To be honest, after watching this, the rebuttals, and the rebuttals to the rebuttals...

To be honest, after watching this, the rebuttals, and the rebuttals to the rebuttals, I gotta say that I'm unsure how to feel about both this film and the accusations in it. So what do you guys think?

Attached: Leaving Neverland.jpg (446x299, 66K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=9yTTEwBLfUQ&t=78s
digitalmusicnews.com/2016/06/21/items-discovered-police-michael-jackson/
m.youtube.com/watch?v=9_1tGqn4jXc
youtube.com/watch?v=r9lRN_f9bNw
m.youtube.com/watch?v=6p8CgdRLnDQ
twitter.com/AnonBabble

i know this is a shill and i wish sages still worked, but if you base all your judgement on something because of one (1) documentary without any further research, you are of a double digit IQ level.

I think he did it. Way too much circumstantial evidence.

>without any further research
I did do further research into the claim. That's why I still haven't come to a conclusion.

Why don't you tell me what you think?

How would the kid know the exact marks on his cock if he didn't whip it out for him?

Read past the first 6 words of his post before talking about double digit IQs

Kid said he was circumcised too but Shlomo never got that MJ foreskin.

it's a shill. Yea Forums is full of them now. imagine thinking Yea Forums is still some cool anonymous club. Yea Forums is a medium companies use to spread their shit. That's why I'm mad. Half the threads on here are practically advertisements.

Why was this never submitted into evidence, then?

Wade Robson is probably full of shit. He's even more suspicious than the past 2 accusers.

I don't know anything about Safechuck though

Individual evidence when you read about it is very damning, but as I've since analyzed the court cases themselves, they put Jackson in a more favourable light. Even things we found out about after his death calls some of the decades-old evidence into question (and indeed, it must've been questionable to begin with, as the courts found them questionable).

I'm not entirely sure what to think.

And walked out of court not guilty. Ya seething lil guy?

>Razorfist

Half the shit in this rebuttal is him giving an opinion on certain events. And considering he's a contrarian faggot who only lives to rustle the jimmies of SJWs, I wouldn't consider any of his opinions worth a damn.

he couldve just paid the fbi off

i mean if you want to defend the guy that sleeps with little kids go right ahead

What persuades you though?

I'm looking at a guy who defended michael jackson as an adult when he didn't have to. MJ and his defense attorney selected him as a star defense witness. He's a chad that's banged celebrities and stole britney spears from justin timberlake in her prime. His sexual development wasn't warped at all. And everything changed after he got turned down for a michael jackson production.

Leaving Neverland is 4 hours of two lads telling stories with zero (0) evidence.

I mean if you want to #listenandbelieve go right ahead user.

So the evidence is right there in your face, but the guy with a legal team that was likely worth more than a small country, had a legal defense that planted a seed of doubt in your mind.

This is why intelligence tests should be required for juries.

i mean there's no question that he slept in beds with kids, you can believe that nothing sexual happened if you'd like. but he did share his bed with kids

Two lads who were actually close to Michael and were confirmed to have been alone with him in various stages of their lives. Situations that we're corroborated by family members.

But some pasty metalhead faggot on YouTube skimmed a bunch of articles about the accusers, so he is obviously more credible.

>if you spend time with someone you would never lie about them
Leave the basement lad.

Is it possible that Michael Jackson was both a good person and licked shota buttholes?

>the highly-politicized, corrupt govt alphabet agencies didn't find a smoking gun
>it means he's innocent
Dude was a pedophile ghoul and as much as you want pedo-acceptance to be a thing, it wont ever be. Furthermore, the Jackson estate -will- eventually lose the rights to his songs (which is what all of this is ultimately about anyway - the two arent mutually exclusive). Black people can't keep anything, especially not across generations. This is all just to reduce the value so Heeby Baumstein can swoop in at a later date. It's Jackson's fault for being majorly weird instead of a little weird and a little gay like Oprah, and then surrounding himelf with Jews to ward away the other Jews. Blacks are generally too dumb, though. And this is what happens.

Who knows and honestly who cares at this point? The man is dead.

Wow moved on from hating women to hating little boys too, when is this slippery slope going to stop.

