Bailey Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, Game For Now said: Zero oh I dont know there, she's got some super high profile appearances to make the Hall induction and the Vegas residency. If there were plans to release new music Im sure she wanted to promote it unlike "Unbreakable" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Bailey said: oh I dont know there, she's got some super high profile appearances to make the Hall induction and the Vegas residency. If there were plans to release new music Im sure she wanted to promote it unlike "Unbreakable" Right and none of that is affected by her brother being a sexual predator She promoted MFN just fine btw which was her latest promo tour. Let’s focusing on that and now four years ago His behavior didn’t affect her janet. era’s success in 1993 though it did curtail Damita Jo in 2004 but Janet needed the heat off of her Super Bowl fiasco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Hiding emails meaning being FORCED to produce them and also lying about them, (like literally the opposite of Hillary ). He even said in his journal his claims will make him relatable and relevant And I'm sure his witness statement being thrown out had nothing to do with it being thrown out at all. Eh that's what he's saying, but he's also said he's looked into all the information on this and seemed surprised to learn so much when confronted with information he overlooked Except timelines do matter when you're making allegations against someone for SO much money, and you have so little to go on, AND you have shit credibility, explain the making up the entire story about Michael begging him to Testify, when Safechuck wasn't allowed to testify, something everyone on both sides knew. He 1st said he forgot this happened to him until he saw Wade asking for money on TV, then in court he said he told his mother it happened in 05, then in the doc he said he didn't specify to his mother what had happened just that "Michael's a bad man" and made up the story of turning him down, AND then said he didn't realize it was abuse or wrong until he went to therapy in 2013....Again, the sloppiness of it all So it's Just an "excuse"......nothing to do with Jordan Chandler's father trying to negotiate deals with MJ (before even accusing of molestation, threatening to sell other weird stories to the tabloids) for months to keep him from going public? Was it just an excuse when it was revealed that the 2nd boy and his family had falsely claimed abuse against 2 others before Michael before Michael's trial exposed that and was a MAJOR cause in why they lost (beyond all their other lies being exposed)? Is it just an excuse cause Wade tried to get a payout before going public.....and then when he did....for $1.6Billion, James says he didn't remember being molested until he saw Wade coming forward (what he said in court, not the doc)....and that 1.6Billion had nothing to do with it and the fact that he was in a terrible financial situation just like Wade....that's just an excuse too huh? Sorry doll, but it's only an "excuse" when it's not proven, when it is proven, it's a reason. Find 1 person who accused Michael without trying to cut a deal 1st, then it'll be an "excuse", but with these 4, it's the reasons. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 He didn’t lie in his journal. Speaking the truth doesn’t make his claim lies His case was throw out for the reasons listed above. Creating your own answers doesn’t help you at all. The judges in both cases did not excuse his claims Except timelines don’t matter when it was twenty years ago and the victim was a child who has very little concept of time The “money grabbing” claim was thought out at the offices of Johnnie Cochran.. The same Johnnie Cochran that got OJ off for murder.. P Diddy off for his crimes in New York.. Stanley Tookie Williams.. and Michael Jackson... that Cochran No one wants to deal with the US courts... and 95% of cases get settled out of court.. but money right? Good grief. Any excuse to excuse Michael’s behaviors Source: https://thelawdictionary.org/article/what-percentage-of-lawsuits-settle-before-trial-what-are-some-statistics-on-personal-injury-settlements/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimAdamz Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Whether he did it or not the two accusers need to figure out their story and stick to it because they are losing lot's of credibility. People will still be playing Thriller on Halloween, R. Kelly at weddings, and watching Weinstien films on Netflix so none of it matters anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 He lied about having journals and tried his hardest not to have them turned over to the court so he couldn't be questioned about saying making these claims will make him relevant after years of "joking" and saying he'd do this if he ever needed to. Except, his witness statement was stricken for the blatant lying.....which didn't and don't help his claims boo Wow....that...doesn't make sense at all, especially in Safechuck's case who was essentially a teenager for most of what he alleges, and it's pretty odd how it doesn't here yet in real cases with real abuse victims (especially from celebs) they remember things so clearly and so vividly, yet with Michael Jackson being Michael Jackson......it's weird how it's JUST him where that's what these 2 have in common......how telling Again I ask, so you're saying no MJ accuser ever went for the money before they came out with the claims? Also....Cochren was only worked with MJ once....he was kinda sorta dead by the time of the 2nd trial.