Michael Jackson

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Interesting article. Shows that the people who try to shape public opinion are continually going against public opinion.



Here’s a striking excerpt-

While radio fell 32 percent in the 31 weeks after Finding Neverland, on-demand streaming consumption of MJ’s music has outpaced the rest of the industry.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
This is actually extremely interesting beyond the playful headline...
I don’t know what direction this case will go..but HBO’s “1st amendment’ claim seems like a bit of a stretch, the last judge didn’t go for it.. maybe a higher court will?



 

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member


Understand yet?

Money. That’s what was the goal here, always.
Reading comprehension. Learn how to use it, because you are wildly either misinterpreting the article, or (and this is the likelier scenario because your intentions are often misleading and nefarious) you are attributing motive where you shouldn’t.

Per the AP article, there wasn’t a single mention of any monetary settlement nor what they’re seeking. Literally, the only comment is from their lawyer: “All they’ve ever wanted is their day in court,” which they absolutely should as a further investigation toward the truth seems to be quite necessary.

And even if these two end up losing their lawsuit, it’s important that they still have the opportunity. The new California allows for an extended statute of limitations for sexual abuse involving minors opens the door for the victims to have their say, because a not-insignificant number have been living with these incidences most of their lives.

To boil these down to simply money is a heinous position to take.

You should be absolutely ashamed of the way you’ve conducted yourself in this thread.

It’s one thing to have an opinion on the matter; it’s another thing entirely to engage in such disgusting character assassination not based on fact, but based on what you want to be the truth.

Additionally, I would still like you to answer my two questions from the past several pages. You want to quiz people with an abundance of questions? Debate in good faith, and return the favor when directed your way. It’s only fair.
 
Last edited:

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Reading comprehension. Learn how to use it, because you are wildly either misinterpreting the article, or (and this is the likelier scenario because your intentions are often misleading and nefarious) you are attributing motive where you shouldn’t.

Per the AP article, there wasn’t a single mention of any monetary settlement nor what they’re seeking. Literally, the only comment is from their lawyer: “All they’ve ever wanted is their day in court,” which they absolutely should as a further investigation toward the truth seems to be quite necessary.

And even if these two end up losing their lawsuit, it’s important that they still have the opportunity. The new California allows for an extended statute of limitations for sexual abuse involving minors opens the door for the victims to have their say, because a not-insignificant number have been living with these incidences most of their lives.

To boil these down to simply money is a heinous position to take.

You should be absolutely ashamed of the way you’ve conducted yourself in this thread.

It’s one thing to have an opinion on the matter; it’s another thing entirely to engage in such disgusting character assassination not based on fact, but based on what you want to be the truth.

Additionally, I would still like you to answer my two questions from the past several pages. You want to quiz people with an abundance of questions? Debate in good faith, and return the favor when directed your way. It’s only fair.
🤦‍♀️ I knew I shouldn’t have looked.


To anyone who didn’t pay attention to this story before the “documentary”-

Wade filed a lawsuit against the estate in 2013, for over a billion dollars. Interestingly, this happened during a time when Wade’s career was in shambles, and shortly after being denied the choreographer (or any role) on the Cirque project.

That lawsuit was thrown out.

Then, he revised the suit to then go after 2 of MJ’s companies- claiming they were pedophile rings. He recently compared them to the scandal and coverups within the Catholic Church.

A judge threw that out too. It was under appeal.. then came Leaving Neverland, WHILE the case was still being appealed.


Amazing that people can have such strong opinions without being fully aware of a situation.. changing what has been reported and proven in documents since 2013. lol.

They were definitely clever to do LN, it got a lot more attention than the articles on the lawsuit did... it would definitely help with a jury.

Personally, I don’t think this will make it to a jury trial, again. For all the same reasons within the court documents over the past several years. Added to that, where are all of the other victims of this pedophile ring?? Almost all of the “boys” who are now adults, have come out in defense of MJ, publicly since the lawsuit was filed, and even more since LN came out. Not to mention Wade’s own words and emails and writings all publicly viewable.

