|
Post by kaeleah on Jan 15, 2018 1:24:34 GMT
She says she's seen all over that TMez is the go-to lawyer if you're guilty of sex crimes. I personally WAS disappointed that Tom took on the Cosby case because it encourages the general public to compare MJ's case to Cosby, but that in and of itself doesn't mean TMez's adament defense of Michael's innocence wasn't sincere...
|
|
|
Post by jaywonder on Jan 15, 2018 4:52:12 GMT
She REALLY dislikes this fanbase yet constantly sniffs around the forums (HistoryContinues, LSA, MJJC, and others)
It's so freaking weird....
|
|
|
Post by Snow White on Jan 15, 2018 5:20:51 GMT
She pots on MJJC? Eww, I'm glad Gaz drove me away! If it suits him having trash of "fans" posting on the forum rather than valuable members who actually contributed like respect, so be it.
As for Tom defending Cosby, if other people assume Michael bought his freedom because of Tom's recent client, it shows they don't know shit about that circus of a trial in 2005 and they have no business comparing the two since they are totally different cases hi. Lawyers know they won't always defend innocent people and it shouldn't take away the merit of Tom's brilliant defence of Michael in 2005.
|
|
|
Post by kaeleah on Jan 15, 2018 5:24:23 GMT
FWIW, I've never seen Dani actually posting on MJJC. I think she just lurks/reads there sometimes...
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jan 15, 2018 6:09:18 GMT
The TMez thing is yet another fallacy. Apparently, that's all she can. How does your choice of a lawyer in itself indicate guilt or innocence? Lawyers take all kinds of cases, sometimes they defend a guilty man, at other times an innocent man. Just because another client of his might be guilty how does it indicate that all of his clients are then guilty? Doesn't she realize the utter stupidity of this argument?
A real example of winning a lost case through lawyer skills is the OJ Simpson case. There Johnnie Cochran managed to change the narrative of the trial from being a murder trial into whether the police manipulated evidence out of racism. In MJ's there was no such element. Mez is good at cross-examination and he was thankfully meticulous in his preparing, but that's nothing out of the ordinary.
If she wants to say MJ was only acquitted because of some super skills by TMez then let us discuss the details of the Arvizo case and let's see based on what exactly MJ should have been convicted? Their changing story? Their lies and contradictions? LOL. Oh yeah, her biggest argument there the Arvizo's stuff being locked up in a storage locker. So lame and ridiculous. LOL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2018 4:15:02 GMT
Just read this whole thread. That bitch talking all that mess on that other forum needs to be stopped. Just for the record, I know I have said some susso shit on this forum and I want to atone for it. I have never thought Michael was guilty of any of this crap. At most he loved these children as playmates and like the interviews said, he loved them for their honesty and the fact they do not want something off him like adults do.
Sad but true, the level of duplicity and selfishness from the adults he hung around.
Reading this stuff, makes it real to me the bullshit Michael Jackson had to deal with on a daily basis, the lies, rumours and allegations seemed to never go away. It angers me.
|
|
milo
Wondering Who
Posts: 124
|
Post by milo on Jan 22, 2018 18:23:57 GMT
Someone on twitter mentioned Wade Robson’s latest post and said Wade was "pretty convincing" because it was clear that Wade was in love with Michael and "looked forward to be abused". How this is convincing?
|
|
Huey
Wondering Who
Celebrating life !
Posts: 65
|
Post by Huey on Jan 22, 2018 21:08:53 GMT
« Pretty convincing », that’s a reach.
For someone who has had so-called repressed memories, he « remembers » his abuse quite well.
Why didn’t he say anything to the police in 1993 and 2005 ? Why did he lie to not only the police, but also the judge ?
That poor excuse of a human being is making sexual abuse a joke.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Jan 23, 2018 4:59:36 GMT
Someone on twitter mentioned Wade Robson’s latest post and said Wade was "pretty convincing" because it was clear that Wade was in love with Michael and "looked forward to be abused". How this is convincing? That's sick hater logic. The type of hater who internalize NAMBLA arguments (ie. that boys really enjoy being abused). I know Wade said in his court papers at one point that he was looking forward to being abused but I'm sorry that's nonsense. If that was the case how come he didn't grow up being at least a tad bit confused about his sexuality? If he enjoyed sex with another man and was looking forward to it. But from this blog I have no idea how someone can derive he was in love with MJ or that he was looking forward to being abused. BTW, the blog is just more ropes to hang him with. That's why I'm waiting for him to finish it until I post the Robson section of my website. There is nothing convincing about his story. On the contrary. On this topic that he addresses here - that's just one version of his story. He has other versions of why he didn't tell. When you put them next to each other you can see the contradictions in them. This is from my upcoming article about his allegations. Convincing my ass. He is all over the place with his explanations.
|
|
|
Post by Thriller on Jan 23, 2018 17:36:19 GMT
Desperation from haters. If that blog post is convincing then...
Maybe haters could address why Wade's story has changed from 'I didn't realise being anally raped wasn't love until I was 29' to 'I didn't tell the truth because I felt shame'.
