The link I posted, along with the there posted link to the investigative article by Mary S. Fisher are about facts. <br /><br />Your link to the Jimmy Safechuck story is indeed from a hater-site. Funny you use it as your source. It brings many 'happenings' as fact when they are not. You quote from stories about Blanca Francia, Diane Diamond and so on. That tells me a lot. <br /><br />You say you are after the truth, but at the same time you have clearly already formed an opinion. That doesn't match. So I question your intentions. And you can try to lure me into lengthy debates on the whole case, but I won't bite. <br /><br />Succes met haat zaaien.<br /><br />
<br />The link I posted, along with the there posted link to the investigative article by Mary S. Fisher are about facts. <br /><br />Your link to the Jimmy Safechuck story is indeed from a hater-site. Funny you use it as your source. It brings many 'happenings' as fact when they are not. You quote from stories about Blanca Francia, Diane Diamond and so on. That tells me a lot. <br /><br />My first post was a response to a post of Michaelslady, which stated that James volentarily came forward to defend Michael in 2005. That wasn't a fact, because why didn't he defend Michael in court then? Apparently he didn't want to defend Michael at all. And did you know TM stated during Kiki Fournier's cross-examination at Michael's trial (on March 17, 2005) that James was wedded at Jackson’s Neverland Ranch? Which also wasn't a 'fact' because James wasn't married there. Nice lie of TM. But it did make seem that Michael was still in contact with James, which apparently he was not. Besides that, I often felt that Michael himself was not always telling the truth.<br /><br />Mjfacts is called a hater-site by Michael Jackson fans who believe he is innocent. It is not called a hater-site by me, it doesn't 'only' quote doubtful sources like many seem to think. They have many 'facts' over there, which make me doubt.<br /><br />You say you are after the truth, but at the same time you have clearly already formed an opinion. That doesn't match. So I question your intentions. And you can try to lure me into lengthy debates on the whole case, but I won't bite. <br /><br />My search for the truth didn't start yesterday. So yes, I am clearly forming an opinion. It isn't an absolute opinion, but I have doubts certainly. And believe me, the last thing I want is a lenghty debate with someone who doesn't want to hear anything about it.<br /><br />Gelukkig heb ik wel een leuk contact met een anderen hier op de site, die net als jij geloven in Michael's onschuld, maar we kunnen wel samen op een constructieve en positieve manier over dit soort zaken discussiëren. Jammer dat je zo vijandig bent.<br /><br />Succes met haat zaaien.<br /><br />
@Do<;br /><br />You are not wrong for having different opinions on this matter.<br /><br />There have been times over the years where I have wondered if maybe, just maybe there was some truth to any of it but I always came back believing that none of it was true. <br /><br />Not because it was Michael Jackson, but because I never saw any proof. Hearsay means nothing to me. In all the years there are no pics? Even the pics and mags that were found in the raid weren't classified as pornographic, even by Mr. Evil himself (Tom Sneddon).<br /><br />If Michael was a predator (because that is what he would be in this), there would be something, somewhere that would come to the surface and it would stop me stop in my tracks and make me die inside.<br /><br />I realize that at times victims do take awhile to come forward, but in James and Wade's case why not do it while Michael was still alive? Why wait 4 years after his passing when the man can't defend himself? I don't believe the suppressed story coming from Wade and James looks like a tag-a-long.<br /><br />Even though I believe Michael is not guilty 100% that doesn't mean I won't look at this at a different angle if there is something to look at. If these last lawsuits are telling us something, it is up to us to find out what they really mean - even if the outcome isn't what we wanted.<br /><br />After all, isn't this hoax about finding the truth?<br /><br />Love you Michael!<br /><br /><br />
i love your post iamhere4MJ.<br /><br />And i do like that you have the abillity to let people have their own opion ,and own search for the truth.<br /><br />I personally don't believe any of the accusations at all ( let that be clear). regarding Mj, but Mj made some bad choices regarding sleeping with children in the same bed or even in the same room, he was claimed a intelligent man why did he do that, everyone could have known it was fuell to to the fire while doing that. I suspect that he was thinking like "i did nothing wrong so i can't get in trouble for that, so imo that was bad judgement from his side. but that my opion.<br /><br />@iamhere4MJ,...Wade later on changed his story from repressed memory into " i always known, but thought it was love" this was( if i recollect correctly) because the judge ordered him to change to get the claim going on, i hope i will find that post about that matter, if i do i will share.<br /><br />@Do, i hope you will continue to post here, i know you are not a hater but instead loves MJ very much, you are in search for the truth. i hope you will find the truth for your own peace of mind.<br /><br />p.s. you asked in a former post why would people jump the band waggon and claim that MJ molested them, the answer is a whole lot of Money. people are greedy, extremely greedy, money can take away lots of sorrows, and hey, the man is dead so it won't hurt him no more.<br />Tht's why Wade accused the estate, and P.A. and claim 1.62 billion! because i think you can't sue a dead man....<br /><br />
<br />@Do<;br /><br />You are not wrong for having different opinions on this matter.<br /><br />Thank you iamhere. I have always loved MJ, I stated this many times. I can't help it that I have serious doubts, to me there are just too many things that point in a certain direction. I used to believe in a conspiracy, now I'm not that certain anymore.<br /><br />There have been times over the years where I have wondered if maybe, just maybe there was some truth to any of it but I always came back believing that none of it was true. <br /><br />Not because it was Michael Jackson, but because I never saw any proof. Hearsay means nothing to me. In all the years there are no pics? Even the pics and mags that were found in the raid weren't classified as pornographic, even by Mr. Evil himself (Tom Sneddon).<br /><br />Sadly, I think there were pics and mags that were classified as such (seized evidence of erotic materials, request to admit those to court):<br /><br />http://www.mjfacts.info/resources/011805pltreqaseemd.pdf<br /><br />A nude pic believed to be Jonathan Spence and many (sometimes exremely graphic)pornography, hetero- and homosexual. Ofcourse that doesn't mean that MJ was a molester, but it certainly WAS pornographic. But then again, if it's for own use, what's the problem.<br /><br />Plaintiff's (The People of the State of California) motion for reconsideration of the defendant's (MJ) motion for an order excluding 14 items of irrelevant evidence: <br /><br />http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/013105pltmotrd14itms.pdf<br /><br />If Michael was a predator (because that is what he would be in this), there would be something, somewhere that would come to the surface and it would stop me stop in my tracks and make me die inside.<br /><br />I realize that at times victims do take awhile to come forward, but in James and Wade's case why not do it while Michael was still alive? Why wait 4 years after his passing when the man can't defend himself? I don't believe the suppressed story coming from Wade and James looks like a tag-a-long.<br /><br />I think that having their own children was the biggest trigger. And the fact that Michael also did a lot for them and that they admired him and loved him, kept them quiet. I don't know how the mind works when you were part of an extremely, extraordinary, privilaged and maby manipulative situation back then.<br /><br />Even though I believe Michael is not guilty 100% that doesn't mean I won't look at this at a different angle if there is something to look at. If these last lawsuits are telling us something, it is up to us to find out what they really mean - even if the outcome isn't what we wanted.<br /><br />That's all we can do right now, wait and see. Again, thank you for having patience with me!.<br /><br />After all, isn't this hoax about finding the truth?<br /><br />Love you Michael!<br />
Comments