Doesn’t sound like much of a “sophisticated pedophile ring“.

Sounds like 2 guys who need money and are willing to lie to get it. It’s been going on for 7 years, it didn’t start with the “documentary”.
 

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
🤦‍♀️ I knew I shouldn’t have looked.


To anyone who didn’t pay attention to this story before the “documentary”-

Wade filed a lawsuit against the estate in 2013, for over a billion dollars. Interestingly, this happened during a time when Wade’s career was in shambles, and shortly after being denied the choreographer (or any role) on the Cirque project.

That lawsuit was thrown out.

Then, he revised the suit to then go after 2 of MJ’s companies- claiming they were pedophile rings. He recently compared them to the scandal and coverups within the Catholic Church.

A judge threw that out too. It was under appeal.. then came Leaving Neverland, WHILE the case was still being appealed.


Amazing that people can have such strong opinions without being fully aware of a situation.. changing what has been reported and proven in documents since 2013. lol.

They were definitely clever to do LN, it got a lot more attention than the articles on the lawsuit did... it would definitely help with a jury.

Personally, I don’t think this will make it to a jury trial, again. For all the same reasons within the court documents over the past several years. Added to that, where are all of the other victims of this pedophile ring?? Almost all of the “boys” who are now adults, have come out in defense of MJ, publicly since the lawsuit was filed, and even more since LN came out. Not to mention Wade’s own words and emails and writings all publicly viewable.

Doesn’t sound like much of a “sophisticated pedophile ring“.

Sounds like 2 guys who need money and are willing to lie to get it. It’s been going on for 7 years, it didn’t start with the “documentary”.
It’s amazing how you spent all this time regurgitating the same garbage you’ve spouted maniacally throughout this thread, typed this long diatribe that you believe to be insightful, and yet somehow still managed to not address a single point within my post.

Do you just respond to things you want to respond to, or do you legitimately have issues comprehending the contents of other peoples’ posts?

Please address the specific points of my posts. I’m not responding to your stump speech.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
It’s amazing how you spent all this time regurgitating the same garbage you’ve spouted maniacally throughout this thread, typed this long diatribe that you believe to be insightful, and yet somehow still managed to not address a single point within my post.

Do you just respond to things you want to respond to, or do you legitimately have issues comprehending the contents of other peoples’ posts?

Please address the specific points of my posts. I’m not responding to your stump speech.

You didn’t realize that this case has been under appeal..that it always had a monetary sum attached to it. And yes, I have said that several times in this thread., and yet you still didn’t understand that the article was related to those cases in appeal status.

Here’s some shocking news-
Michael Jackson is dead.
His estate goes to 20% charity right off the top, with the remainder split between his mother and then his children. When Catherine dies then that money reverts back to the kids.

They can’t sue Michael Jackson, they chose to essentially try to take the money from his children..in the form of millions and millions of dollars. A judge wisely threw the estate case out, for good... so they rerouted to a pedophile ring claim to try to get the money, from the same place, even though there is ZERO evidence or even any likeliness of such a thing at this point. No one else has joined in. A “ring” isn’t 2 alleged victims.
This is their claim, it’s not criminal court.. it’s civil, for money. FYI, Wade had filed a creditors claim against the estate, originally under seal, for money. Hope that’s not too confusing to understand. At no point has this ever been a criminal trial.

Use common sense.
 
Last edited:

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
You didn’t realize that this case has been under appeal..that it always had a monetary sum attached to it. And yes, I have said that several times in this thread., and yet you still didn’t understand that the article was related to those cases in appeal status.

Here’s some shocking news-
Michael Jackson is dead.
His estate goes to 20% charity right off the top, with the remainder split between his mother and then his children. When Catherine dies then that money reverts back to the kids.

