Brandi Jackson spills tea on ex Wade Robson

[AgusPop 4,141]

very interesting. this confirms the "documentary" is biased

[darkwolf 590]

This is not related to any of the accusers, but I found this old interview of Latoya

 

[Chromatislaps 34,838]

37 minutes ago, darkwolf said:

This is not related to any of the accusers, but I found this old interview of Latoya

 

this was debunked by Latoya, she was physically and mentally abused by her husband at the time to say lies about MJ

starts at 1:09

 

[Chromatislaps 34,838]

5 hours ago, Runway said:

#believesurvivors

Wade Robson knows what he wants...

I had a talk with my best friend, who had been abused in the past by her own father, and she thought this was a weird story. Her father was a real monster, he wasn't sweet to her, and really manipulated her to feel like she was worth nothing. The man is a real psychopath, and even tho he has a parole, he still tries to get her distraught in various ways (he can not contact her in anyway, but will try it indirectly). Throughout Leaving Neverland the "victims" are mostly lovingly about MJ, there was even laughing in there....how the heck is that even credible? This isn't stuff you would just blurt out in front of a camera, this is serious stuff the usually victim relives by telling it, and they often hate the person who did it to them! Sorry to say this and I do NOT want to discredit actual abuse victims, but this film looked like acting to me, and there were a lot of editing tricks in this film to make it feel convincing. 

Another thing... if MJ was a pedo, how could he repress his urges for 13+ years while raising his own kids? Doesn't really add up in my opinion. And they stand by their father...I don't think kids of an actual pedo would feel that way about their father

[darkwolf 590]

11 hours ago, Flopplause said:

this was debunked by Latoya, she was physically and mentally abused by her husband at the time to say lies about MJ

starts at 1:09

 

I don't see where she debunked this. She said that her husband was manipulative and that she suffered abuse

[derpmonster 22,412]

17 hours ago, Flopplause said:

When a heterosexual young boy/man is abused in a way that Wade was allegedly being abused by Michael, that has a profound impact on a man's psyche, his confidence and especially his sexual confidence. And comparing this picture to the way you (Brandi) are describing Wade, he seemed perfectly normal with you and breaking up Britney Spears and Justin Timberlake at Britney's celebrity peak...that takes a lot of confidence...

What the heck is this bullsh*t?

You guys think any of this has credibility?

What kind of garbage ignorant logic is this (and it doesn't even have anything to do with heterosexuality).

[Chromatislaps 34,838]

22 minutes ago, derpmonster said:

What the heck is this bullsh*t?

You guys think any of this has credibility?

What kind of garbage ignorant logic is this (and it doesn't even have anything to do with heterosexuality).

Well it seems you have made up your mind about this entire situation. I'm still in this with an open mind, I'm not gonna dismiss other views on the matter. It is very interesting to see a lot of people who didn't even dig deep into the allegations, suddenly feel the right they have full knowledge on these matters. Also very interesting to see, as someone who has closely observed the media circus of 2003-2005, that people forget how biased and manipulative the media can be. Most receipts against MJ circling around on the interwebs the "haters" use are debunked, refuted and are proven fabrications  by credible lawyers, detectives and and other professionals in the field. We surely as "amateur" conaisseurs of the law would know better, wouldn't we?

Perhaps there is no logic in it, but there have been studies on the victims of this particular kind of abuse, and it does make all of the behavior of alleged "victims" seem fishy in comparison to the behavior of actual victims. I'm not going to generalize, because there are exeptions to everything. 

[Chromatislaps 34,838]

38 minutes ago, darkwolf said:

I don't see where she debunked this. She said that her husband was manipulative and that she suffered abuse

watch this, I hate the fact that the media cover all of these receipts up to create a certain narrative to vilify MJ without covering this all objectively.

 

[darkwolf 590]

49 minutes ago, Flopplause said:

watch this, I hate the fact that the media cover all of these receipts up to create a certain narrative to vilify MJ without covering this all objectively.

 

I'm getting the impression that she wants to blame everything on her ex husband in order to "repair" her relationship with her family. I do not deny that he was an abuser, however.

I don't if what she said was true or not, but to me, it seems that there is something very wrong with the entire Jackson family.

[Bebe 17,065]

I'm not going to comment on all OP - but I will just say comments like:

"Why would he wait 6 years to have sex with his girlfriend...while he "allegedly" had sex with Michael right of the bat? It doesn't add up."

When Wade is alleging MJ abused him between the ages of 7-14 is just.... uugh....

It exposes a lack of understanding regarding the issue of child sexual abuse and a lack of empathy for the situation that is not only disturbing, but should frankly disqualify you from having any kind of serious discussion about whether or not Wade is credible. It's just obvious from that alone that you don't understand even the basics of child sexual abuse and the psychology around it.

[Mythos 3,199]

Isn't it kinda crazy how someone make a documentation about such an issue, without us knowing how biased he is against that person, or not, if all the facts are involved or not and so on...

I don't know if MJ has really done something or not, but people should really stop judging so fast... looking everything from just one side is never good.

[Chromatislaps 34,838]

6 minutes ago, Mythos said:

Isn't it kinda crazy how someone make a documentation about such an issue, without us knowing how biased he is against that person, or not, if all the facts are involved or not and so on...

I don't know if MJ has really done something or not, but people should really stop judging so fast... looking everything from just one side is never good.

Thank you, I'm also not saying to people to believe he was or wasn't innocent. I have my own views on it, but I do respect other views on the matter. However I do no respect other's views without digging deeper into this matter if people only watch the Leaving Neverland film and media tabloid junk.

 I'm just trying to get people to think more critical of a "documentary" that seemingly claims to have receipts, without showing any actual evidence. 

