u/didistutter_416

I’ve been following this content creator who is unbiased, and still thinks Michael is innocent. He is coming out with a documentary soon, and he’s examining the court documents in its entirety.

Interesting take on how the Guilters love to compare MJ’s accusers to the victims of Epstein, Cosby and Trump.

Would love to try to sign up somewhere! If anyone knows any info, would truly appreciate it 🙏😩

Martin Batshit-Crazy Bashir confessed he lied about Michael Jackson AFTER his death. Bashir's legacy of being a complete dirt bag journalist and low-life person will forever remain.

The following excerpts are taken from a former Guilter turned MJ defender, Aphrodite Jones's (investigative journalist who was present in the courtroom during the Michael Jackson trial) book Michael Jackson Conspiracy, Foreward by Tom Mesereau:

Mesereau (Michael Jackson's lawyer) wanted to know why Bashir had been reported in England for "unfair" journalistic practices on three separate occasions.

To Mesereau, Bashir admitted that he'd been accused of "unfairness" and of "breaching an agreement." Bashir testified that, while these two complaints were "rejected," the third complaint against him was cause for him to be sanctioned.
The complaint alleged that Bashir was unbalanced in his reportage, that he was "not representing the entirety" of the subject—the same allegation Michael Jackson would later make against Bashir.

Tom Mesereau asked questions about Bashir's representations to Jackson, about Bashir's many promises to Jackson, which were used to lure Jackson into full and unfettered cooperation with the Bashir project. Though Mesereau found himself being blocked by Bashirs high-powered attorney, Theodore Boutrous, a man who represented the ABC network, Mesereau continued his line of questions. Often, the objections were sustained on the grounds that Bashir was protected by the California Shield Law, which states that reporters cannot be forced to testify about things they learn while working on a story.

"Mr. Bashir, in the show you prepared, which we've just seen, Mr. Jackson made statements to the effect that nothing sexual happened in his bed, correct?" Mesereau asked.

"Correct," Bashir testified.

"To obtain that interview you had with Mr.
Jackson when he made that statement, you told him he was under-appreciated, true?" That particular question, like many questions before it, was objected to by the ABC lawyer under the Shield Law, but Judge Melville overruled the objection, asking Bashir to respond.
The jury was stunned to see that Mr. Bashir refused to answer, telling the court,
"I'm standing on the broadcast privilege and the Shield Law, Your Honor."

"Mr. Bashir, you wrote to Mr. Jackson's assistant and said you would very much like to feature Michael with a large group of children, around fifty, welcoming them and sharing with them his extraordinary home so that, for one day, their lives can be enriched, right?" Mesereau asked.

"Objection," Boutrous argued.

"Mr. Bashir, did you request that Michael Jackson bring Macaulay Culkin so you could film him at Neverland?"

"Objection, Shield Law," Boutrous said.

"In the process of putting this film together, Mr. Bashir, did you write to Michael Jackson's assistant and say that you wanted to film the beautiful landscape, encouraging all of us to become as little children again?"

"Objection, Shield Law, First Amendment," Boutrous repeated.

Martin Bashir, who had a blank expression as he continually declined to answer questions-had taken every opportunity to publicly hide. For the jury, the amount of objections and Bashir's refusal to answer, was making heads spin. It was becoming difficult for anyone without a legal background to keep up with the technical mumbo-jumbo.

Though Bashir was never recalled, Mesereau had sent the message to the jury: Bashir misrepresented himself to get the interview with Michael Jackson*. It wasn't necessary for Martin Bashir to testify about the specifics. Through Mesereas highly crafted questions, the jury learned that Bashir had done everything to win Jackson over. Bashir capitalized* on his
"friendship" with Princess Diana. He flattered Jackson for his parenting skills. Bashir played up his love for Jackson's music, naming tunes and joking with the pop star. And more than anything, Bashir complimented Jackson for all the charity work, for all the time and money Jackson donated to help children throughout the world.

Of all the inconsistencies Mesereau mentioned, the one tangible thing that would become most vital to the defense was the outtake footage of the Bashir documentary, which would later be entered into evidence as part of their case-in-chief.

