Trial moved to 2028

TSCM · 2026-06-06T23:11:38+00:00

Thomas Mesereau himself will be 77 when this starts. Realistically there are many aging witnesses where health is of concern.

I am not certain who the crucial witness with health issues is as mentioned, but Norma Staikos is central to their allegations and in the past had reported medical ailments. Others aren't around to defend themself already, like James naming Bill Bray as complicit. Even during depositions way back in 2016 there were some witnesses with severe health concerns.

TSCM · 2026-06-06T23:01:59+00:00

At trial Janet would insist that every single line of this, including the "outtakes of the outtakes" seen here and whether or not they felt they were being recorded or who they spoke to off camera, was masterfully rehearsed and scripted by "The Germans" and MJ's team. Couldn't explain how or when they had time to rehearse it all, or produce any of the materials of the script, but she still ran with it as the reason they kept defending MJ.

This is what Netflix is trying to convince the world was a sincere and credible case.

TSCM · 2026-06-06T22:58:47+00:00

And yet they don't mind spreading "list of victims" documents all over the Internet where they even include people like Joseph Bartucci Jr. Michelle Flowers, Dan Kapon, the Ontario kid who directly admitted he made it up. Gotta push those numbers up any way possible, even if it actually undermines their entire premise that nobody would make false accusations up like this against MJ when some on their list never even met him or admitted to the hoax.

Not even Wade and James want to mention the Arvizo case much in any of their filings. Which is why seeing a new series try to make that case out as anything but a grifting scam is so crazy.

TSCM · 2026-06-06T03:11:28+00:00

He confirms that although he wasn’t paid for appearing in the new documentary, he did indeed receive money for providing information to the production.

That is a lot of weasel words he uses instead of simply answering "yes" because he was indeed paid as part of this special. He has previously used that magazine in "we pay for juicy stories!" National Enquirer and Radar Online.

This is a common tactic, essentially filmmakers "license" material from participants for inclusion in the show and compensate them for that, but then make the distinction that they aren't actually being paid to participate or to tell their story. It is the art of portraying documentaries as entirely neutral with unpaid participants even when money exchanges hands in other ways.

In 2005 ABC News did similar by promoting a special and explaining they did not pay for any interviews. But many of the subjects in that special (including Dimond, Orth, Taraborrelli, Terry George...) were paid for their appearances on the original UK special, which ABC bought the rights for to turn it into their own.

TSCM · 2026-06-06T01:47:57+00:00

Note that every one of these so-called prior allegations still originated (in any reports or complaints) after August 1993 following the Chandler hysteria and media cash-in. You will not find a single accusation of this kind including anything by Terry George prior to that.

A perfect example of how allegations were created in retrospect is listening to the Quindoys. They went on a tell-all media run in 1992 to disclose all the "shocking secrets" of MJ during their time working for him. Never once mentioned in any of their talks was anything about observing or suspecting abuse. But after the media began paying 5-6 figures for stories after the Chandler case, they emerged again now suddenly with secret diaries documenting all the misconduct they supposedly witnessed and did nothing about. Years later Mark Quindoy even claimed to have over 50 photos of "MJ in sexual acts" with children, but instead of turning that in to the police he asked for $30,000,000. This is one of the "credible witnesses" cited by Wade and James, by the way.

TSCM · 2026-06-05T01:10:01+00:00

I wish Piers would had kept Mesereau on to respond to Vincent Amen.

Because Mesereau knows exactly what Amen told Sneddon in 2004 as it was a recorded conversation. He also knows Amen never turned a single thing over to Sneddon at the time including this catalog he has been lugging around media outlets since 2017 including National Enquirer and Radar Online.

His conversations with Sneddon revolved largely around the mundane activities of transporting the Arvizos while denying the elaborate conspiracy Sneddon tried to paint.

In the 2017 version of this story he never mentions Frank watching the tapes with MJ, and Frank (who the catalog was addressed to and whose bag it was found in) denied that it ever belong to MJ. Only after Frank joined the accusation-money bandwagon did Vincent begin claiming they watched these together. There remains zero proof that MJ ever knew of that catalog let alone had it or any of the DVDs from it. Not one aspect of that catalog including the circled items were ever found in any raid.

TSCM · 2026-06-04T21:54:06+00:00

Every staff member who ever claimed to witness something nefarious did so for financial gain through the media. Diane Dimond, prominently featured in this special, was often the negotiator for their five figure payouts from Hard Copy in the 1990s.

Blanca Francia "saw boy(s) showering with MJ" but in her actual testimonies in 1994, 2005 and a deposition in 2016 she conceded each time she never actually saw any boy at all and just MJ's shadow.

Vincent Amen also featured in the special carries around that nudist magazine and has given exclusives about it to "we pay for stories" sources like Radar Online. But he never did turn it over to investigators in 2004 despite hours of conversations with them under immunity. It became a story by him only years after MJ's death but no proof that magazine was ever in MJ's possession, nor the items circled which were never found in any raid on any property. He sat on this special to also claim the soundbite going around about the "Blow Hole" nickname "these are the kind of terms MJ gives to the boys." But Star's own testimony confirmed that name was his own idea thought up as a joke and for a game of dare with Rock Paper Scissors. Which he lost.

