Leaving Neverland

Apologies for having posted the same controversial review twice prior. This movie/documentary emotionally affected me and I believe the message and the film itself is important and should be seen.

Forget my review and watch the film. Following that read my review or add your own comments.

Leaving neverland

Watched this after having watched the documentary ‘abducted in plain sight’ where a peodophile/sick and evil man abducted a young girl numerous times but had also manipulated and groomed her family.

Michaels story is similar in that he groomed his victims parents to gain access. The victims tell a similar confused tale in which they were in love with their abuser and lied to protect him.

Leaving neverland is graphic in its verbal descriptions - it is at times sickening, saddening and strongly affecting of emotions. The two narrators, for whom are victims are handled emphatically. Most importantly - their story is believable. I believe them.

How I feel about Jackson has changed. Of course he’s always been seen to be an odd character and the rumours have followed him since when I can remember however being moved by his victims accounts following watching this story makes me despise the man.

This is an important film. One which explores fame, fortune, control, manipulation, grooming, sexual predators, deceptive appearances. It’s more than Michael Jackson - it’s a story about the world we live in.

• Wade Robson and friends only made the docu to demand free money from the Jackson Estate
• the Jackson Estate instead sues them
• docu is a failure with terrible ratings
• TV networks are already cutting it apart and people realize that it's nothing
• Oprah gets #muted on twitter
• Wade Robson is still poor and jobless

LMAO, Anti-MJ shills forever BTFO'd. The turn of events has been something to behold.

__________________

212 555 6342

Pierce & Pierce: Mergers and Acquisitions

Patrick Bateman
Vice President

358 Exchange Place New York, N.Y. 10099 FAX 212 555 6390 TELEX : () 4534

I'm just joshing with ya.

In all seriousness, I have to preface by stating I'm not really in either camp of "HE DID IT" or "didn't do anything" (I don't think we'll never really know for sure). I'll try my best to be as unbiased as I possible can, considering I'm really a huge fan of MJ's work.

It seems suspect that this is happening close to his 10 year memorial, and right after the successful documentary about R. Kelly was released. This compels me to question the source. I know we live in an era of always believing the alleged victim, but people need to step back, look at the situation from both points of view and go with what makes most sense to you. If you believe them, that's fine. I don't know these men, nor Michael. But, to immediately take these allegations as fact shows people who want him to be a criminal, instead of being innocent until proven guilty. So far, there has been nothing that has come up; nothing came up at all from the FBI. At least in R. Kelly's case, they found evidence. Call me naive, but I think it takes more than unsupported claims for me to raise my pitchfork.

I can understand where you're coming from, Larry. Truly, I do. Especially when someone makes statements such as:

But it has no evidence of anything, whilst presenting nothing but just stories and interviews. That's all it is.

I mean, what's the point of this "documentary" other than to just lob baseless accusations against someone who can't refute them? You could have these people coming out and saying "Oh yea, Michael used to sacrifice kittens too and rub their blood on his penis", and who in the hell would be there to say he didn't? Usually, you would have both sides trying to contribute to the documentary. The R. Kelly documentary had his family, friends, and other people talking about him. This is only just the victims; just 2 of them.

Not only that, but the 2 that have come forward since his death are known liars that have previously defended him under oath whilst having sudden accusations that conflict with not only previous stories, but ones not even related to their time with him (fun fact that I just read about: MJ's niece actually dated Robson for 7 years after MJ set them up, which would actually hinder his claim that he was steering him away from women).

Here's the events (from what I've gathered), regarding Wade Robson and James Safechuck.

• In 2011, Robson approached John Branca, co-executor of the Michael Jackson Estate, about directing the new Michael Jackson/Cirque du Soleil production, ONE. Robson admitted he wanted the job “badly,” but the Estate ultimately chose someone else for the position.

• In 2012, Robson also had a nervous breakdown, triggered, he said, by an obsessive quest for success. His career, in his own words, began to “crumble.”

• That same year, with Robson’s career, finances, and marriage in peril, he began shopping a book that claimed he was sexually abused by Michael Jackson. No publisher picked it up.

• In 2013, Robson filed a $1.5 billion dollar civil lawsuit/creditor’s claim aganist the estate, along with James Safechuck, who also spent time with Jackson in the late ‘80s. Safechuck claimed he only realized he may have been abused when Robson filed his lawsuit. That lawsuit was dismissed by a probate court in 2017.

• In 2019, the Sundance Film Festival premiered a documentary based entirely on Robson and Safechuck's allegations. While the documentary is obviously emotionally disturbing given the content, it presents no new evidence or witnesses. The film's director, Dan Reed, acknowledged not wanting to interview other key figures because it might complicate or compromise the story he wanted to tell

Both guys are still in financial trouble too, and did defend him up until only recently. Once you started reading up on this things, It's very clear the finical and beneficial motive involved. So, don't expect more victims coming forward, but probably a new lawsuit with, this time, a good portion of the public on their side (as they both intended).

