Leaving Neverland: Michael Jackson Documentary

[GreenWyvern]

Fiddle Peghead, it’s not up to anybody else to provide ‘proof’ for you.

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence. It’s up to you to go through that evidence in detail, and explain to us why you don’t believe it.

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@GreenWyvern

Fiddle Peghead, it’s not up to anybody else to provide ‘proof’ for you.

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence. It’s up to you to go through that evidence in detail, and explain to us why you don’t believe it.

aceplace57 said there are victims but didnt provide evidence. Why dont you ask the same of him or her? And I have looked, and am not at all convinced, but no, it is not up to me to do that. I am not making a claim of guilt. Others are. So again, what is the best evidence you have seen? Maybe I’ve missed some vital evidence.

[Royal_Nonesutch]

Maybe I am completely, 110% wrong, but does anyone else remember reading that when the cops searched Neverland Ranch after Michael Jackson was arrested for sexually molesting that young boy (but later found “Not Guilty” in court) among other things they found a stash of all male porn (though NOT any kiddie porn) and several pairs of little boy’s soiled underpants, alongside a note in Jackson’s handwriting that said something like, “Always remember, children are innocent and pure.”

That DID happen, right?

(Seriously, that did actually happen, didn’t it?)

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@Royal_Nonesutch

Maybe I am completely, 110% wrong, but does anyone else remember reading that when the cops searched Neverland Ranch after Michael Jackson was arrested for sexually molesting that young boy (but later found “Not Guilty” in court) among other things they found a stash of all male porn (though NOT any kiddie porn) and several pairs of little boy’s soiled underpants, alongside a note in Jackson’s handwriting that said something like, “Always remember, children are innocent and pure.”

That DID happen, right?

(Seriously, that did actually happen, didn’t it?)

Why don’t you search for a link and see?

[Fiddle_Peghead]

I just did a quick search and found that MJ’s underwear was found. And what do you know, it was soiled. Imagine that!

[GreenWyvern]

I suggest reading through the articles on this site, for a start:

Michael Jackson Facts - Learn the Truth - MJ Facts

[Gatopescado]

@Fiddle_Peghead

What are the reason(s) you believe he is guilty?

I’m gonna have to go with ‘Common Sense’.

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@GreenWyvern

I suggest reading through the articles on this site, for a start:

https://www.mjfacts.com/

Thanks, I’ll have a look after work.

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@Gatopescado

I’m gonna have to go with ‘Common Sense’.

Instead of presenting evidence? Ok. Whatever.

[Gatopescado]

Other than the evidence you’ve dismissed?

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@Gatopescado

Other than the evidence you’ve dismissed?

I said I would read that link after work. And yes, I have looked at evidence elsewhere, and it has not convinced me. That is not in any way the same as “dismissing” it.

[Stoid]

I was able to stay in “who knows-he is/was a seriously strange man, so maybe he really can walk like a pedo, talk like a pedo and NOT be a pedo” all these years. But just reading about this film has ripped away all possible doubt: Michael Jackson systematically raped children, hundreds, probably thousands of times. He was a fucking textbook pedophile, in that he truly loved children in every reprehensible way.

For the first time in my life, the artist’s crimes are infecting his art for me. I hear any of his adult music and my head fills with vile pictures and I have to turn it off.

Fuck.

FUCK.

[Stoid]

@Fiddle_Peghead

I’m not “invested” in anything and don’t care if he is innocent or guilty. I just refuse to believe he is guilty without proof. You, nor anyone else, has offered it.

What proof of child molestation would you expect, other than the testimony of the molested?

The focus of the film is on the two men and their families, and therein lies the answer tto your query…read up about it, watch it, you will understand exactly why their adult testimony is completely convincing.

Also included is material about what was found at Neverland when he was investigated.