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 12 minutes ago, EphraimAdamz said: Whether he did it or not the two accusers need to figure out their story and stick to it because they are losing lot's of credibility. No they’re not. Please go back to making gay music videos and leave sexual abuse to people who know. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Yea they are, it's a really bad look to aim for tons of money & be less credible than Wikipedia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 I want to note that the emails to and from his family members aren’t anything surprising. He was writing on his book and needed to fill in some blanks. The Wackos want to make it a conspiracy out of it (I just read an “article” about it. The “article” I read, concerning the emails, sounds like a conspiracy theorist article... NEWS FLASH: adults don’t remember every living childhood moment except the big and/or traumatic events. Calling him a liar for not recalling every detail of his childhood is weird and people should be ashamed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 I want to note his emails indicate that he only started writing his book (that he denied trying to do) after he was denied jobs with MJ's company, and only used the threat of said books (that were so badly done later nobody would pick them up after trying to shop them around for a while, which has to be REALLY crappy cause it's so easy to get a book out on MJ) to attempt to blackmail the estate into paying him, but they don't want you to know that....too bad that was brought up in court. Problem is too, he was looking for and citing every TABLOID article that even his family in his emails denied being true or credible....but he still cited them, very telling. They're liars because they've been proven to have lied and fabricated/edited tons in their stories on this subject SINCE coming out, not even to do with their memory of their childhood, of their memory of what they said 2-4yrs ago, they're trash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 19 minutes ago, jarrylf said: He lied about having journals and tried his hardest not to have them turned over to the court so he couldn't be questioned about saying making these claims will make him relevant after years of "joking" and saying he'd do this if he ever needed to. Except, his witness statement was stricken for the blatant lying.....which didn't and don't help his claims boo Wow....that...doesn't make sense at all, especially in Safechuck's case who was essentially a teenager for most of what he alleges, and it's pretty odd how it doesn't here yet in real cases with real abuse victims (especially from celebs) they remember things so clearly and so vividly, yet with Michael Jackson being Michael Jackson......it's weird how it's JUST him where that's what these 2 have in common......how telling Again I ask, so you're saying no MJ accuser ever went for the money before they came out with the claims? Also....Cochren was only worked with MJ once....he was kinda sorta dead by the time of the 2nd trial.... Doesn’t mean he wasn’t abused just means he wants compensated for it.. none of those emails or journals means he wasnt abused. I need copies of these transcripts from court cases. I looked for these journals and court transcripts and none were found James remembers the abuse. Not many people remember the dates or even years. Perfect example: Janet couldn’t tell you which songs came from which classic album. By your logic, she’s lying. Money is irrelevant when it comes to abuse. Going for MJ’s purse doesn’t mean he didn’t molest children Name one celebrity/wealthy person who hasn’t accused someone they’ve abused of “going for money”. Hell, even none-abusive relationships go for money (child support) so “going for money” is literally an attempt to undermine the real issue, in this case, child abuse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Game For Now said: Right and none of that is affected by her brother being a sexual predator She promoted MFN just fine btw which was her latest promo tour. Let’s focusing on that and now four years ago His behavior didn’t affect her janet. era’s success in 1993 though it did curtail Damita Jo in 2004 but Janet needed the heat off of her Super Bowl fiasco MFN came out before all this scandal with Black male singers, and the media swears Janet should make a statement. I just cannot see the MJ issue not being even a small factor. And the allegations in 1993 did affect Janet, she had a slew of interviews that were going to be held at her beach house, those were cancelled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 13 minutes ago, jarrylf said: I want to note his emails indicate that he only started writing his book (that he denied trying to do) after he was denied jobs with MJ's company, and only used the threat of said books (that were so badly done later nobody would pick them