0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginI wonder where these two are hiding out. The fans might forget to be loving and kind if they get a hold of them.This could be one of many reasons why a victim of a worldwide superstar kept quiet for so long. I know we don"t want to think about it, but if you are a reasonable person, you do understand what I'm saying. If you don't agree that's okay, but this is what I'm feeling about these kind of cases.
I wonder where these two are hiding out. The fans might forget to be loving and kind if they get a hold of them.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginI wonder where these two are hiding out. The fans might forget to be loving and kind if they get a hold of them.This could be one of many reasons why a victim of a worldwide superstar kept quiet for so long. I know we don"t want to think about it, but if you are a reasonable person, you do understand what I'm saying. If you don't agree that's okay, but this is what I'm feeling about these kind of cases.Sorry @Do.....That doesn't seem too logical to me. Didn't Wade shoot his movie at Neverland, and I think he also got married there. Strange to want to have the big events / days of your life at the place where you were so horribly abused . Oh wait...that's right....he had repressed memories then. He also had a thriving career . I don't see fear from fans here, I see opportunistic greed and $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
'This is not a case of repressed memory. I have never forgotten one moment of what Michael did to me, but I was psychologically and emotionally completely unable and unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse.'
You are right @Suspicious.....quoted from an interview here. Seems this story has changed a few times .Quote'This is not a case of repressed memory. I have never forgotten one moment of what Michael did to me, but I was psychologically and emotionally completely unable and unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse.' I had the facts wrong about getting married at Neverland....Wade and Amanda got married in 2005 in Hawaii upon further digging. But he is on record saying that both families got together for BBQ's.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are right @Suspicious.....quoted from an interview here. Seems this story has changed a few times .Quote'This is not a case of repressed memory. I have never forgotten one moment of what Michael did to me, but I was psychologically and emotionally completely unable and unwilling to understand that it was sexual abuse.' I had the facts wrong about getting married at Neverland....Wade and Amanda got married in 2005 in Hawaii upon further digging. But he is on record saying that both families got together for BBQ's.but i wonder about the legal aspect of all of these. as long as these things are out there does that keep the estate from being settled and still needing branca and weisman to execute it?
Sorry I don't buy any of the allegations. Not saying im blind, but no I just don't see it. First of all, this so called "Safechuck" VOLUNTARILY came forward and defended MJ publically. Nobody forced or asked him to come forward in 2005. Why make it a point to think so highly of a person that you have to come forward and say how good of a man Mike was? Nobody asked him anything. So why volunteer a lie? Why change it now? If he stayed silent all these years because of MJ being a superstar, why didn't he just keep quiet in 2005? Nobody asked his opinion. What was his motive for defending him then? But why say something now? Why not say it in 2009,2010,2011,2012,2013? I think hes a liar. Him and Robson both. I have my own opinions of what I think is REALLY going on. But I will keep it to myself.
Farcically and with zero self-awareness, Jackson called 25-year-old James a total of three times throughout the trial in an attempt to get James on the stand to “deny everything that the cooks at Neverland samid that they saw happen between Decedent and him,” his Petition says. The bid failed spectacularly.On the first call, Jackson tried to soften James with chat about wanting to assist him with music, directing, and film; when James was a teen, Jackson had promised that “one day, we’re going to make movies together.” Jackson then made the request for James to testify in his defense; James declined.Jackson became enraged, the Complaint says, and threatened his former ‘special friend’. James told Jackson “never to call him again, and that he wanted a normal life.” Jackson grew angrier at this, James remembers, and escalated his threats — he told James he’d “get [him] for perjury” for statements James had made under oath as a fifteen-year-old at his November 1993 deposition. Jackson was evidently fearful James would decide to tell the full version of their story for the Prosecution in lieu of cooperating in his defense, and attempted to intimidate him with invectives about jailing the boy he once ‘loved’. When the call concluded, James began to panic, his court filings say. He dreaded what his mother could learn about the aspect of he and Jackson’s relationship the star had made him keep secret.According to several workers at the Ranch, Jackson used the Neverland theater bedrooms with boys. Blanca Francia recalls Jimmy Safechuck.It was an understandable fear for a young heterosexual man. Though Mark Quindoy died before getting to testify about what he’d seen on August 12, 1989, when Jackson caressed and fondled eleven-year-old Jimmy in the Neverland hot tub, chambermaid Blanca Francia was very much alive. She’d worked for Jackson long enough to see his boys from Spence through Culkin before quitting in 1991. She claimed to have seen Jackson and Jimmy in one of the ‘cancer-kids’ bedrooms in the Neverland theater, both shirtless with their waists and legs covered in a blanket.James told his mother about the telephone call with Jackson, saying he would not testify for the star because Jackson was a “bad man” — a vague descriptor that no doubt confused his mother, who, like other members of the Safechuck family, believed Jackson “could do no wrong.” In explaining his sudden and surprising rejection of Jackson to his mother but still sparing her from the grimy details, James “was unable to tell her any details or say anything but the briefest statement that he had been abused.”Jackson later called Mrs. Safechuck himself. He asked the mother not only to convince James to change his mind about testifying but also if she and her husband would give under-oath testimony in his defense. Mrs. Safechuck kept her son’s secret, and apparently neither of the parents took Jackson up on his request.Jackson’s lawyers and longtime assistant Evvy Tavasci made the second call to James, but he rebuffed their pleas by stating he wanted nothing more to do with Jackson.The final call from Jackson, James remembers, seemed “rehearsed”, with Jackson’s tone reminding James of all of the listening devices attached to phones at Neverland Ranch. It occurred near the end of the trial, perhaps at a moment when — in spite of his attorney Tom Mesereau’s confidence the Prosecution’s case was full of holes — Jackson feared for his freedom, a tacit acknowledgment that years of bad behavior may have finally caught up with the allegedly ‘smooth criminal’. He needed James. He apologized, James remembers, telling James he was “sorry for not being there for [the Plaintiff].” James suspected the phone call was being recorded and “the very sound of Decedent’s voice made him very uncomfortable and put him into panic mode.”Jackson pressed, saying Gavin Arvizo — as he’d said about Jordie Chandler over a decade earlier — was only interested in money, but James resisted. He told Jackson “never to try to call or try to talk to him ever again” and hung up.
