Brandi Jackson spills tea on ex Wade Robson

[Gimme More 35,393]

Just now, BLACKOUTbritney said:

 

But by you’re own logic then we shouldn't believe Brandi either because people also tend to lie about pedophilia to cover it up. It goes both ways 

i get where you are coming from, but people need to look into these two men further before going on a warpath against Michael. i'm not even a big fan of his, but to me i believe he is innocent.

[Gimme More 35,393]

Just now, Runway said:

it's an hyperbole. Still the victim blaming has allowed Pedos to walk free and keep molesting women, and underage boys and girls

lets hope that you don't get accused of something you didn't do, because according to your logic you'd be put into jail 

[Runway 27,876]

2 minutes ago, Gimme More said:

every case is different, it is clear if you actually looked at both sides that these two men are liars and are only in it for the money.

please don't waste my time or yours by replying to me  because you have nothing worth saying if you cannot even bother to be fair and look at both sides. i'm not here for biased people who are too lazy to look into things further before blindly supporting two frauds. I admit when this came out i was wary but i've looked into it and i 100% believe that these two men are lying.

I didn't even call your God Jackson a pedo so you getting triggered is not my problem. I said to believe survivors

[geusst1235 5,398]

Just now, Runway said:

it's an hyperbole. Still the victim blaming has allowed Pedos to walk free and keep molesting women, and underage boys and girls

Sure,but the opposite can be said as well.There have been innocent men or women that have been falsely accused and have been absolutely torn to shreds because of it.

[Runway 27,876]

Just now, Gimme More said:

lets hope that you don't get accused of something you didn't do, because according to your logic you'd be put into jail 

I don't sleep with toddlers so  no I will not get accused of pedophilia at the very least

[Gimme More 35,393]

3 minutes ago, Runway said:

I didn't even call your God Jackson a pedo so you getting triggered is not my problem. I said to believe survivors

i have stated i am not a big fan of MJ, you seem pretty triggered by your responses and quite immature as you are unwilling to even consider the other side of the story  btw they are 'alleged' victims, nothing confirmed and they are people who testified under oath in his favour.

i kindly ask you do not bother responding to me unless you actually listen to the other side of the story. I respect that you have an opposing opinion, but i personally would want to know my view was correct on a situation as serious as this by looking at both sides, unfortunately you're unwilling to do so.

unless you have anything worth responding to, i'm finished even trying to have a discussion with you 

[Runway 27,876]

4 minutes ago, HangWang said:

Sure,but the opposite can be said as well.There have been innocent men or women that have been falsely accused and have been absolutely torn to shreds because of it.

rape can't be proven because victims take way too long to come forward (if they ever do) thanks to trauma caused by their abusers. That's why we need to believe survivors

I don't even ask for jail time for innocent people. All we need to do is believe the victims, thats the least we can do after their rapist will most likely end up free

[Runway 27,876]

1 minute ago, Gimme More said:

i have stated i am not a big fan of MJ, you seem pretty triggered by your responses and quite immature as you are unwilling to even consider the other side of the story  btw they are 'alleged' victims, nothing confirmed and they are people who testified under oath in his favour.

i kindly ask you do not bother responding to me unless you actually listen to the other side of the story. I respect that you have an opposing opinion, but i personally would want to know my view was correct on a situation as serious as this by looking at both sides, unfortunately you're unwilling to do so.

unless you have anything worth responding to, i'm finished even trying to have a discussion with you 

so? Wade Robson sleeping with underage women does not erase what might or might not have happened to him in his childhood  go make a wade documentary if youre so bothered

[SEANGT 5,311]

y'all acting like you're so educated on the accusations because you looked into both sides, and yet the only thing ever posted is a soundcloud interview from an account called "Free Speech Broadcasting," some website with the name "michael jackson truths dot com," or dozens of conspiracy theory youtube channel videos. 

I've read summaries in reputable publications that talk about how safechuck's and robson's stories have changed and they went to the funeral and participated in tributes. But that's not a secret. They go over it in the documentary. It's not the silver bullet you think it is when you're dealing with child sex abuse. 