up after trying to shop them around for a while, which has to be REALLY crappy cause it's so easy to get a book out on MJ) to attempt to blackmail the estate into paying him, but they don't want you to know that....too bad that was brought up in court. Problem is too, he was looking for and citing every TABLOID article that even his family in his emails denied being true or credible....but he still cited them, very telling. They're liars because they've been proven to have lied and fabricated/edited tons in their stories on this subject SINCE coming out, not even to do with their memory of their childhood, of their memory of what they said 2-4yrs ago, they're trash. Cool! Tell ya story! Come out so many others can do so! I applaud his book. Him being denied a job and writing a tell all does not mean he wasn’t sexually abused Bringing up his court cases after they are over is irrelevant. His 2015 court case was dismissed bc of statues of limitations and his 2017 because the Estate could not be held liable. That’s it. Cut and dry. The court cases weren’t thrown out for perjury or his testimony.. they weren’t thrown out bc of journals and book deals.. so why bring it out? . Neither dismissed his childhood sexual abuse from Michael Jackson and that factual. Wackos can continue to try to pretend to be lawyers and pretend to break down what was said in court (as if that matters).. then spin little conspiracy theories but at the end of the day, the person they’re defending is a child molester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 6 minutes ago, Bailey said: MFN came out before all this scandal with Black male singers, and the media swears Janet should make a statement. I just cannot see the MJ issue not being even a small factor. And the allegations in 1993 did affect Janet, she had a slew of interviews that were going to be held at her beach house, those were cancelled. MFN came out last year wtf you talking about. Janet made a statement about the #MeToo Movement.. she said “no fucking more”. Reading is fundamental: 1 hour ago, Game For Now said: His behavior didn’t affect her janet. era’s success in 1993 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 52 minutes ago, Game For Now said: Doesn’t mean he wasn’t abused just means he wants compensated for it.. none of those emails or journals means he wasnt abused. I need copies of these transcripts from court cases. I looked for these journals and court transcripts and none were found James remembers the abuse. Not many people remember the dates or even years. Perfect example: Janet couldn’t tell you which songs came from which classic album. By your logic, she’s lying. Money is irrelevant when it comes to abuse. Going for MJ’s purse doesn’t mean he didn’t molest children Name one celebrity/wealthy person who hasn’t accused someone they’ve abused of “going for money”. Hell, even none-abusive relationships go for money (child support) so “going for money” is literally an attempt to undermine the real issue, in this case, child abuse It means we can't take his word for it on this case because his relevance and finances are clearly his priority, PERIOD. Oh no problem: Wade's Witness statement being stricken from the record:https://www.scribd.com/document/367639167/Robson-Summary-Judgment-Ruling The Book Deals threat:https://www.scribd.com/document/335685460/MJ-Estate-Motion-to-Compel-Robson Wade begging for a job with MJJ:https://leavingneverlandfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Wade-Email-to-Cirque-Wanting-MJ-Show-Badly-532x1024.jpg James's financial issues: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.564084.1.0.pdf Wade denying knowing what "time to get mine" means in his diary: https://themichaeljacksonallegationsblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/wade-robson-deposition-extracts.pdf James lying about being asked to/able to testify:https://www.offidocs.com/loleaflet/dist/loleaflet.html?service=owncloudservice04&file_path=file:///var/www/html/weboffice/mydata/1948333/NewDocuments/1093695.odt&username=1948333&ext=yes Ah but he said he didn't remember them being abused because they seemed fun & loving, but then he said he was always in fear, but then he said he didn't remember at all until 2013, then he said he knew all along it was wrong and he was always in fear. The difference in the Janet example, we have evidence to correct her, because otherwise, she is wrong, what you're arguing is being wrong doesn't mean you're wrong. And the Janet comparison doesn't work because in her case she's been wrong, in their case they've been proven to have lied about what they've said and what they did and when they did it from their time with Michael, to their trials, to the doc, to their damn interviews. In this case, on this subject, they lie....so they aren't credible. Doesn't mean abuse didn't happen, it just means you have to have blind faith in un-credible liars that it did.......that don't work for me It doesn't mean he didn't but making the purse the priority jacks the credibility, and I can name many cases (including R.Kelly & Bill Cosby) where there were accusers that didn't do that before coming forward. Name someone who's done that with accusing MJ...... 47 minutes ago, Game For Now said: Cool! Tell ya story! Come out