Words/actions can be twisted to fit the intent and the intent has always been to bring Michael down.Unfortunately I'm starting to see this in a different light. Why would anyone want to bring Michael down if he was such a kind person? I just don't get it. He wasn't the only one with money, why only get HIM down? Where were his friends when he needed them? Now I'm starting to believe that they suspected there was a dark side on Michael and that that was the reason they didn't support him. Even Paul Anka wrote about that side in his book. What we still want to believe is this: everybody is a liar, except for Michael. There has never been any evidence of any kind to prove any wrong doing that the FBI or child services could find - EVER; if there had been Michael would have been put away.There was evidence, but it a) never went to a trial back in 1993, because right after taking the pictures, Michael settled with the Chandlers b) evidence was hidden or taken away by his staff. There was plenty of evidence, but because of court laws (which I have zero knowledge about, but read about on several accounts), much evidence was barred of being used (to put it simple).And how odd that James told his mom that Michael was 'a bad man' and that abuse had occurred, but she did nothing?? And I can't recall hearing how Wades and James personality, mood or emotions changed while all of this abuse was going on. There would have been something to give the parents an inkling something was going on.I agree with you on that. But maybe, like the article stated and many of us still want to believe: Michael Jackson could do no wrong. Even parents were blinded by the gifts, vacations and privileges they had when they were with Michael. Maybe they were very scared to admit to themselves that they made a mistake in judgement and that their children became victims because of that lack of judgement. Remember, not only Michael would've been guilty, the parent of the children as well!I don't believe Safechuck or Wade - I do believe there is something with all of this but it isn't about Michael. Could it be part of the double theory?That crossed my mind a year ago. But I can't seem to make it fit in any scenario.Now, we have all heard about nobody being allowed in Michael's bedroom at Neverland; ring a bell? Nobody was allowed upstairs at Carolwood. Is that a coincidence? I don't think so.Not sure what you mean by this. By many accounts, many were allowed unlimited access in Michael's room, but not ALL the time.After Wade's interview with Matt Lauer, there was a body reader who watched the interview and he said the body movements didn't match to what Wade was saying and the words that Wade was saying wasn't matching to the accusations. He said it was like the victim was feeling sympathy for the Like I stated many times, maybe that's why they kept quiet for so long or didn't fully understand what had happened to them. Because of the SYMPATHY they felt (and maybe still feel) for Michael. When you have read the link of the Safechuck story, you know how much love James felt for Michael, before he was being pushed out. And if James was only after the money and had hated Michael, he would have testified in 2005. But he wanted to go on back then, maybe still feeling really confused.As I'm sure you all know during This Is It there are mini movies included, Suddenly Last Summer was one of them. Suddenly Last Summer is about a man who molested young boys and in the end those young boys devoured him. As I said in the beginning, words/actions can be twisted to fit the intent.You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginI have been lucky enough to visit Neverland and I wish I could describe the feelings one has while there but I don't think there are any words.I'm sure it wasn't all bad things what happened there, ofcourse not. Michael did so much good. But that doesn't mean he wasn't capable of doing less good things. Like he said: everybody has deep dark secrets.Your heart tells you what you need to know.My heart tells me different things right now :icon_e_sad:Love you Michael!
Do, I wonder what your motivations are to cast doubt on Michael being innocent of child molestation. You talk about things you believe, or can't imagine. And you are making false assumptions to make a point. Maybe before you throw Michael under the bus with wrong information, you should take the trouble of reading the truth, instead of spreading lies.You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The link I posted, along with the there posted link to the investigative article by Mary S. Fisher are about facts. Your link to the Jimmy Safechuck story is indeed from a hater-site. Funny you use it as your source. It brings many 'happenings' as fact when they are not. You quote from stories about Blanca Francia, Diane Diamond and so on. That tells me a lot. My first post was a response to a post of Michaelslady, which stated that James volentarily came forward to defend Michael in 2005. That wasn't a fact, because why didn't he defend Michael in court then? Apparently he didn't want to defend Michael at all. And did you know TM stated during Kiki Fournier's cross-examination at Michael's trial (on March 17, 2005) that James was wedded at Jackson’s Neverland Ranch? Which also wasn't a 'fact' because James wasn't married there. Nice lie of TM. But it did make seem that Michael was still in contact with James, which apparently he was not. Besides that, I often felt that Michael himself was not always telling the truth.Mjfacts is called a hater-site by Michael Jackson fans who believe he is innocent. It is not called a hater-site by me, it doesn't 'only' quote doubtful sources like many seem to think. They have many 'facts' over there, which make me doubt.You say you are after the truth, but at the same time you have clearly already formed an opinion. That doesn't match. So I question your intentions. And you can try to lure me into lengthy debates on the whole case, but I won't bite. My search for the truth didn't start yesterday. So yes, I am clearly forming an opinion. It isn't an absolute opinion, but I have doubts certainly. And believe me, the last thing I want is a lenghty debate with someone who doesn't want to hear anything about it.Gelukkig heb ik wel een leuk contact met een anderen hier op de site, die net als jij geloven in Michael's onschuld, maar we kunnen wel samen op een constructieve en positieve manier over dit soort zaken discussiëren. Jammer dat je zo vijandig bent.Succes met haat zaaien.