Meanwhile, vanity fair published this piece with just some of the gross facts on the case that are more than enough for me:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/03/10-undeniable-facts-about-the-michael-jackson-sexual-abuse-allegations

And you all choose to ignore that it's not normal, even for a disconnected superstar with his own child abuse, to behave the way michael did. The "cycle of abuse" story is a myth. No man should sleep in the same bed with a bunch of different young boys. https://www.vox.com/first-person/2019/3/8/18255956/r-kelly-michael-jackson-leaving-neverland-cycle-of-abuse

 

[geusst1235 5,398]

1 minute ago, Runway said:

rape can't be proven because victims take way too long to come forward (if they ever do) thanks to trauma caused by their abusers. That's why we need to believe survivors

I don't even ask for jail time for innocent people. All we need to do is believe the victims, thats the least we can do after their rapist will most likely end up free

Understandable but for the people that are innocent,their lives get absolutely ruined.Its not just believing the survivors,it CAN (not saying it always does) turn into a witch hunt for the people that are innocent.Also sorry but with the two accusers in this documentary,there isnt much helping their credibility.Timelines are basically almost 100% off,facts have been made up (like wade saying that seeing MJ get drunk at a dinner convinced him to testify in the 2005 trial,yet he testified before dinner even happened),etc.Most people aren't believing Wade and Safechuck because of the wild inconsistencies,not because they are fans of MJ.I also don't think that people should just be deciding that he is innocent because he is MJ either as that isn't looking at both sides as well.

[geusst1235 5,398]

50 minutes ago, SEANGT said:

y'all acting like you're so educated on the accusations because you looked into both sides, and yet the only thing ever posted is a soundcloud interview from an account called "Free Speech Broadcasting," some website with the name "michael jackson truths dot com," or dozens of conspiracy theory youtube channel videos. 

I've read summaries in reputable publications that talk about how safechuck's and robson's stories have changed and they went to the funeral and participated in tributes. But that's not a secret. They go over it in the documentary. It's not the silver bullet you think it is when you're dealing with child sex abuse. 

Meanwhile, vanity fair published this piece with just some of the gross facts on the case that are more than enough for me:

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/03/10-undeniable-facts-about-the-michael-jackson-sexual-abuse-allegations

And you all choose to ignore that it's not normal, even for a disconnected superstar with his own child abuse, to behave the way michael did. The "cycle of abuse" story is a myth. No man should sleep in the same bed with a bunch of different young boys. https://www.vox.com/first-person/2019/3/8/18255956/r-kelly-michael-jackson-leaving-neverland-cycle-of-abuse

 

1. Uh no he didn't get the description right,he said Michael was circumcised when in fact the actual autopsy reveals otherwise.If it matched,he literally would've been arrested.

2.The alarm was known to employees and other people that visited 

3.Ah yes the sexual closet he casually took photoshoots in and was not hidden at all

4.His semen was never found on any magazines. 

 

5. He also never actually had ANY type of child erotica or ****. 

https://themichaeljacksonallegations.com/2019/03/05/was-jacksons-semen-found-on-his-nudist-magazines/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/23/authorities-rebut-claims-child-****-found-michael-/

6. Fingerprints from the accusers were never found on the magazines.Tom Sneddon was being a dumbass 

7."Neverland employees (maids etc) did not witness abuse. These were employees, part of the Neverland five who were fired by MJ for stealing, who then sold tabloids using fake abuse stories, and who admitted they lied about them/made them up, under oath." Again people out looking for money.

8.Jackson’s insurance agency footed the bill. It was an unanimous decision by Jackson’s legal council and Jackson was pressured to resolve the case by his music label, Sony Music.He was forced to settle because he would've been fighting a civil AND criminal case when Sony wanted him to tour and continue focusing on music.

[Married the Night 3,955]

She’s RELATED to the Jacksons and she is estranged from her ex. Of course she would dispute his claims. 

[SEANGT 5,311]

28 minutes ago, HangWang said:

1.

okay.....the michael jacson allegations dot com and twitter...good sources. You have one washington times article. Looked back at the VF article....they never said he had child ****. So the articles are not contradictory. This is stupid I'm out. 

[geusst1235 5,398]

5 minutes ago, SEANGT said:

okay.....the michael jacson allegations dot com and twitter...good sources. You have one washington times article. Looked back at the VF article....they never said he had child ****. So the articles are not contradictory. This is stupid I'm out. 

Would you like me to show you the actual court transcripts,autopsy,etc,then because I quite literally can.Actually provide good,ACCURATE,sources yourself as well.

[Guest]

2 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."

 

Finally someone doing their research and not being a sheep following the media's narrative...