so many others can do so! I applaud his book. Him being denied a job and writing a tell all does not mean he wasn’t sexually abused Bringing up his court cases after they are over is irrelevant. His 2015 court case was dismissed bc of statues of limitations and his 2017 because the Estate could not be held liable. That’s it. Cut and dry. The court cases weren’t thrown out for perjury or his testimony.. period. Neither dismissed his childhood sexual abuse from Michael Jackson and that factual. Wackos can continue to try to pretend to be lawyers and pretend to break down what was said in court (as if that matters).. at the end of the day, the person they’re defending is a child molester You're championing for a book of tabloid sourced stories...........that's um............well I would say that's probably why he never got the deal, but there are books about MJ's tabloid stories, so this had to be really bad, but then again, seeing as how they cant keep up with their claims.....that's not surprising. Cute story, but the truth is their words in court matter, and they always will ESPECIALLY since they're pressing for an appeal, Every lie they said in court in the past will be used against them as it should, just because the case is over doesn't mean we have to ignore their blatant sloppy lying. They keep getting blindsided by their own words from 2 years ago and that's not OK, it don't mean they weren't abused by someone in their life, but it definitely does mean they should not be taken seriously in this conversation. And acting like it doesn't is more wacko than anything really, you're basically saying "who cares if you're lying, tell your story! Get his money! It's all the same!"... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bailey Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Game For Now said: MFN came out last year wtf you talking about. Janet made a statement about the #MeToo Movement.. she said “no fucking more”. Reading is fundamental: Janet was at the top of her career in 1993 and just because a project was successful doesnt mean things couldnt have been even more successful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, Bailey said: Janet was at the top of her career in 1993 and just because a project was successful doesnt mean things couldnt have been even more successful I’m not here to play “hypothetical”.. was it successful: yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 1 hour ago, Game For Now said: Cool! Tell ya story! Come out so many others can do so! I applaud his book. Him being denied a job and writing a tell all does not mean he wasn’t sexually abused Bringing up his court cases after they are over is irrelevant. His 2015 court case was dismissed bc of statues of limitations and his 2017 because the Estate could not be held liable. That’s it. Cut and dry. The court cases weren’t thrown out for perjury or his testimony.. they weren’t thrown out bc of journals and book deals.. so why bring it out? . Neither dismissed his childhood sexual abuse from Michael Jackson and that factual. Wackos can continue to try to pretend to be lawyers and pretend to break down what was said in court (as if that matters).. then spin little conspiracy theories but at the end of the day, the person they’re defending is a child molester. Again.. I will quote me since you refuse to read this. I can’t convince you otherwise. You’re too far into the conspiracy theory. None of those court documentations states that either lied about the sexual abuse. None of those court document exonerates Michael Jackson on sexually molestation of young children. The only thing that does is feeds into and from the conspiracy theory that they’re doing this for money, Fame, power which is an outlandish accusation and is side-stepping the fact that Michael Jackson was a pedophile. Sorry. You can continue quoting conspiracy theorist or you can come to the realization that you’re attempting and failing to defend an inactive pedophile, drug abuser, & public manipulator. None of those links proves Michael didn’t molest children.. it just proves that Michael and his big time lawyers have successfully manipulated you into believing that nothing happened to these child victims as they laid in bed with a 20-40 year old man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Basically, I'm too far into facts to be moved by their performance, and you're to far into their performance to see the facts. Theories aren't proven, their ignorance, their greed, and their motives are proven. I don't recall any of their court docs exonerating Michael (that already happened in 05), they show their lack of credibility and consistencies. They're aiming for tons of money off of edited stories and attempts to hide information. That's what the court docs prove and that's why they matter. Ah so it's a "conspiracy theory" that they're doing this for money.............can you provide sufficient evidence that no accuser of MJ has ever went public with the claims before attaching money?....cause without evidence THAT is the conspiracy theory, what's factual is that the money grab was the 1st move. And you can keep trying and failing at defending people's stories who don't even remember their stories all because you despise the man they're accusing who was completely exonerated. And literally nothing and nobody credible to & consistent ever said or/& proved that MJ did molest anyone who was in or around his life, just that he was an easy target in life & death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 Conspiracy theories are based on facts.. then those facts are twisted and turned to fit a narrative... you are literally copying and pasting that narrative. That narrative is the conspiracy theory. 