Whatever the truth, one fact remains: despite all the doubts we should have about the allegations—after Jussie Smollett and Covington—the world has once again uncritically swallowed a victimhood narrative based on mere talk. And that, to me, is wrongdoing I can be certain of.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
Which of these claims do you think are the strongest? Some of them I find pretty weak (the distinction between 'met' and 'spoke to' can be explained by a phone call) The mother's claim of celebrating his death seems the most confounding one to me.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mikedennymike
Agreed. The mother's premature celebration was what rang the first alarm bells for me when I began researching the case.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
Gonna review it. It's possible it was a response to an off-screen question like: 'Did you see MJ's death in a new light after your son's confession?' Doesn't make sense otherwise. Such a lie shouldn't have got past the filmmaker, editors, subjects during screen tests.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mikedennymike @G_S_Bhogal
Checked and she's lying in some sort of capacity. Doesn't make sense to be part of a group lie. The other players would have surely identified it as being inconsistent with the timeline. It's possible she acknowledged MJ's guilt before knowing her son was one of the victims.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mikedennymike
During the 2003 trial, James claims he told his mother that he didn't want to testify for MJ, as MJ was evil. It's possible that this made her suspect MJ was abusing kids, but this makes no sense as she knew her son had been alone with him, yet didn't think to press him about it.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
Aint no doubt that both mothers were lying pieces of shit and neglectful parents. However this has no bearing on the characters of the 2 victims.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mikedennymike @G_S_Bhogal
I spent a couple hours yesterday combing through http://mjfacts.com There are several instances wherein they acknowledge countering claims to both sides of the argument so I'm confidant in their reporting. It's the most thorough and non-biased site I could find.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @mikedennymike
I just checked out this website, found it to be heavily biased against Jackson, cherry-picking facts to justify its positions. I'd view it with a healthy dose of scepticism.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
Just Twitter.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.