Or maybe they can address all the clear lies he's told in his court documents. Such as using a story invented by a former guard about MJ keeping Wade away from Joy on Mother's Day and her crying about it. She said 'none' of that story is true. Wade then went on to use that total lie in his court documents.
Also, perhaps haters could tell us why Wade was directing and dancing again long before his miraculous 2017 healing in which he openly danced and directed again.
I'd also love to hear their thoughts on a supposed abuse victim in Wade harassing other supposed victims. Wade's new tale of 'I was too ashamed to speak about it' is mightily hypocritical when he's trying to get Jordan and Jonathan Spence (the latter of which has maintained nothing ever happened) to be deposed. Surely as a supposed abuse victim he would respect the wishes of other supposed victims?
Just on Jonathan, Wade's lawyers wanted Jonathan to be available for several days for his deposition. Yet they had previously argued against the Estate that a person can only be deposed for seven hours. So, maybe hater's could also tell us why this is acceptable?
I could go on. Haters fail to address these issues as they know there is no answer to them. Wade's actions cannot be defended. The way he has gone about this case is disgraceful. The entire case is all about him. His claims of raising awareness are absolutely nonsense. Initially filing under seal in the hope of a quiet settlement helps raise awareness how? Lying and harrassing other supposed victims doesn't help raise awareness and help people to understand the complexities of sexual abuse and what real victims go through. He will do whatever he can to get money. Even if you think MJ was a child molester, I fail to see how anybody can not have serious doubts about Wade and his true intentions.
|
|
ChrisC
Wondering Who
Posts: 200
|
Post by ChrisC on Mar 8, 2018 12:59:24 GMT
Maybe haters could address why Wade's story has changed from 'I didn't realise being anally raped wasn't love until I was 29' to 'I didn't tell the truth because I felt shame'. HA! Succinct, to the point, bang on the money. Also he uses emotive language like a tabloid, I am immediately suspicious of anything written when I come across that. You're acknowledging, perhaps sub-consciously, that the literal content isn't compelling enough and you're attempting to sway someone on an emotional level instead.
|
|
|
Post by kaeleah on Mar 9, 2018 1:56:34 GMT
It's so obvious she's been "recruiting" people from MJFacts to come to MaxJax. It's pathetic. When I talked to her regularly, she seemed to lean toward thinking he wasn't guilty in the Arvizo trial but had very serious doubts about other allegations, yet now she's acting like he's guilty as sin with the Arvizos. There are more holes in the Arvizo's story than swiss cheese, so I've got a really hard time understanding how an intelligent person could believe it. There's a reason why even people like Aphrodite Jones who has doubts about other allegations says she has zero doubts about the Arvizos. What's up with her obsession with some storage locker? Where's the full context of that?
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Mar 9, 2018 2:00:10 GMT
She's a hater acting as a fan. That's obvious to me. And them letting in MJFacts folks now is another reason to not touch MaxJax. There should be a line even for them, should not there? If they don't want the forum to turn into a straight up MJ hater forum which is where it is heading IMO. No moderation policy isn't necessarily constructive. It may end up ruining your forum. Re. the storage locker stuff is totally insignificant in the Arvizo story. It's that when the Arvizos moved from one place to another around the time they were kicked out of Neverland, their stuff was put in some storage locker that was rented by Bradley Miller (the private investor working for Mark Geragos). And there was some dispute about who should pay the rent and how the Arvizos would get back their stuff. Haters try to make something out of it, to make it look shady or something. I guess what they are suggesting that MJs side was destroying evidence or something. LOL. The real shady thing is actually what the Arvizos did after that with their lawyers and how the disputes about who pays for the storage locker then turned into a sexual abuse allegation. Details here: themichaeljacksonallegations.com/2016/12/27/lawyers-being-hired-and-the-formation-of-the-allegations/If the storage locker issue is haters best argument for the Arvizos, it's another sign of desperation and grasping at straws. While ignoring the significant parts of the story. Frankly, if anyone believes the Arvizo story at this point that just shows the irrational hate these people have for MJ. Hell, even some haters admit now tha the Arvizo story was BS. That's how BS it was. That even as a hater who believes every tabloid nonsense, you have to be honest with yourself about the Arvizos. That Dani believes even the Arvizis shows me that she's nothing but a hater.
|
|
|
Post by respect77 on Mar 9, 2018 2:32:15 GMT
And I see Dani bring up the Brazil thing. It proves what exactly? At the height of the media frenzy after Bashir they just tried to keep the media away from the Arvizos. It's very clear that right from the beginning, even before the alleged abuse happened, MJs people just didn't trust the Arvizos. And didn't their instincts turn out to be right?
The Brazil trip was exaggerated by the prosecution as a deportation attempt, but it's ridiculous considering there were return tickets after a one week vacation. And eventually it never even happened. It was called off. So once again haters grasp at straws. A trip that was never more than a plan that never actually materialized. So it proves what exactly?
|
|
|
Post by jaywonder on Mar 9, 2018 3:17:19 GMT
What's really funny is that she's gaining a reputation. She's popped up on a lot of the major groups on Facebook and now people know her and her antics. There was a thread on the MJ Rapid Response group warning people about her and her allies.
|
|