The people he molested are still children alive.

I always thought the treatment of Jackson after his death was so weird. Basically it went from everyone thought he was a pedophile weirdo to endless worship overnight. Same with how everyone pretended that they still cared about Robin Williams after he died.

Based on how he treated the boys he's not a good person at all. Even if he didn't fuck them he made them distance themselves from their parents and tried to break up the family unit. It's always children of divorce that get targeted by pedos because the parents are too self involved to notice.

>hbo documentary with no evidence beats fbi case
lol

Then they should’ve spoken up when he was still alive.

And you're the reason why retards shouldn't run their mouths when they don't know what they're talking about. There are gradients of evidence, and most of it is hearsay. There are some scraps of evidence that are more credible, but said evidence means nothing when a civil court decides not to even indict a man based upon that evidence, let alone convict him. A court's decision to not find evidence substantial has nothing to do with Michael's legal team or how wealthy he is (unless, of course, you believe he paid off an entire court, but I'm not gonna speculate on what's impossible to verifiably prove).

I'm chiefly talking about the 1993 case, which many consider to be the best case in terms of evidence (and indeed, it does have some that's alarming) against Jackson. However, Jordie Chandler and his obviously coaching father lied so fucking much that they completely undermined their own case, to the point that Chandler didn't even show up when subpoenaed for further cases against Jackson, instead choosing to flee the country.

Again, you can speculate on this as much as you want, but from a purely legal perspective, this costs the accusers a testimony. If the evidence is mostly garbage, the court is gonna recognize that and they did, so get over it.

>i dont know the difference between guilt in a court of law and actually being innocent
here's a tip: the government can never and will never find you "innocent". Everyone knows Jackson was a pedo, R. Kelly abused jailbait, and OJ killed his white wife. Everyone knows it. Doesn't matter what the FBI found or didn't find. I suppose you think MLK was a real wife abusing, bigamist, hypocrite because the FBI had him on tape doing all sorts of nasty shit, huh?

>rebuttals to the rebuttals
Source?

why cant you Hillary voters just fucking die?

Why are you always looking for something to witch hunt?

The feds tried to pin him on pedophilia but couldn't do it after thousands of hours. I trust ambitious investigators hoping to pop the King of Pop then 2 guys who got their cases thrown out by judges, applied to Jackson related jobs, and are clearly in it for the money.

Is this list of items recovered from Neverland legit or just more tabloid bullshit?

digitalmusicnews.com/2016/06/21/items-discovered-police-michael-jackson/

>doesn't know what innocent until proven guilty means
lol

>doesn't know what "presumption of innocence" in the legal sense means
>thinks it means you're actually innocent
i see your >lol and raise you a cringe

You're putting words in my mouth.

Kinda like how MJ put his dick in those little kids mouth

The Leaving Neverland nontroversy is all smoke and mirrors to distract us from Macaulay and his daughterwife.

Attached: rs_421x749-170730095021-634-macaulay-culkin-paris-jackson-tattoos-2-072917.jpg (421x749, 31K)

Jackson settled out of court for that case because his lawyers knew he was in deep shit. He wasn't indicted or convicted because his legal team made sure that this case never went to trial.

>But his settlement said he claimed no wrongdoing or liability

Yeah, no shit, he had the money to write a check to the victims and put "not-guilty" in the memo line.

>factual innocence!
lol

This is how I can tell you don't know what you are talking about Netflix employee #7611.

>Yeah, no shit, he had the money to write a check to the victims and put "not-guilty" in the memo line.
Fun story: I was an associate at a law firm working on a case. We came to a settlement agreement, and the other party agreed to mail a check to my client. I got a call at 1 A.M. telling me that there was trouble. The problem? The guy wrote "Gay blowjobs" on the memo line.
I spent 30 minutes trying to convince my client to deposit the check before throwing up my hands and saying I'd do it for him. The person at the bank didn't even fucking blink.

>he totally did it u guize somebody said it!
#metoo
#listenandbelieve
#believeallvictims

Michael Jackson will always have a seedy reputation no matter what. He is will forever be known as a mentally unwell self hating man child.

Even if I was a Netflix employee, the documentary was produced by HBO.

