Can we ban this fakkit for life? I’m sick of seeing him spew shyt on here.
50 Cent to Paris Jackson: "does anyone care about how the little boys butts feel?
- Thread starter Carlton Banks
- Start date
Can we ban this fakkit for life? I’m sick of seeing him spew shyt on here.
Only there were no investigations/raids that took place "five years later" though. They were all swift.
They have used tapes (Kellz), confessions (Cos), child porn found (Jared), etc. If you watched Untouchable (Weinstein) you'd see the crazy non disclosure he made a woman who worked for him (and quit) sign (she knew some fukk shyt happened). The voice messages, the former employees. In the case of three of them, they went down decades after so the question of "what could they find five years after" is flawed.
None of this applies to MJ. No tapes, nothing incriminating after years of wiretapping and surveillance, no child porn, no matching descriptions, NOTHING.
If MJ "paid off" numerous famous like ppl like to say, it would have come out by now. Especially being that he's been dead for a decade.
Instead, you have @śïñe•qúå_nøn who posts easily debunked trash (who still won't say why he lied about reading the court documents) and others posting a debunked article from a woman who is currently being sued by the Versace family (Maureen Orth).
What were they?
Dynamite James
The Main attraction
[QUOTE="YakSpiller, post: 34852796, member: 6509"]If they investigated it 5 years later what physical evidence would they find?[/QUOTE]
Where are you getting this from? 5 years later? ANother person who don't know shyt about the case talking shyt?
Where are you getting this from? 5 years later? ANother person who don't know shyt about the case talking shyt?
Dynamite James
The Main attraction
there were matching descriptions and disturbing porn
Wrong again.
You keep acting like more famous people didn't get away with this stuff.
And you don't know the scope of the FBI investigation either.
what's your point? You expect him to start touching the kid on camera?
matching fingerprints was found on the pages of pornography material from MJ and the boys
This is kind of a lie. First off, it wasn't MJ that settled, it was his insurance company. A person can't settle their way out of a criminal court. The chandlers WANTED money first and Jackson did not give in to their extortion attempt. It was AFTER Jackson didn't give in to them that they went public because they HAD to if they wanted a trial. Jackson's insurance didn't want to have him go through this while he was on tour so they had to settle. Jackson himself did not want to so how are you blaming him for saying he should have just fought it when that's what he WANTED TO DO? He was legally unable to settle so this wasn't his own actions. It's funny because if MJ really wanted to "hush" anything, he could've easily gave in to their demands before they finally went public due to him not giving in to the guy. He literally could've of just paid them off before it went public and MJ probably wouldn't have ever even went through the shyt in the first place but he did like you said and fought it until legally he wasn't able to anymore and his insurance company decided to settle it.
Well, when you stop cherry picking media frenzied pics without context is how you defend it. At first when I didn't know shyt about MJ like that,I thought it was weird but when I seen so many pics of him that NEVER were shown on TV I immediately knew it was just a smear campaign to suggest something wicked. Like, how come we NEVER saw him with little girls or black children? It was to suggest he was a white boy loving pedo right? Why is a picture of someone who legitimately cared for children and took pics like that with EVERYONE an issue? Of course when you make it sexual and want to suggest something now someone who always hugged and took pics with children/grown people is now looked at as a creep because the media only shows the ones that they want to show.But still, the fact that this boy was even in a position to be that close to him and make those allegations is the point that I'm making. There's no reason a grown ass man who can have every female in the world at your disposal should be courting a bunch of kids everywhere you go.
Even without full fledged allegations, how do you defend this shyt???
It's only "weird" how the media had a hard on to suggest something by only showing a few pictures and leaving it contextless and wanting to make him out to be something else. MJ wasn't a normal guy down the street so using the "if Joe down teh street had a house " excuse is stupid as Joe down the street... isn't MJ.
And according to this German Psychologist he said MJ didn't fit the profile for a pedo.
I'm done with this thread though. There's clearly some guys who just simply want to believe he's wrong and did something bad that he successfully evaded/tricked the FBI(who WANTED to find something and tried to suggest things to people they interviewed improperly) and all the other investigators. I mean MJ was not only a musician, he was a master of tactical espionage and I am in complete awe of that. To not only be fool proof in your wicked ways for years and successfully tricking the FBI and police and private investigators multiple times randomly?
Final post
These really opened my eyes to the bs.
Last edited:
This is a flat out lie
He had all sorts of "art " books filled with naked children
Oh my fukking goodness. This has been debunked in this very thread. Nonetheless, Tom Sneddon actually changed the law (Prior Bad Acts) to allow the 1993 case to be heard. Why didn't Tom (who btw, was the same DA from 93) enter this damning matching description into the court case? How could a seasoned and celebrated prosecutor fail to submit a smoking gun TWICE?
It wasn't entered because it wasn't true.
1. Michael was stripped searched and photographed in 1993 for the sole purpose of determining if the "description" matched. He would have been arrested on the spot if it did. He would have been indicted if it did. It did not. In fact, the "description" was actually the opposite of what MJs privates actually looked like.
The "disturbing porn" was from a Radar Online article which has since been removed. The only porn that was found was heterosexual male porn. Nothing extreme or disturbing.
This information is all available to read in the court documents (and the unsealed FBI file on their website since you mentioned it) so yet AGAIN I'll ask. Why did you lie about reading them?
For someone who touts himself as a someone whose career is related to research why can't you take the time to do some actual fukking research on this? Stop being an arrogant jackass know it all for once, take a step back and say, ok let me look this up. Let me see if there is any truth to this.
No one is saying that you are wrong for finding certain actions suspicious or inappropriate...but you're posting things that have long been proven to be untrue as though they are fact while being dishonest about really looking into this.
Last edited:
I really don't know. Actually, I suspect the few who are arguing in this thread are arguing on bad faith and just simply don't like Michael Jackson and are using this as a proxy to get their dislike off their chest. It's really mind boggling.
right! these posters in here got the nerve to try to shame people from throwing pedo jokes his way? its insane!!
