u/Internal_Buffalo_673

I've seen tons of stories about what it was like to be a fan during the 93' case and the 05' trail.

But I see very few stories about what it was it like being a fan when LN came out.

I was young, and wasn't that deep in the online space at the time due to my age. o So while I was a fan, I had no the idea of what the severity of the situation.

How did yall take it when the doc was first released?

Was it hostile to talk about MJ online?

Was their judgement from non MJ-fan peers for still being a fan?

Was there as much resources for his innocence then, as we have now?

Did any have you your doubts? If so, what caused you to conclude to his innocence?

Recently, I saw an old post from the main MJ subreddit, about a view years ago. The post was mainly drawing comparisons to the Depp trail to the MJ trail.

Obviously, the cases are, legally speaking, inherently different. And you see people also share that same sentiment in the comments.

But one thing caught me off guard. It was this one comment. (I won't list the name of to avoid getting the sub into any trouble, and get it banned like the last sub. But if you want, I believe you just find the old post by searching it up)

Mostly because it had about 50 replies underneath it, so when I clicked on it, and went through it.

After going through it, and going to the person's profile. I was just left with these weird feelings.

The person story is this - they were a fan since they were a child, defended MJ, and even saw him live several times. They were a member of the main sub for years. Celebrated when he won in 2005, and cried at his deatg. Until Leaving Neverland came out, in which they did their own research, and came to the conclusion that MJ was "pedophilic."

Obviously, that was an old post from years ago, and they were still open minded to hear any more info.

Now, going to their profile. I see interactions from the Leaving Neverland​ sub, the conspiracy sub saying why MJ is guilty. And old post on the main MJ sub. (Obviously from when you could still talk about the allegations on there.)

They say things to contradict "fan myths." Writing whole paragraphs and chapters to show why he's death.

Now, I write all this because I'm genuinely confused

Because I feel like, "what I'm I missing."

What did they see, what I didn't?

Are they wrong?

Could I be wrong?

I feel like they are, but they're effort to show he's guilty just has me dumbfounded.

Because they look like they did they're research, and I'm assuming they looked at are points, and came to that conclusion.

I dont know how to feel about all this.

Around the 9:00 mark, I think.

I get he had posters of babies and children because he saw them as the inspiration for everything he did.

But what what does the "PP" mean?

I know this was filmed in Singapore, does it mean something there I don't understand?

I've heard of this, never seen this footage until recently.

I thought James said the ring was from a capsule. The coin machine kind.

The footage says that James was a interpreter FOR Michael. Rather than talking with Michael on a ring Michael "gave him for marriage."

Do you guys have anything you add to this?

(Mods, pls don't take down this post.)

Has anyone else read it?

I was skimming through it, and there were at points when it felt anti-MJ.

Michael is portrayed very much like a cartoon.

And of course, its taken from the perspective of bubbles, so it that can be the reason why.

But at some points it feels just plain disrespectful towards Michael.

Michael seems TOO fairytale like, like the peter pan charcater he wanted to be, was ACTAULLY him irl.

​​Bubbles also talks like a Shakespeare character, and talks about Michael like an actual king, neverland is his kingdom, and he's next in line to the "throne"

While interesting, it honestly becomes ridiculous towards the end.

Michael and bubbles have a "fight scene," at the end. Bubbles throws him across the room, to the point his "nose is destroyed."

There are also points where it has a great nuanced parts. Michael wasn't perfect, and the script shows that.

But unfortunately most of the time it feels like drawn out South Park skit.

Title☝️

Recently, I saw an argument being brought up that Star didn't say that the August 2003 Magazine was the one he recognized. What he apparently meant is that he saw those TYPES of magazines.

So, to settle any questions I might have or eventually get. I'm going to read the full transcripts myself.​

Is there any videos about the case that aren't already with the goal about proving innocence?

Rather, videos that are just about the case itself.

My believe is that when an abusive claim is made. Whether mental, physical, sexual, emotional, etc. Is to ALWAYS look at both sides of the story, then make my conclusion.

But recently, people calling me, and other MJ supports stans is really annoying me. It always feels like whenever we bring something to show MJ's innocence, it always ends up being undermineded, and what we say is made up because we're fans.

So, I ask these questions.