You didn't even watch the movie and you're still defending the guy.

>he didn't do it! He only slept in their beds, locked his doors with them alone, gave them wedding rings, and looked at "artful" child porn. But he never did anything wrong because he made Thriller!!
Get bent, faggot.

It had absymal ratings on HBO and is being shilled relentlessly and very fucking obviously by Netflix. I did watch it. 4 hours of drone shots sad music and stories. Zero (0) evidence. Ask me how I know you don't know what you are talking about

>it happened because someone who stands to make 1.5 billion said it did
lmfao #metoo

What does Netflix have to do with this? They have no stake in this doc.

You're just grasping at straws because your precious vitiligo pop star was a fucking pedophile.

Smoking the biggest loud in the last 30 years of the 20th century, idk what people are on about getting their faces melted and thinking they can pick em back up.

You seem invested in this user. Almost as if you were being paid. Ask me how I know you don't know what you are talking about.
Protip: you outed yourself here

>common sense
chuckle

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 40K)

>keeping the public talking about a controversial documentary only available on netflix doesn't benefit netflix
u retarded m8? look how fast they pushed out a maddie mccann documentary to capitalize on this

>literally advocating for guilty until proven innocent
this user raped me and i want him to pay me 1.5 billion in damages

I think that if I knew any man who held hands with children that weren't his own kids and repeatedly slept in bed with these children I would make the safe assumption that he's a kidfucker.

>it didn't happen because someone who stands to lose 1.5 billion said it didn't
Ayyyyyy

Yeah, I'm invested in arguing with dipshits who refuse to see the forest for the trees.

Protip: Repeating "ask me how I know you don't know what you are talking about" without actually providing a counter argument makes you sound retarded.

Ok, but the MJ doc is not on Netflix and likely never will be you stupid faggot.

Making a posthumous hit-piece, when no convictions were ever given, is literally unamerican. MJ is, in the eyes of the law and everything that matters, is innocent. And now that he is dead he will always be and always will have been innocent.

Am I the only one who doesn't give a fuck?

You claimed MJ was never tried on the 93 charges. He was. So you've outed yourself as knowing less than nothing on the case.

>mj doc is not on netflix
lmfao

I haven't heard a single rebuttal that changed my mind from thinking hes guilty.

The rebuttal that Robson is a "known liar" now invalidates the acquittal Michael received, which Robson was newrly solely responsible for as the star witness.

The indicators here, kissing/holding hands with boys, openly sleeping with boys, it's no doubt he was a pedophile.

The fact that after the 1993 accusations, he continued sleeping unsupervised with boys in his bed, for 30 days in some cases, if it was a mistaken misunderstood thing any sane man not a pedophile would avoid kids at that point, but Michael still pursued them.

The fact that he paid $25 million to Jordy Chandler to me, proves he is guilty. No one is giving qway $25 million dollars based on rumors.

7 boys have now come out, thats just too many for me to even consider he was innocent.

And truly, if he was about "friendship" why only cute boys? Why only boys period? Why did he dump them after they got too old?

100% guilty in my mind. And even if Wade is lying, I dont think James Safechuck is. Hes so clearly damaged by his experiences with Michael it, even years later as a married man with children, he has a secret love and allegiance. Its undeniable.

Its so sick to me someone would use their fame, mystique, money, influence and find these kids who adore him, shower them with gifts and trips, get them vulnerable and then abuse them.

To me the final indicator in my research is this.

Latoya.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=9_1tGqn4jXc

"My mother was outraged he was sending checks to the parents of little boys that would sleep over. This was in 84, mind you"

Latoya gave so many redpills in this interview alone. Since 1984. 9 years before the initial allegation.

Latoya was the first to speak about her fathers abuse too, which ended up being confirmed by her sisters.

The entire family has known and covered it up since the early 80's.

Still today they live off the estate and cover it up. It's insane to me.

Attached: leaving-neverland.jpg (780x439, 44K)

Jacko immediately turning in to sweaty pepe when that mexican kid said "if you'd love me you'd sleep in my bed" is all the evidence I needed to make my decision.