[Fiddle_Peghead]

Stoid: If Jackson literally raped that many children, don’t you think there would be at least one piece of physical evidence of bodily harm of some sort? The fact that there isn’t (or I should say, I haven’t seen it) doesn’t mean he’s innocent, but it does suggest at least the possibility. That is the type of evidence I would need to be convinced. As far as the movie, well, I haven’t seen it yet. And no, reading about it won’t help. I will watch it when it comes out.

Now, to be clear: I have no idea if Jackson molested children. Surely it is possible that he did. But without the type of evidence mentioned above, I would not be able to vote to convict him of a felony. That is the gist of what I am saying in this thread.

[Stoid]

Sexual molestation and abuse by adults of children does not automatically and invariably lead to the existence of any physical evidence, much less evidence which lasts, never mind causes harm, not even close. The existence of same can certainly be strong supporting evidence but cannot and is not be held up as the standard for determining guilt, so theres that.

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@Stoid

Sexual molestation and abuse by adults of children does not automatically and invariably lead to the existence of any physical evidence, much less evidence which lasts, never mind causes harm, not even close. The existence of same can certainly be strong supporting evidence but cannot and is not be held up as the standard for determining guilt, so theres that.

No I agree it does not invariably lead to physical harm. But out of curiosity, have you seen any evidence of this in regards to Jackson, because I have not and would be interested in seeing it if it does exist. Anyway, what should the standard be then?

[Guinastasia]

@GreenWyvern

I suggest reading through the articles on this site, for a start:

https://www.mjfacts.com/

Holy shit, I’m reading that right now and Jesus Christ. If he wasn’t guilty, he had to be one stupid, ignorant, naive motherfucker.

I remember the Martin Brashir interview years ago, and the guy came off as both creepy and sort of “out of it”, if that makes sense. I swear he was on something for half of it.

And as Brashir put it later, he may or may not have been molesting those kids, but it was still completely inappropriate for him to have them sleep with him.
(I also remember during the trial how fucking INSANE his fans were, especially the one, B.J. something? Holy shit, they were SCARY)

[GreenWyvern]

I think the crucial point that many people fail to understand is the nature of the relationship between Jackson and the boys.

These passages from the mjfacts site are worth reading carefully:

To most people, child sexual abuse is defined as being performed on an unwilling child by a stranger which is achieved by threats of violence or even actual violence – usually a stranger, a sick pervert, who physically overpowers the child and violently forces them into sexual activity. Some also realize that inter-family child abuse exists.

There is another little-known alternative though, and that is child molestation where the victim is somewhat willing and the molester is in many ways “good”.

Society seems to have a problem dealing with any sexual-victimization case in which… child victims simply behave like human beings and respond to the attention and affection of offenders by voluntarily and repeatedly returning to an offender’s home… Children are human beings with needs, wants, and desires. Child molestation victims cannot be held to idealistic and superhuman standards of behavior. Their frequent cooperation in their victimization must be viewed as an understandable human characteristic that should have no criminal-justice significance. …

Child-lover molesters almost never use violence for sex, said Lanning. Instead, they groom and seduce and manipulate and use cooperation to get what they want out of the child. “I can’t tell you how many cases where there are letters from the victim written to the accused, saying, ‘You’re the nicest person I ever met,’ or ‘You’ve been so good to me,'” said Lanning. Many victims don’t tell anyone of the inappropriate behavior because they are considered “compliant child victims.” “A child can’t legally consent to having sex, but some of them aren’t necessarily fighting him off,” said Lanning. “They’re developmentally immature, and later they feel ashamed and embarrassed that they cooperated in their victimization.”[2]

Because victims of acquaintance exploitation usually have been carefully seduced and often do not realize they are victims, they repeatedly and voluntarily return to the offender. Society and the criminal-justice system have a difficult time understanding this. If a boy is molested by his neighbor, teacher, or clergy member, why does he “allow” it to continue? Most likely he may not initially realize he is a victim. Some victims are simply willing to trade sex for attention, affection and gifts, and do not believe they are victims. The sex itself might even be enjoyable. The offender may be treating them better than anyone has ever treated them.[2]

