1,863 posts
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Mar 6, 2019 21:57:09 GMT
Having seen the Alistair McGowen Jimmy Saville play at the Park a few years ago, the prevailing public persona, the intimidation aligned with good lawyers can make it extremely difficult to stand up to a powerful abuser.
(One hell of a play, still gives me the shivers when I think about it and Alistairs portrayal was so good that when he stood next to me I felt physicaly repulsed)
There has always been a lot of smoke, the fire is yet to be discovered but would not be surprised if it is found.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 21:59:39 GMT
Am I the only one who is kinda floored by this documentary? I'm sat here, just stunned.
|
|
5,840 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 6, 2019 22:00:49 GMT
No, Daniel, you aren't
It is devastating. I find it impossible not to believe these two young men.
|
|
3,321 posts
|
Post by david on Mar 6, 2019 22:03:15 GMT
Watching it, it just breaks your heart hearing what happened.
|
|
345 posts
|
Post by johartuk on Mar 6, 2019 22:14:26 GMT
Am I the only one who is kinda floored by this documentary? I'm sat here, just stunned. Same here. It's so desperately sad. |
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Mar 6, 2019 22:26:21 GMT
As for the parents letting their children sleep in the same bedroom as an adult male - there are no words!
|
|
5,840 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 6, 2019 22:29:18 GMT
As for the parents letting their children sleep in the same bedroom as an adult male - there are no words! Something posted by a nobody on Twitter is evidence of nothing. Nothing at all. |
|
1,936 posts
|
Post by wickedgrin on Mar 6, 2019 22:33:40 GMT
The fact is that Michael Jackson was found innocent in a court of law in 2005. These two guys swore under oath that no abuse took place. So were they lying then ( under oath in a court of law ) or lying now?
|
|
32 posts
|
Post by amadeus on Mar 6, 2019 22:40:47 GMT
The fact is that Michael Jackson was found innocent in a court of law in 2005. These two guys swore under oath that no abuse took place. So were they lying then ( under oath in a court of law ) or lying now? All of this is explained in Part 2. I suggest you at least listen to what the other side has to say before leaping to his defense... |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 22:42:36 GMT
I think a full judgement is only fair on both sides once we have seen both parts. But I'm floored by this whole documentary thus far. I've just found it so shocking and highly emotional to watch.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Mar 6, 2019 22:45:51 GMT
I’m watching on 4+1 and it’s just.... it’s just weird that a grown man wants to spend so much time with a 10 year old. Most boys of the same age don’t spend that much time together, even best friends.
|
|
5,840 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 6, 2019 22:47:08 GMT
Wickedgrin - have you watched the documentary?
I have watched it all now - and it is compelling and credible. Yes, it is presented for TV - but they come over as sincere and damaged by their experiences.
The 2005 trial was not the only time allegations of inappropriate behaviour had been made.
We will never get to the truth of what went on - historic cases like this rarely do get properly resolved. But we have seen too many times that powerful people have a way of escaping proper scrutiny
The graphic you shared is clearly one put together by someone determined to defend their idol. It is not an objective statement of 'facts'
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 22:53:10 GMT
I've just seen on Twitter, fans have been protesting outside of the Channel 4 Headquarters today over the documentary, many with banners saying "facts don't lie, people do".
... before people have even had the chance to watch this documentary.
|
|
127 posts
|
Post by terrylondon79 on Mar 6, 2019 23:01:20 GMT
The trouble with the way this documentary is presented is its just reminding me of the show Quiz and how easy it is to present facts to fit your agenda.
The music images used etc. Just feels very contrived. I'll wait till I've seen part 2 till i decide what to make of it. Unfortunately I don't believe what the media shows you. The program has been made to make a profit, and manipulate you into believing its agenda. Its probable you could make a equally believable documentary to show the 2 of them as liers.
|
|
5,840 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 6, 2019 23:02:19 GMT
Even if they had watched the documentary, they would just say that it has been manipulated/scripted/edited to show MJ in the worst possible light.
I am always sceptical of claims against celebs - but these two families present a very compelling and credible narrative.
Could it be fake? Possibly. But - to my mind - not probable.
There are still those who defend Jimmy Savile or the US gymnastic coach who was recently convicted. Not every celebrity who is accused of this sort of crime is guilty. But the documentary presents two very powerful stories that need to be heard before anyone dismisses them out of hand.
(and I have seen both parts - this is not just on the basis of the first)
|
|
524 posts
|
Post by callum on Mar 6, 2019 23:02:36 GMT
Listened to an interview with the director where the interviewer posited that the Jackson machine and the MJ Innocent brigade have a massive bot/troll farm operation going on social media, and he didn't deny that it was the case.