If there's actual evidence, and more and more victims come forward: I'll officially renounce my defense of Michael Jackson. But, until then, I still consider this case closed.

I anticipated as much - Jackson is a beloved global figure, defending him is only natural. I assume you haven’t seen the film as a lot of your reasoning shows a lack of understanding about both the victims and events.

You talk of lack of evidence. Testimony is a form of evidence - it’s here twice plus the multiple prior lawsuits (victims who brought Jackson to trial and lost). This type of evidence is very common in convictions- forensic csi type evidence is not always available. Interesting - testimony from both wade and James significantly helped Jackson’s prior cases and acquittals. This is part of the show. This is also explored as to why they were dishonest and perhaps you should listen to their side before condemning them as money hungry liars. A lot of that can be said but does not fit within the context of their story.

Again you talk of lack of evidence: Michael shared a bed with these boys - this is a fact confirmed by Jackson himself, the financial contributions to the family, the time spent alone with the children.....

Generally where there’s smoke there’s fire. The documentary puts the peices together. It fits and it all starts to burn. There story is compelling. It however needs to be taken in without a combative attitude - with a open and reasonable mind. This is very difficult given level of fanhood Jackson has reached. Passions run hot. For example you have easily searched and been able to argue a page of points both defendinh Jackson and attacking his victims and given what you have raised you haven’t even seen the documentary. I would guess that you would need some time before you were able to view this in a objective light -maybe the world does given how this icon portrayed himself. I however believe the victims and also think they are courageous. I do however think they will suffer before it is accepted as with anything the masses has already made their mind on.

Interestingly, due to the strength of this very documentary, various radio stations have banned Jackson’s music. I don’t have a comment on that however it does speak to the power of the film.

I've got nothing else to say to you. You're clearly indoctrinated by nothing but an emotionally manipulative hit-piece (which I have seen, by the way).

The bottom line is this...

If you want to view Michael Jackson as a pedophile, you will. It’s very easy to do. He admitted to allowing children to sleep in his bedroom (which itself is the same size as a small two story house), and has been accused of child molestation more than once. He’s not the guy next door, was undeniably eccentric, and most certainly didn’t live a conventional life.

But, to anyone who has bothered to look into the allegations against him - and I mean really look into them - there is more than enough evidence to demonstrate that he was a victim of extortion and of copycat false claims for the past twenty six years. Yet, despite the Los Angeles Police Department stating that Jackson should be presumed to be innocent, despite a jury finding him not guilty on every single charge against him, despite the Los Angeles Department of Children and Family Services twice investigating and clearing him of wrongdoing, despite the FBI conducting a very thorough investigation in which no evidence of wrongdoing was found, and despite the cash grab lawsuits of his posthumous accusers being tossed out of court, the court of public opinion may sadly be what defines this saga and a large part of his legacy.

Based on what? He made perfectly reasonable arguments, none of which suggest indoctrination. They only suggest disagreement.

The "copycat false claims" thing is an argument that not every accusation is true. I'll bet a lot of people who think he abused children are willing to believe not every accusation is true, but that wasn't the question. The question is whether he did it at all.

Being extorted is also not mutually exclusive with being guilty. I'm not even sure if it's inversely correlated, since it's a lot easier to extort people for things they did, I would imagine.

So, you're basically making two claims to dispute his guilt, and neither of them actually disputes his guilt. I don't really follow the logic there.

Probably because the standards for removing someone's freedom are rightly higher than the standards for thinking something is more likely than not.

Thank you yoda.

It is possible to extort someone with a lie..

This is so complicated, but sadly my english is not good enough to make opinion changing comments..

Correct. Or with the truth. The salient point being that saying he was extorted is not an argument for his guilt or innocence, especially since he could be extorted by a lie and guilty of another accusation.

I really don't know why people find that hard to believe considering what we already know about the man, how he was himself and how much he loved children and how much time he spent with them in bed... none of that is allegations.. If we were talking about anybody other than the king of pop, we would employ common sense and say... yeah.. probably.

Not just some random victim, Wade Robson spent his childhood with Michael Jackson and cried more at his funeral than his own fathers. If he is lying the man is totally remorseless and a bloody amazing actor and personally I don't see that, my gut tells me every word he said was true, I don't need proof, ever, I'm no judge but **** Michael Jackson and **** his goofy siblings but I'll still bop my head to smooth criminal and I don't condemn the man to hell

__________________
Do you know what a roller pigeon is, Barney? They climb high and fast, then roll over and fall just as fast toward the earth. There are shallow rollers and deep rollers. You can’t breed two deep rollers, or their young will roll all the way down, hit, and die. Officer Starling is a deep roller, Barney. We should hope one of her parents was not.

Just watched it and it's a devestating and extremely convincing documentary.

__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019

It is. As hard as it is to hear maybe there’s a life lesson and it can be helpful in the future as unfortunately these people (perpetrators) do exist.

I agree that this film is important and I also agree that it's not about Michael Jackson...it's about these two boys whose encounters with Jackson damaged them permanently.