Most of these victims never disclose their victimization. Younger children may believe they did something “wrong” or “bad” and are afraid of getting into trouble. Older children may be more ashamed and embarrassed. Many victims not only do not disclose, but they strongly deny it happened when confronted. In one case several boys took the stand and testified concerning the high moral character of the accused molester. When the accused molester changed his plea to guilty, he admitted that the boys who testified for him were also victims.[3]

The most common reasons that victims do not disclose are stigma of homosexuality, lack of societal understanding, presence of positive feelings for the offender, embarrassment or fear over their victimization, or do not believe they are victims. Since most of the offenders are male, the stigma of homosexuality is a serious problem for male victims. Although being seduced by a male child molester does not necessarily make a boy a homosexual, the victims do not understand this. If a victim does disclose, he believes that he is risking significant ridicule by his peers and lack of acceptance by his family.[3]

Jackson would have made Wade believe that the molestation was perfectly natural and an expression of love, and warned Wade that telling would have dire consequences for both of them – not because it was “wrong”, but because “people wouldn’t understand”. This is typical of the methods preferential molesters use to keep victims compliant, and is probably what Wade referred to when he spoke of “brainwashing”.

[Fiddle_Peghead]

@GreenWyvern

I think the crucial point that many people fail to understand is the nature of the relationship between Jackson and the boys.

These passages from the mjfacts site are worth reading carefully:

Does anyone other than I wonder how in hell this guy knows with such authority what child sexual abuse is defined as to most people? I’ve perused a bit of this site, and saw documents and such that lend credence to some claims of abuse by Jackson. But when the author makes unsupported claims like in the first three paragraphs you quoted, quite frankly it sounds like he’s talking out of his ass. Oh, he may have got it right, but if so it could very well just be a lucky supposition on his part. IOW, I would be very wary of falling into the trap of taking things like this at face value.

[GreenWyvern]

@Fiddle_Peghead

Does anyone other than I wonder how in hell this guy knows with such authority what child sexual abuse is defined as to most people? I’ve perused a bit of this site, and saw documents and such that lend credence to some claims of abuse by Jackson. But when the author makes unsupported claims like in the first three paragraphs you quoted, quite frankly it sounds like he’s talking out of his ass. Oh, he may have got it right, but if so it could very well just be a lucky supposition on his part. IOW, I would be very wary of falling into the trap of taking things like this at face value.

Sorry this disturbs you so much.

If you’d bothered to look at the references you would have found that the quotes are from a paper by Kenneth V. Lanning, and an interview with him.

Kenneth V. Lanning, M.S., FBI (Retired)

Mr. Lanning is a 30-year veteran of the FBI who spent 20 years in the Behavioral
Science Unit and National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime at the FBI
Academy in Quantico, Virginia. He is a founding member of the Board of Direc-
tors of the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC) and
current member of the Advisory Board of the Association for the Treatment of
Sexual Abusers (ATSA). He is the 1990 recipient of the Jefferson Award for
Research from the University of Virginia, 1996 recipient of the Outstanding Pro-
fessional Award from APSAC, and 1997 recipient of the FBI Director’s Award for
Special Achievement for his career accomplishments in connection with missing
and exploited children. He has testified on seven occasions before the U.S. Con-
gress and many times as an expert witness in state and federal courts. He has
consulted on thousands of cases involving deviant sexual behavior and the sexual
victimization of children. He has authored numerous articles and publications
including one monograph titled Child Molesters: A Behavioral Analysis and
another titled Child Sex Rings: A Behavioral Analysis that have been widely dis-
tributed by the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC). He
has made numerous presentations at major national and regional conferences on
the sexual victimization of children, child abuse and neglect, and missing and
exploited children and has lectured before and trained thousands of criminal-
justice and mental-health professionals.
The 160 page PDF quoted from, Child Molesters: A Behavioural Analysis was funded by a grant from the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, and distributed by the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children.

So, no, I don’t think he’s ‘talking out of his ass’.