The side that undoubtedly has the biggest financial motivation in any of this are the people that want to preserve an $825 million annual income for the Michael Jackson estate. No one was paid for participating in the doc, and hard to imagine that any financial gains that they might get down the line will be worth the criticism/abuse they'll receive - Wade said in the Oprah interview that he gets almost daily death threats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 23:05:31 GMT
As for the parents letting their children sleep in the same bedroom as an adult male - there are no words! But the adult male that wanted to sleep in the same bed as these children was totally understandable and innocent, right? |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Mar 6, 2019 23:31:10 GMT
That’s the thing - the completely verifiable stuff is unhealthy and weird for a grown man to be doing with kids.
|
|
3,040 posts
|
Post by crowblack on Mar 7, 2019 0:01:19 GMT
I had to switch it off, but it was like seeing something on children being raised by awful parents in a fanatical religious cult. I was already fuming about that even before we got on to the sexual abuse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 0:06:56 GMT
I have to agree that whilst the accusations are awful, another feeling I had was one of anger and fustration toward those parents who, in my opinion, were not protecting their children like any parent would and shouls. They continued to practically abandon their children with a stranger or agree to let them even stay in the same bed as a stranger. Famous or not, no matter how close, you don't do that to your own child.
|
|
524 posts
|
Post by callum on Mar 7, 2019 0:12:23 GMT
I have to agree that whilst the accusations are awful, another feeling I had was one of anger and fustration toward those parents who, in my opinion, were not protecting their children like any parent would and shouls. They continued to practically abandon their children with a stranger or agree to let them even stay in the same bed as a stranger. Famous or not, no matter how close, you don't do that to your own child. A lot of Part 2 is dealing with their response - Michael seduced them like he seduced the children. The Safechucks did not need to pick up Michael, he made them feel as if they were responsible for him like they were Jimmy and inserted himself into every part of their lives. Firstly, he wasn't a stranger to them and secondly just by being MICHAEL JACKSON they felt like they knew him. Neverland is literally designed to keep the parents away from the children. The reckoning that the parents have with themselves is just as compelling IMO as the reckoning that the children have. Wade said that even though he didn't meet Michael until he was 7, he felt like he was being groomed from the age of 5 just by idolising him. Fame is completely crucial |
|
5,840 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Mar 7, 2019 0:20:13 GMT
Being made to feel special by probably the biggest star on the planet would be enough to turn any head. The aura that surrounds certain celebrities can be incredible.
Did the parents always act in the best interests of their children? Of course not.
Did they feel a connection to MJ? It certainly seems so.
Enough trust was clearly established for this unusual behaviour to appear to be acceptable - just part of the world of MJ
And MJ was clearly a very damaged human being as well. Not that it excuses him - but it does go some of the way to explain it.
Sadness is mainly what I left with. Sadness for lives blighted by abuse. Sadness for lives blighted by fame. Sadness for everyone involved - even MJ - but not forgiveness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 0:23:30 GMT
Yes, the parents are not blameless, but they were also manipulated. It's not difficult to see psychologically why they allowed this to happen. I mean, you should go watch Abducted In Plain Sight on Netflix if you want a deeper, even more disturbing look into how parents can become manipulated into helping their child to be abused, and that was just a normal man doing it, not the most famous man in the world.
I think it's hard to comprehend what it would feel like to go from normality to being invited to tour with and stay at the home of Michael Jackson at the peak of his career. Powerful people get what they want for a reason. They're hard to say no to. And look at how the world trusted him, even though he was walking off planes holding hands with children that weren't his. No one batted an eye, people barely did even after he had been accused for the first time. He continued to be allowed to have children surrounding him. If the world trusted him, it's not hard to see why someone that knew him and had been personally manipulated to trust him would either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 0:30:53 GMT
Just the most insane story. I obviously knew alot going into this documentary as I have been fascinated with the whole Michael Jackson story for ages, and everyone in the world knows a little about the case at least, but the fact it's still unravelling even now with new allegations and different perspectives. It's so crazy that, should these cases be true, he got away with so much over the years, literally in front of the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 0:46:42 GMT
Because Jackson was so big a brand, someone who many invested in to such a degree that he formed part of his fan’s identities, it becomes more difficult to change opinions. With some nobody, there would be nothing much at stake to let go of. If you grew up idolising, imitating, buying product of someone, however, then letting that go could almost seem like destroying yourself and negating part of who you are. It shouldn’t, of course, but at what point does evidence break that down?
At while ago it seemed like a large percentage of seventies popular entertainment was being exposed - Saville, Stuart Hall, Rolf Harris, sundry disc jockeys and pop stars. Now our eyes are opened, though. Just because they are dead or old, knowing what we now know is as much a lesson that we, the unknowing audience, needed to learn.
|
|
