and hopefully the Robson/Safechuck trial and Reed's upcoming project won't have much of an effect. |
|
Why can't we win for once? I'm so fucking tired. I hate everything.