During Bashir's taping of his documentary, Michael Jackson had asked his own personal videographer to roll tape the entire time. The never-before-seen footage existed, and since the judge allowed the Bashir documentary into evidence, the outtake footage would also be allowed in.

Because Michael had supplied the entirety of the Bashir footage to the defense, the jury would eventually see the raw footage of Jackson, the
"uncut" version of what Jackson had really told Bashir. Jackson's defense team would later prove just how vulnerable and gullible Michael Jackson had been throughout the months of taping with Martin Bashir.

The unused Bashir footage would show jurors the
"out of context" aspects of Bashir's infamous documentary.

It would’ve been great to see a remix of this song with MJ doing the high notes! And maybe Beyonce as the girl of interest lol 🤭

Born 1984 here. As a kid, I liked Michael Jackson, and sang “Black or White” in a 4th grade choir competition, but I wouldn’t consider myself a hardcore fan back then. I enjoyed his music, but toward the end of the 90s, MJ was becoming “uncool” (at least in my school) and hardcore hip hop was considered “in.” I remember a lot of kids making fun of him and thinking it was uncool if you liked his music.

Now as an adult, after watching the Michael biopic, I’m in LOVE with Michael’s music again, re-listening to the meaning of the words of his music as an adult and it totally hits different. And the nostalgia of his music makes me wish for my childhood again. I feel lucky to have lived during some of his prime years, but wish I was old enough to have made my own decisions to attend a MJ concert instead of being a little kid at the time. Having major regrets and FOMO, especially since I have lived in SoCal my whole life. It’s like Michael was RIGHT THERE. So far, yet so close. I have seen his Hollywood Star, but have never gone to Neverland, the Encino house, or to Forrest Lawn in Glendale either. And I can’t help feeling regret or like I took him for granted. Thinking he was always going to be around.

Anyone else feel similar?

I see one coming up in my area, but from the posts on TikTok, it looks like the crowd is on the younger side. Would it be ridiculous if I go as someone in their 40’s? 😩

41F divorced here. I’ve observed my close friends either have abusive spouses who take advantage of them financially, cheat on them, verbally abusive, but they still stay out of fear of being “lonely.” Then my single friends are also miserable because it’s hard to find a partner who wants to be in a committed relationship these days. Everything is just “hook up” culture. So they’re stuck in situations where they just become a booty call. Is there no point in dating then? Since all these dating sites are geared towards sex and nothing more.

I’m surprised he was never a guest judge. I would consider him the OG American Idol! The way he could’ve mentored so many of the new artists. I don’t see any other artist even rehearse in the same manner that he did.

He goes on to say, "trying to change somebody's mind is really hard. Trying to influence somebody who doesn't have any view on you can be easier (referring to GenZ customers).”

When Todd Kahn says the strategy is to focus on Gen Z because they “don’t have a view” on Coach yet, it implies Gen Z is essentially brand new territory with no critical thinking, no brand awareness, and no ability to form independent opinions. That’s not just marketing language, it’s a pretty patronizing and insulting assumption about an entire generation.

As an elder millennial myself, this whole comment from Todd Kahn feels incredibly insulting to me as well, because it basically boils down to: “Older millennials remember when Coach damaged its own image, so we’d rather market to younger people who don’t know the history.” That’s not consumer bias, that’s accountability. We remember the overexposure, the endless outlet saturation, and the years when the brand completely lost its sense of exclusivity. Those were corporate decisions, not some misunderstanding on our part.

What makes it worse is that elder millennials are finally in the stage of life where many of us actually have the disposable income for luxury and premium retail. And instead of valuing the customers who stuck around long enough to reconsider the brand, the message basically sounds like, “they’re too hard to convince.” Imagine saying that out loud about the very generation that helped build online fashion culture before TikTok influencers even existed.

Honestly, the comments left such a bad taste in my mouth that I’m reconsidering purchases I literally just made. I bought a bunch of retail bags recently, and now I’m sitting here thinking about returning them because why would I keep investing in a brand whose leadership openly talks about my generation like we’re a lost cause? That kind of rhetoric absolutely affects brand loyalty. Good job at insulting both GenZ and Millennials, Todd!

I’m interested in the zodiac collection and the tube top sets. Just wondering if it’s better quality than what you would find at a discount store like Ross, Marshall’s, Burlington, etc.?