[Adakam 2]

18 hours ago, HangWang said:

Here is also some more stuff as to why they are not credible. 

"Both men strenuously defended Jackson, including under oath, for decades, and only decided they’d been molested years after his death, when they were both in financial trouble and filed a lawsuit seeking hundreds of millions of dollars. That lawsuit was thrown out of court – twice – but the men are in the middle of an appeal, giving them a gigantic financial motive to lie.

Since filing their lawsuit, both men have repeatedly changed their stories, frequently telling directly contradictory versions of the same supposed events. For example, Wade Robson has told at least four directly contradictory stories about the first time Jackson supposedly abused him.

In the lawsuit, Robson was caught lying under oath so brazenly that the judge threw out his entire witness statement and said no rational juror could ever believe his account.

Between 2012 and 2014, Robson wrote two drafts of an abuse memoir and tried unsuccessfully to sell them to publishers. Meanwhile, he lied under oath and said he’d never discussed his allegations with anyone except his lawyers. When the Jackson estate discovered he’d actually been shopping books, the court ordered him to produce the drafts as evidence. They revealed the story of his abuse had changed significantly from one draft to the next.

Robson was also ordered to release his emails as evidence. He breached the order repeatedly, first by claiming they didn’t exist, then by simply refusing to hand them over. Then he redacted all the emails between himself and his family members and cited ‘attorney-client’ privilege, even though none of his family are attorneys.

When he eventually complied with the court order and released the emails, they revealed that at the time he was constructing his lawsuit and abuse memoir, he was researching and emailing himself links to old tabloid newspaper stories about abuse allegations against Michael Jackson.

The emails showed Robson found one particular story from the early 1990s which specifically named he and his mother. He emailed it to his mother and asked whether it was true. She replied, ‘Wow, none of that is true’. He then included it in his story anyway.

Emails also revealed that throughout 2011/12, Robson was lobbying Jackson’s estate for a job directing and choreographing an official Michael Jackson tribute show in Las Vegas. His campaign to secure this role had included sending emails explaining that his amazing friendship with Jackson meant nobody was better qualified for the role than he was, and he was devoted to doing the best job he possibly could ‘for Michael’. After being told someone else had got the job, he suddenly claimed he’d been abused and filed a creditor’s claim against the estate for millions of dollars.

Months later, according to Jimmy Safechuck, he flipped on the TV and saw Wade Robson being interviewed about his lawsuit. In that moment, Safechuck suddenly remembered that he had been abused by Jackson as well, so decided to join the lawsuit. He didn’t mention that this epiphany coincided exactly with his inheritance circling the drain after a relative died and the surviving siblings started suing each other – including him – for control of the family business.

Robson was also ordered to produce his diaries as evidence. In them, he’d written about how these allegations might rescue his failing career by making him ‘relatable and relevant’. He also wrote, ‘It’s time for me to get mine.’ When questioned under oath about what he’d meant when he wrote that, he refused to answer.

Both men tell stories in the TV show which directly contradict stories told under oath in their lawsuit. In fact, they have continued to change their stories as recently as within the last week.

For example, Jimmy Safechuck claims under oath in the lawsuit that he only remembered Jackson had abused him in 2013 when he turned on the TV and saw Robson. Yet in tonight’s TV show and interviews promoting it, he claims he knew he’d been abused in 2005 and thus, when asked to testify for Jackson’s defence ‘towards the end of the trial’, he refused to do so.

But that’s a provable lie. Safechuck was never asked to testify for Jackson’s defence. The judge ruled long before the trial began that testimony could only be heard about certain children, and Safechuck was not one of them. All testimony about Safechuck was literally banned from the courtroom. So Jackson’s defence cannot have asked him to testify – and certainly not after the trial was already underway.

Robson claimed in a BBC interview last week that Jackson had abused him ‘hundreds of times’. Yet his mother’s sworn testimony is that they went to Neverland roughly 14 times but Jackson was almost never there. She estimates the number of times they visited the ranch and he was actually there was four.

[Robson’s claim that he was abused in the recording studio while Jackson was working on his Dangerous album is completely refuted by Brad Sundberg who was present in the studio every single time Jackson was and witnessed absolutely no suspicious behaviour.] (Added by u/Catch-up)

Questioned about their financial motive, the men now say they don’t care about money and are only suing to embolden other abuse victims by holding the Jackson estate accountable. This is a provable lie. The lawsuit was originally filed under seal and Robson tried to extract a settlement from the estate with zero publicity. Only when the estate refused to pay a bean did he go public."

 

All of this baffles me, its incredible how many people just swallow Wade's words without even looking at his background.

Thanks to people like him, real victims like me struggle to be believed. (And by the way, real victims want justice, not money)

 

[Mythos 3,199]

1 minute ago, Flopplause said:

Thank you, I'm also not saying to people to believe he was or wasn't innocent. I have my own views on it, but I do respect other views on the matter. However I do no respect other's views without digging deeper into this matter other than the Leaving Neverland film.

 I'm just trying to get people to think more critical of a "documentary" that seemingly claims to have receipts, without showing any actual evidence. 

Yeah, it's totally fine to discuss this and to have your opinion, but people should slow down with final judgement, this is just too dangerous. 

[Chromatislaps 34,838]

6 minutes ago, Adakam said:

All of this baffles me, its incredible how many people just swallow Wade's words without even looking at his background.

Thanks to people like him, real victims like me struggle to be believed. (And by the way, real victims want justice, not money)

 

@Admin please feature this comment!

I'm so sorry @Adakam that you struggle to be believed , feel free to talk with me if you want to talk about it