8 minutes ago, jarrylf said: I don't recall any of the court docs exonerating Michael, Exactly. Attacking credibility is a practice lawyers do to their client’s accuser. As I said “acting like lawyers” Just bc they are going for MJ’s purse, doesn’t mean they were not abused. Facts are apart of conspiracy theories I don’t expect a 30 year old human to remember detailed events of his or her childhood.. that would be delusional. No person can do that. No one. Just the traumatic and exciting portions I’d source his help but then you’ll attack their credibility like a lawyer would. Enjoy your conspiracy theory though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Nope, conspiracy theories are based on mostly un-provable circumstances that challenge provable facts. The doc is a conspiracy, challenging the facts we have on record with nothing to back up the challenge. Your side is "coulda"(=conspiracy) my side is credibility. What you're advocating for is that everyone believes everything everyone says UNLESS they're in court. Them being inconsistent this entire time on this subject and going for MJ's purse first (only after he's dead, only after they both are in financial & career shit) means its more likely they are lying than that they aren't. Ah and yet most do remember their childhood & teen years vividly when it comes to sexual situations (especially since sometimes both accusers here claim it was all consenting), the R.Kelly girls can, and did so easily, McKenzie Phillips did so easily (was molested and groomed and consented with her father but her story has remained the same for years) it doesn't mean everyone does or can but that on top of their inconsistencies is another notch against them I'll enjoy the facts (until or unless they prove me wrong in time), you enjoy your theories, stories, and blind belief tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock & Roll Hall of Game Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 They’re based around facts bro. You can’t just redefine conspiracy theories I’m advocating for more people to come forward who have been sexually abused Inconsistencies are common when dealing with memory especiallyvover a 20 year period Continue pushing conspiracy theories though. It’s a good look. I remember the conspiracy theories about MJ faking his death Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarrylf Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Nah conspiracy theories challenge facts. Yet when it comes to celebrities, inconsistencies is only a major thing when dealing with the biggest star in the world.......And again, it's weird that they get details of their own allegations wrong and re-edited, that's not normal either in these celeb cases.... Why are you projecting so hard? You're literally on the side of "coulda"=did.......that's conspiracy lingo, your own example there is perfectly applicable to you right now, people who believe he was murdered have no concrete evidence but he "coulda".....people who believe he was a pedophile have no concrete evidence (or credible witnesses) but he "coulda" You're doing a better job mocking your argument than I am Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dal Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 Whether he sucked a 10yo’s dick or not doesn’t mean he wasn’t abusive and manipulative to begin with. Yes he had a rough upbringing (to say the least), yes the kids’ parents should be held accountable also.. but even if being as generous as possible to MJ’s side, at best he should have known that befriending these kids and their families for the sheer joy of having “friends” in his life (outside of the industry) would mean that there would always be that imbalance in power and influence. That was mostly a problem caused indirectly by MJ himself for getting as insanely famous as he was, a prisoner of his own success. I don’t believe everything both men say, but I still believe that even is 10% of the shit they say is true then that’s already too much to defend. I’m not going to defend him anymore, but I’ll accept that he was an extremely flawed human being who knew a fame unlike any other human being in history has ever experienced before/after him, and even it wasn’t Michael Jackson but it was John Smith it would still allow the absolute worst traits and tendencies to be exposed because there would be little to no repercussions due to the influence said person would have.. im high af Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EphraimAdamz Posted March 30, 2019 Share Posted March 30, 2019 On 3/28/2019 at 12:35 PM, Game For Now said: No they’re not. Please go back to making gay music videos and leave sexual abuse to people who know. Thanks Because you're an expert? And thanks for the free promo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.