1. What do other victims of abuse think of the case?

2. How does this case compare to other cases of sexual abuse.

3. How to deal with things like, "MJ's kindness was an act," and "Abusers know how to act in front of people."(Basically stuff that I can't prove, or disprove)

All this is just to clear my mind, please and thanks!!

I think I get it,

Vincent has shown to be scummy.

He was interviewed by Sneddon, and didn't mention the magazine when he had the chance too.

He only mentioned it in 2016 when he was paid to say anything about the case by an outlet.

As far as I'm aware, he never mentioned anything about footage he took from the bag until now.

Which, not to imply he faked the footage. There is no evidence to say he did fake it. But I do find it odd he never mentioned he had footage until now. Especially 20 years later when he had multiple chances to do so.

The videos that were allegedly ordered were not found in Michael's possession at Neverland, nor was it in the bag that Frank gave.

To add, it looks like there was only ONE magazine. Since the cam footage shows mostly documents from May 2001, with one magazine shown.

Infact, in the doc, he only said "magazine" not plural.

If Michael was such the pedo the accusers and prosecutors make him out to be. Why wasn't there more magazines and videos in this nature? Especially if it was a "phase" according to Frank. Which we already have seen the 180 turn that Frank took recent years. With his 180 turn, his inconsistencies, and just straight up lies, do we trust his claims about this "phase?"

I still am bit indifferent to this situation. This didn't bother me that much before. But the footage really got me stumped.

It's just a really messy situation. Since Frank and Vincent have messy backgrounds that have shown they have lied, and or have reasons to lie now.

Especially with Vincent having a wife that allegedly has ties to Epstien.

Who knows, mabey he's trying to distract us from that.

But again, thats just me. Not an objective fact.​

What is your stance on this?

Do you guys have anything to add.

The Netflix doc apparently has footage of a bag of magazines that Frank had, that inside had magazines of nude children that Michael wanted to order.

I'm curious to see this footage because this has me stumped.

And I don't want to give my view to the doc on Netflix, thats why I'm asking for it here.

It's crazy how much misinformation is out there.

I saw one woman say that "Jordan described his genitals to a tee."

• No he didn't, if he did, Michael would have been arrested on the spot. Sneddon was looking for ANYTHING.
• The drawing the chandlers did has nothing concrete on it.
• According to Evan himself in his book. He gave Michael anesthesia through his butt. Is it crazy to say he had a good look down there?

I saw another woman say that she watched leaving neverland and was "done." Apparently, thats all she needed. With no further research on the history and backgrounds of Wade and James.

I saw one comment say, "they literally found cp at his house."

• Three ART books, three LEGAL ART books.
• No any other type of cp was found, if they did, they would have, again, arrested on the spot.
• And if he was as much a pedophile as the accusers made of out to be through their stories. Why didn't he have more?

Of course, theres the same points.

• No normal man should sleep with kids
• No way all the accusers are lying

And honestly I don't blame these people for thinking like this. There are some terrible people out there, especially in the music industry that take advantage of so many people.

I'm not saying Michael or anyone should put themselves in that situation with children. It's NOT appropriate, and if someone feels uncomfortable with a grown man sleeping with children, then they have every right to feel that way.

There also some fans that will treat him like a god, when he was VERY much the opposite. Although he was different than most, he was still human.

I just wish that more people would look into the accusers, the neverland employees, the specific people in the media, with a different perspective.

These are ALL coming from a place of CONFUSION as a FAN.

How were Michael's relationship with Tatum O' Neal and Brooke Shields.

Because the age gaps, the different claims in whether the relationships were romantic or not.

And whether the age gap connects the allegations is getting to me.

Can someone help me out?

I remember I was starting to do some research in a innocent sub from a year ot wo ago.

I can't remember when, but the sub got banned and I never found out why.

Does anyone have any answers?

I always see people talk about more about Wade than James.

Like, I know how he wanted to work on the immortal tour, worked with Janet jackson in 2009, wanted his wedding at Neverland. (Can someone list me a source for the neverland one though for reference?) And the fact that he filed for abuse when going to financial troubles in the early 2010's and couldn't get work.

But I never hear much of James's situation, and I feel like I don't know much about his case as much as Wade.

Can someone educate me? Also, please list sources so I can use them in future references.

Do you yall think it'll end at his death, or that it will end like how it originally was. Ending during the HIStory era.

Where did the, "He was investigated for 10 years" come from?