Attached: Screenshot_20190316-215008.png (2560x1440, 1.75M)

>My mind
>To me
>In my mind

Literally your headcanon. Who cares what you think? He is innocent in the legal and literal sense of the word.

Not to mention Jimmy Safechuck admitted MJ kissed him on the lips EVEN WHEN HE WAS STILL DEFENDING HIM.

take him to court. anyone can try to sue for anything. you know that, right?

I don't think you can sue someone for murder or rape, those are criminal offenses.

Being found "not guilty" due to statute of limitations is not innocent. His innocence is unprovable.

Wrongful death is a tort.
And you can civilly sue someone for rape.

Let's see what Norm MacDonald has to say

youtube.com/watch?v=r9lRN_f9bNw

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-03-17 at 12.52.19 AM.png (695x487, 381K)

/thread

he was guilty

>He is innocent in the legal and literal sense
there is no such thing as "legal innocence" in the factual, "literal" sense unless by "literal" you mean the way that word is used on the internet to mean putting emphasis on a mere assertion of your feelings.

Attached: PrincessBride_Mandy-Patinkin-Inigo-Montoya.jpg (1200x653, 117K)

>there is no such thing as "legal innocence"
There is in some states, you can make a motion to be found innocent of a charge, but the burden of proof is extremely high and they're very rare. MJ didn't make such a motion after he was acquitted and if he had it would have been denied.

He wasn't tried. The civil case occurred at the time of the criminal investigation. MJ and his lawyers settled before the investigation even finished and as a result Chandler's dad got his hush money so they had no reason to cooperate with investigators at that point.

Look, both parties can be guilty. Jackson molested Chandler and Chandler's dad used that as a means to an end.

It literally isn't

this nigga is guilty af

Undisputable facts:

>Michael told Martin Bashir he'd never had any plastic surgery and that all of hia surrogate children who are white came from black parents.
Michael was a liar

>Michael paid off parents to sleep unattended with 7 year old boys
Michael was a pedophile

>6 out of 8 of Michael's top 8 hits were written by different artists for him
Michael was a fraud

>Michael paid $25 million for a single accuser as hush money
It's on the record. He was guilty.

He was acquitted because he had the most expensive lawyer in history Johnny Cochran who also got OJ acquitted.

But Michael was guilty, a liar, a fraud and a pedophile.

More undisputable facts:

>He's dead.
He rots in a hole where he belongs.

/thread

Attached: cropped_MI_Michael_Jackson_Getty.jpg (640x400, 46K)

I really wish Yea Forums was a thing back in the 90's just to see you faggots defend O.J. when he was aquitted.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=6p8CgdRLnDQ

>Didn't y'all notice I only slept with little cute boys
I've never seen this explained even by MJ's most deluded defenders. Not to mention he always, without fail, dropped their asses when they hit puberty.

>Someone calls out the Jew
>They get smeared with bogus allegations
>Die
>People start noticing that you once called out the Jew and were smeared for it
>Suddenly two Jews wait a decade after you die to accuse you of molesting them
>You can't slander or libel the dead and dead people can't defend themselves
>When all is said and done, it turns out it's all just pure coincidence

Based

Michael's sexuality seems to be on a 10 year old boys level.

I'm not generally suspicious, but that's a lot of semantics. Could you post a nose pic with timestamp? Just to ease my curiosity.

dems da rules! byeeeee

Been on the fence for a while but I believe he's guilty based on the circumstantial evidence. Any physical evidence is long gone so that makes it hard to give a definite answer, but apply any of the circumstantial evidence to a random guy who isn't the most famous and beloved entertainer ever with a billion dollars and it's pretty hard to deny he was at the least attracted to kids.

The alleged victims don't hold much credibility with me. MJ has been tried before and investigated extensively, but nothing came up.

I really don't care either way, because MJ being a child rapist won't stop me from listening to Off The Wall or Thriller. I'm just not convinced by a one-sided documentary.

So are you taking the side of degenerate homosexual pedophile nigger or the juden who set the landscape for such filth to come into being in the first place?

would that not be the same as the Court affirming a -presumption- of innocence? I'd like to read the wording on that. Would need some lawfag to weigh in on the concept that a court could find a person Innocent. I aint one, but it sound specious.