They can’t sue Michael Jackson, they chose to essentially try to take the money from his children..in the form of millions and millions of dollars. A judge wisely threw the estate case out, for good... so they rerouted to a pedophile ring claim to try to get the money, from the same place, even though there is ZERO evidence or even any likeliness of such a thing at this point. No one else has joined in. A “ring” isn’t 2 alleged victims.
This is their claim, it’s not criminal court.. it’s civil, for money. FYI, Wade had filed a creditors claim against the estate, originally under seal, for money. Hope that’s not too confusing to understand. At no point has this ever been a criminal trial.

Use common sense.
I never once said this was a criminal case. Don’t assume things.

You still missed my primary point, to the surprise of no one. I said your viewpoint that they’re only suing because they want to get rich is an abhorrent view.

And, by the your own reasoning, anybody who ever sues someone in civil court is strictly doing to to make bank, right? You realize how utterly asinine that is, right? Believe it or not, and with you, I know its the latter, a monetary penalty and recognition of wrongdoing can both be achieved.

Lastly, you are also accusing Woodson and Safechuck of trying to steal from the Jackson kids? That is such sensationalized, misleading word garbage that you should work for a tabloid. By that logic, when Jordan Chandler and his family began accusing Jackson of sexual abuse, were they just trying to steal $130,000 from the Jackson kids?

Use common sense, if at all possible.
 
Last edited:

21stamps

Well-Known Member
I never once said this was a criminal case. Don’t assume things.

You still missed my primary point, to the surprise of no one. I said your viewpoint that they’re only suing because they want to get rich is an abhorrent view.

And, by the your own reasoning, anybody who ever uses someone in civil court is strictly doing to to make bank, right? You realize how utterly asinine that is, right? Believe it or not, and with you, I know its the matter, a monetary penalty and recognition of wrongdoing can both be achieved.

Lastly, you are also accusing Woodson and Safechuck of trying to steal from the Jackson kids? That is such sensationalized, misleading word garbage that you should work for a tabloid. By that logic, when Jordan Chandler and his family began accusing Jackson of sexual abuse, were they just trying to steal $130,000 from the Jackson kids?

Use common sense, if at all possible.
Michael Jackson is dead. He was sued by the Chandlers, they did not sue his estate. You don’t understand the difference here, and you don’t understand a word I said in that last post.

I can’t speak to someone who isn’t reading. Back to ignore, sorry. I tried.
Good luck.
 
Last edited:

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
Michael Jackson is dead. He was sued by the Chandlers, they did not sue his estate. You don’t understand the difference here, and you don’t understand a word I said in that last post.

I can’t speak to someone who isn’t reading. Back to ignore, sorry. I tried.
Good luck.
His earnings becomes his estate’s money after he bites the dust. This ain’t a difficult concept, for most of us at least.

If you can’t hold your own on a point-by-point discussion, then get the hell out of the way of real discussion. That would be the benefit for all of us.
 
Last edited:

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member

Expect a movie that pulls its punches, if at all. With the estate involved, they’ll definitely play revisionist history with this.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
Oopsie!

Happy Friday, Stamps!

I posted about this a month ago. 🙄

For the people who knew about the case prior to the movie, we knew the appeal was in works, and was the entire reason for the movie. I’m looking forward to reading the transcripts of this one.. maybe the media can actually start accurately reporting about the proceedings. One can hope.

Meanwhile.. tickets for MJ the musical go on sale this month. I. Can’t. Wait!!!
 

Tony Perkis

Well-Known Member
I posted about this a month ago. 🙄

For the people who knew about the case prior to the movie, we knew the appeal was in works, and was the entire reason for the movie. I’m looking forward to reading the transcripts of this one.. maybe the media can actually start accurately reporting about the proceedings. One can hope.

Meanwhile.. tickets for MJ the musical go on sale this month. I. Can’t. Wait!!!
You didn’t. The article is dated 1/3/2020. Don’t lie, again and consistently.

“In a ruling on Friday, a three-judge panel of California’s 2nd Appellate District reversed two rulings dismissing their lawsuits against Jackson’s companies, MJJ Productions and MJJ Ventures Inc.”
 
Top Bottom