Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted March 11, 2019 Moderators Share Posted March 11, 2019 16 minutes ago, scratchdj said: However, I'm curious as to why now, if it isn't about money. If it's all genuine, then I can see how the battle is probably easier for them to stomach now given Jackson isn't around to defend himself and as they're also older and more emotionally mature may be more comfortable with coming forward, but I still don't fully know why they'd want to thrown themselves in front of the World rather than getting on with their lives. Justice can't be done, as the supposed perpetrator is dead. So it has to be about money and that's what makes me feel uncomfortable about families coming forward on camera telling this story now. Isn't destroying his legacy and getting everyone else to realise he was a monster some kind of justice or closure enough? As an aim, rather than money... Getting the rest of the world to see him like they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Justice Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 I would imagine the reasoning behind them coming forward now is to make sure everyone is aware of what a disgustingly horrible person MJ was, and as they have said on the documentary, to hopefully give other people the courage to come forward. Not just about MJ, but about anyone who has abused them. As far as the money goes, that's the only option they have now in terms of reparation. Wade Robson can't be short of cash given his career. I can't imagine he wants to come forward now just for money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted March 11, 2019 Author Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 Â 21 minutes ago, scratchdj said: However, I'm curious as to why now, if it isn't about money. Why do people keep asking the question about why they're choosing to talk now? This is another reason why survivors don't come forward, or at the very least take so long to come forward. Their motives will always be questioned. It doesn't seem to occur to so many people that getting to the stage of actually talking about abuse is the biggest step of all. There's no set time limit. They will talk when they can. Some people, unfortunately, never reach that stage. The question of time is NOT IMPORTANT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Teedy Kay Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 3 hours ago, scratchdj said: I've now seen the documentary ... However, I'm curious as to why now, if it isn't about money. If you've seen the documentary you wouldn't need to ask. Wade is because of his child being born and the imagery going round his head. Something he actually spoke about first in 2013. James because Wade came out and was looking to find solace in other survivors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 3 hours ago, Devon Malcolm said: Â Why do people keep asking the question about why they're choosing to talk now? This is another reason why survivors don't come forward, or at the very least take so long to come forward. Their motives will always be questioned. It doesn't seem to occur to so many people that getting to the stage of actually talking about abuse is the biggest step of all. There's no set time limit. They will talk when they can. Some people, unfortunately, never reach that stage. The question of time is NOT IMPORTANT. My question, and apologies if this has been answered, is why did they testify, under oath, of nothing untoward happening? I haven't yet seen the doc, though I have it recorded, and I am not really a Michael Jackson fan, so I am not trying to defend him, I am just genuinely curious. All the other cases we have seen, Weinstein, Spacey, Saville etc have all had people who reported crimes be ignored or covered up. So why now? Why have they now decided to tell the truth after lying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Chris B Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 1 minute ago, Hannibal Scorch said: My question, and apologies if this has been answered, is why did they testify, under oath, of nothing untoward happening? I haven't yet seen the doc, though I have it recorded, and I am not really a Michael Jackson fan, so I am not trying to defend him, I am just genuinely curious. All the other cases we have seen, Weinstein, Spacey, Saville etc have all had people who reported crimes be ignored or covered up. So why now? Why have they now decided to tell the truth after lying? They were groomed kids. It's pretty much brainwashing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 33 minutes ago, Chris B said: They were groomed kids. It's pretty much brainwashing. And there's also the added element of pressure via leveraged gratitude, from all the gifts he lavished on them before this happened - they seemed to feel they couldn't say anything at the time as a result of it. I daresay that, during the court cases where they testified for him, they were probably terrified that they wouldn't be believed, because they'd accepted houses and whatnot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members wandshogun09 Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, Carbomb said: And there's also the added element of pressure via leveraged gratitude, from all the gifts he lavished on them before this happened - they seemed to feel they couldn't say anything at the time as a result of it. Not unlike the Savile case with all the charity work. Seems that type of thing is/was a tactic among the rich and famous nonces to both get close to victims initially and then to make them feel like they can’t say no or that nobody will believe them if they do speak out. Nonces are as manipulative as they are sick and perverted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Devon Malcolm Posted March 11, 2019 Author Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 54 minutes ago, Hannibal Scorch said: My question, and apologies if this has been answered, is why did they testify, under oath, of nothing untoward happening? I haven't yet seen the doc Hope this helps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 (edited) It should also be noted, when asked "why didnt he molest such and such", one of his accusers was defending him a few years back. Just because we dont know he fiddled with a certain person doesnt mean he didnt. If Hulk Hogan invited me around to Clearwater, Florida back in 94 to look at his memorabilia room, it might have taken me until my 40s to go "maybe it wasnt just a shirtless grapple afterall." And he wouldnt have put me over, knowing him. Edited March 11, 2019 by IANdrewDiceClay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Chris B Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 27 minutes ago, Carbomb said: And there's also the added element of pressure via leveraged gratitude, from all the gifts he lavished on them before this happened - they seemed to feel they couldn't say anything at the time as a result of it. I daresay that, during the court cases where they testified for him, they were probably terrified that they wouldn't be believed, because they'd accepted houses and whatnot. Also, one of the kids says he told them that if the FBI found out, they'd BOTH go to jail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Hannibal Scorch Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 Thanks all for the input. That has answered some of my thoughts/questions 38 minutes ago, wandshogun09 said: Not unlike the Savile case with all the charity work. Seems that type of thing is/was a tactic among the rich and famous nonces to both get close to victims initially and then to make them feel like they can’t say no or that nobody will believe them if they do speak out. Nonces are as manipulative as they are sick and perverted. The difference here is many DID go to the police at the time, it was a combination of not beliving and covering up because of his name/power, which protected Saville. I read rumours of the necrophilia years before it came out in Popbitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ColinBollocks Posted March 11, 2019 Paid Members Share Posted March 11, 2019 (edited) I have a nephew that was fiddled with at a very young age. He goes to therapy to help him talk about it, but he finds it impossible to say much. There is no money to be had there, just a kid that lives with a secret he finds so unfathomably confusing and horrid. Every chance he finally comes to terms with it in his 20s/30s, but right now he would rather just bury it, which is a killer to think about. Also, if we're talking about the timing of it, it's maybe no coincidence that the victims felt safe to come forward when their abuser died, but who knows what the trigger is to confront such an experience. As dear wand says, Jackson made sure to deliberately say all manner of things to get the kids to feel they were going to go through a worse hell by saying anything, while also saying this was a tremendous secret and experience for both of them. I doubt many (if any) can pretend to know how such a thing can play out in someone's head. Edited March 11, 2019 by ColinBollocks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted March 11, 2019 Share Posted March 11, 2019 I also think the #metoo moment has made victims believe that there's now a much greater chance of being believed than say 5 years ago, Brett Kavanaugh not withstanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Coconut Posted March 12, 2019 Share Posted March 12, 2019 21 hours ago, johnnyboy said: The Jacksons was probably the last album, at least partially, recorded before he was 18. Blame it on the Boogie and Can You Feel It are iffy by that marker. Turning 18 doesn't make you a nonce either though, does it? I'm sure there are people who are sexually attracted to children who live long lives without ever acting on their urges. They aren't criminals, are they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.