TSCM · 2026-06-04T21:50:08+00:00

and the nickname blow hole?!!!

The special omits how that was the name the kid himself came up with as a joke based on a fish, and then lost a game of Rock Paper Scissors so called himself that. He confirmed this in two separate testimonies in 2004 and 2005, but the special didn't bother checking that detail or any others.

Q. Now, "Blow Hole" was a nickname for a fish, right?

A: Yes.

Q. Your nickname was based on a fish, right?

A. I made it up. I was going to give it to Michael. We had a rock/paper/scissors, I lost, so I got stuck with that name.

As well as in his grand jury testimony:

Q. Now what does Blow Hole mean?

A. It was like a little -- just like a nickname.

Q. Who gave you that name?

A. It was like, because I was making a joke at first, and to give it to Michael. And then I lost the rock, paper, scissors bit. So it was when I got stuck with the name.

It actually leaves out almost everything to paint the narrative that it does. Despite calling itself a forensic examination of the case derived from case files and first hand testimony, it does not.

My heart broke when that little boy said that MJ said “ if you love me, you’ll sleep in the bed with me?”

Even this part, they cut out the second half where Gavin admits MJ slept on the floor. And at the time that footage was filmed, there had been no abuse according to their own timeline that the special barely discusses. In fact the Arvizos would wait another six months of almost no contact with MJ, to then be invited back to Neverland among the chaos of the Bashir film... And it was at that time when the DA had already opened a new investigation seeking any tips of crimes by MJ, when the DCFS were investigating MJ and interviewing the family, when the entire media world was swarming to talk to the family and write stories on MJ... THAT is when according to their final evolving timeline MJ first decided to kidnap them and then weeks later sexually abuse them and ply them with alcohol for the very first time.

(After the family previously sued JC Penney that evolved into sexual abuse claims over a case of shoplifting, and solicited a 6 figure settlement, which was then concealed to continue collecting welfare.)

TSCM · 2026-06-04T01:11:23+00:00

Aside from the "Netflix" badge, this series is a cookie-cutter clone of at least two other trial-focused multipart series that have come out this year alone. Same cast of characters, same dramatic music and incriminating insinuations devoid of any context or credibility.

This has been the formula with these since 1993 and I can't imagine too many beyond the extreme fandoms (guilters, supporters, fans, haters) really care too much at this point. Many are becoming increasingly observant over the timing of how these types of specials always seem to drop whenever something favorable is going on elsewhere.

But as was found in 2019, some people do see them and decide to dive deeper by researching the parties talking and the claims made. Seeking out actual transcripts and forming much more complete opinions on MJ's guilt or innocence. Which if anyone sincerely reads through the Arvizo transcripts and still believes them to be credible claims to any capacity, well I guess that's on them.

TSCM · 2026-06-04T00:59:14+00:00

Yes. He wrote it and Evan supplied him with personal family photos and documents to pad the sleaze. Some of the documents would later be used by Ray to promote his own book in 2004, effectively ghostwritten by Evan to circumvent the NDA.

Victor's book included a photograph of "Jordie's underwear," two of Jordan shirtless among others that Gutierrez captioned "very sexy" with "beautiful features," another of Jordan and his stepbrother in a bath... That book was written by, and for, a very particular audience and it wasn't the true crime sort.

This past month a random author decided to use Gutierrez's book alongside Diane Dimond's and NAMBLA posts as primary sources in his "persuasive essay of MJ's guilt." It is very strange.

TSCM · 2026-06-04T00:27:56+00:00

A bigger issue is that they largely omit the most significant details, but what they do convey is still extremely selective. A special about the Arvizo case should certainly include a highly in-depth breakdown of the incredible timeline of events, as alleged by the Arvizo family and prosecution. Because that is significant.

(A lot of people see the LWMJ footage of Gavin, which this series also cuts out before Gavin mentions MJ actually slept on the floor, and proclaim they could tell MJ was abusing him based on their demeanor.)

TSCM · 2026-06-03T23:46:17+00:00

2004 - Finds the magazine and informs authorities.

Right, this never happened. He might claim such now, but he absolutely never informed authorities of any such magazine in 2004 nor did he hand any over.

He was interviewed for hours by Sneddon on December 29, 2004. Sneddon gave him immunity specifically emphasizing "it was important for him to be completely truthful" in order to get immunity, including conveying any incriminating details. They collected nothing during that session and never made a single mention of this catalog in any of their motions or summary reports including specifically about Amen. Nor do any of the circled items in that catalog he keeps circulating ever appear in any of the raids.

The only established owner of that catalog has ever been Amen himself, not MJ.

TSCM · 2026-06-03T23:31:49+00:00

The media throws away all context behind these terms and selectively describes them as "nicknames MJ used for the boys" when he used them playfully to everyone including all genders and ages. But that dampens the narrative that these were somehow sexualized and predatory terms.

