HBO Michael Jackson doc 'Leaving Neverland'

[suchafraud23]

Don’t know if mike did anything sexual with the kids

But I don’t know why everything else he did is somehow acceptable behavior with children. Or just swept under the rug as normal.

 

[tay1]

After watching, this doesn't change nothing for me. Documentaries like this are just so one sided. That combined with Safechuck and Robson not being the most credible individuals. Either way, MJ is a weirdo regardless.

Who's the next doc gonna be on? Rick James, James Brown, Eddie Murphy?

 

[DCAllAfrican]

After watching, this doesn't change nothing for me. Documentaries like this are just so one sided. That combined with Safechuck and Robson not being the most credible individuals. Either way, MJ is a weirdo regardless.

Who's the next doc gonna be on? Rick James, James Brown, Eddie Murphy?

Unfortunately, this is where we are going with these companies seeing the success of RK and MJ "expose" docs.

 

[tay1]

Unfortunately, this is where we are going with these companies seeing the success of RK and MJ "expose" docs.

They will eventually lose their appeal in my opinion. They rarely present both sides . Only recent time I recall in which that has been the case is the dude in the Fyre Festival documentary. With that, it's just gonna create skepticism until people are no longer interested in them

 

[peteweezy]

Don’t know if mike did anything sexual with the kids

But I don’t know why everything else he did is somehow acceptable behavior with children. Or just swept under the rug as normal.

Where are all the people that said this was normal acceptable behavior with children or swept it under the rug? People doing like they do in most cases with stuff that isn't close to them. Saying that's not cool and that's about it.

 

[Mark Antony]

Bruh I really can't with the endless bad faith arguments on NT anymore.

 

[harlemtothebronx]

Bruh I really can't with the endless bad faith arguments on NT anymore.

It’s not just here...feels like it’s everywhere.

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Sums up this situation

Whether true or false

 

[getback]

Feldman is speaking the obvious truth along with PAGES of court documents. Mike was with thousands of kids, only 2 kids made “claims” and not only did they go back and forth on them, their parents didn’t want Mike in jail but wanted money and a record deal instead. How did Mike touch kids and kept all of them on code? Why y’all think a roller coaster and a petting zoo is keeping a kid from saying Michael Jackson touched their bum?? The world didn’t deserve Mike man. Y’all go listen to Prince or something.

Taking Corey Feldman's word as gospel of all people

The same dude who's a known dope fiend and was just accused of sexual battery a year ago.

 

[plansb]

what ever happened to due process?

 

[rillo561]

Taking Corey Feldman's word as gospel of all people

The same dude who's a known dope fiend and was just accused of sexual battery a year ago.

Not only that, he doesn't fit the MO.

 

[RIP sleazyy]

Taking Corey Feldman's word as gospel of all people

The same dude who's a known dope fiend and was just accused of sexual battery a year ago.

Would you believe him if he said he did touch him?

 

[harlemtothebronx]

 

[getback]

Would you believe him if he said he did touch him?

It's less about him denying what Mike did to him personally than it is about him denying what Mike did to OTHERS.

 

[RIP sleazyy]

It's less about him denying what Mike did to him personally than it is about him denying what Mike did to OTHERS.

Yeah but that's not what I asked you

 

[getback]

Yeah but that's not what I asked you

I don't know how it's relevant though. He came out and spoke against the allegations of the accusers. Something he really wouldn't know anything about unless he was present every time the accusers were present.

If he said he wasn't touched, I'd want some combination of hearing it from his mouth and/or some evidence so I could give an opinion the same way I did in the case of Wade and Jimmy.

A well known friend of the accused who has is own issues isn't exactly a compelling witness though.

 

[RIP sleazyy]

I don't know how it's relevant though. He came out and spoke against the allegations of the accusers. Something he really wouldn't know anything about unless he was present every time the accusers were present.

If he said he wasn't touched, I'd want some combination of hearing it from his mouth and/or some evidence so I could give an opinion the same way I did in the case of Wade and Jimmy.

A well known friend of the accused who has is own issues isn't exactly a compelling witness though.

It's relevant because you're using his history to cast doubt on his statement. That's why I asked if you'd believe it the other way around.

 

[babyface34]

A well known friend of the accused who has is own issues isn't exactly a compelling witness though.

That same energy should be applied for the two subjects (one being the lead witness in his trial) of this movie then lol.

 

[getback]

It's relevant because you're using his history to cast doubt on his statement. That's why I asked if you'd believe it the other way around.

A combination of his history with Mike, him being an addict and predator himself and him explicitly saying Mike hadn't molested kids when it would have been impossible for him to know one way or another.

 

[getback]

That same energy should be applied for the two subjects (one being the lead witness in his trial) of this movie then lol.

Hence why I said I'd want to hear it from Feldman's mouth the same way I heard it from Wade's and Jimmy's

I didn't have much of an opinion until I saw this doc and heard it from the horse's mouth.

 

[babyface34]

Hence why I said I'd want to hear it from Feldman's mouth the same way I heard it from Wade's and Jimmy's

I didn't have much of an opinion until I saw this doc and heard it from the horse's mouth.

What evidence must he provide for something that didn't happen to him? He believes nothing happened to the others, but he also stated that he wasn't there and can't speak for them. He's always denied it. The other 2 have clearly lied at one point or another. It solely depends on which horse's mouth you choose to believe.

 

[jape]

I wouldn’t believe the horse that slept with little boys in his bed

 

[RIP sleazyy]

A combination of his history with Mike, him being an addict and predator himself and him explicitly saying Mike hadn't molested kids when it would have been impossible for him to know one way or another.

All right and what I'm saying is, knowing that.... If he said Mike molested him would you dismiss it because he has a history of drug use?

Just asking cuz I've seen that line of thinking used to dismiss victims and here it was used to dismiss someone speaking in favor of the accused.

I'm still 50/50 on the accusations lol

 

[babyface34]

I wouldn’t believe the horse that slept with little boys in his bed

Until you can prove that it equates to sexual abuse, you have no horse in this race.

 

[getback]

He believes nothing happened to the others, but he also stated that he wasn't there and can't speak for them. He's always denied it.

Which is the main reason I'd take his testimony with a grain of salt. You can't be a witness if you weren't there.

He can speak on Mike's character or whatever.