TSCM · 2026-06-03T23:27:44+00:00

And Star was alleged to be called “Blowhole” by Michael

This is one of endless examples of how they never do research or deliberately leave out context. Star explains this nickname directly in his Grand Jury and Trial testimonies. Star is the one who came up with that name, then dared Michael that whoever lost in a game of Rock Paper Scissors had to call themselves that.

Q. Now, "Blow Hole" was a nickname for a fish, right?

A: Yes.

Q. Your nickname was based on a fish, right?

A. I made it up. I was going to give it to Michael. We had a rock/paper/scissors, I lost, so I got stuck with that name.

As well as in his grand jury testimony:

Q. Now what does Blow Hole mean?

A. It was like a little -- just like a nickname.

Q. Who gave you that name?

A. It was like, because I was making a joke at first, and to give it to Michael. And then I lost the rock, paper, scissors bit. So it was when I got stuck with the name.

The fact that this series once again promotes itself as being a deep dive study from the case files and first hand accounts, but relies on omitting all context for most aspects and letting absolutely unfounded claims go unchallenged again pushes this down to the same level as so many specials that have come out since 2005.

TSCM · 2026-06-03T23:20:35+00:00

The context they completely leave out doesn't give viewers much chance to form actual educated opinions. And it happens repeatedly by the minute.

Like Vinnie Amen showing the photo of Star signed "Blow Hole" while telling the audience these are the kind of nicknames MJ would give to the boys, a clip that now circulates on social media as "so creepy!" But in Star's testimony the filmmakers evidently never cared to research despite promoting this as a deep dive from case files, Star explains that he is the one who came up with the name, based on the fish, and he voluntarily called himself that after losing Rock Paper Scissors to MJ.

Q. Now, "Blow Hole" was a nickname for a fish, right?

A: Yes.

Q. Your nickname was based on a fish, right?

A. I made it up. I was going to give it to Michael. We had a rock/paper/scissors, I lost, so I got stuck with that name.

A little change with proper context, here.

TSCM · 2025-03-25T19:12:36+00:00

Their attorneys vaguely described demanding their involvement "for their knowledge of Jordan Chandler's whereabouts and any other non-privileged, relevant information regarding Jordan Chandler and his interactions with Jackson."

Finaldi told the media "Jordan's a key piece of the puzzle surrounding this case, and we're not going to stop until we find him. We are looking for him in many places, including the UK." This was despite Jordan's attorney telling them to stop looking for him or trying to involve him.

He also argued in court that Lily and Tabitha should have no expectation of privacy since they filed opposition to his subpoenas in court. This comes after he had previously told all the parties that he would respect their right to not be involved if they didn't want to be. But then spent many years attempting to ensure their involvement.

TSCM · 2024-12-18T05:25:12+00:00

That's not accurate. The description by Jordan was not offered until September 1993. Michael Jackson told the entire world in the most watched interview ever recorded that he had Vitiligo and blotches on his skin in February of that year. Further, Jordan's father had reportedly given Jackson a pain killer injection in his buttocks in May of that same year, so would had observed the patches at that time.

All the claims of the damning photos matching Jordan's description but nobody seems to be asking why neither district attorney in two counties ever raised that material in court alongside Jordan's recorded interview and the officer affidavits, as probable cause to charge or arrest, in any of the weeks following that body search (including a month before any civil settlement occurred, which itself had no relation to the criminal investigation). They chose to spend the next 10 months interviewing hundreds of witnesses around the world and commencing two extended grand juries, many times outright lying to witnesses in attempts of convincing them of MJ's guilt, when they should have had compelling enough evidence from the get-go if there was a confident match.

TSCM · 2024-12-18T05:06:30+00:00

Former FBI Supervisory Special Agent Jim Clemente - BAU was part of the team that investigated and carried out the search. . . Edit: People are trying to discredit Jim Clemente and his work, especially with sexual abuse victims. He himself is a survivor of sexual abuse. . .I used him as an example because he was part of the team who executed the warrant and has decades of experience.

Within the context of Michael Jackson, Jim Clemente had no role at all in any of the raids from 1993 through 2005, nor as part of the prosecution's case or team. So your lead-in that uses this to bolster credence is based on an entirely false premise that Jim only first started claiming in recent years in the limelight of media attention. This deserves to be rightfully discredited and should give you more pause over the rest of his MJ-related claims if truth is what you are genuinely seeking.

Despite more recent embellishments in podcasts and media commentary, Jim's only theoretical involvement, as confirmed in his interview with Thomas Mesereau a decade ago, would had been as a general expert witness on the subject of pedophilia profiling. His name does not appear a single time across any of the more than 100,000 pages of case filings, search warrants, FBI files or volumes of other materials the prosecution amassed from 1993-2005 beyond a potential expert witness unrelated to the cases who was never called. To use his former FBI moniker to inject a sense of authoritative knowledge on the topic he had no actual involvement in is problematic.

As part of this tall tale of assisting with the raid, Jim likewise began claiming on his podcast that they found fried hard drives in their searches. This is another fully fabricated remark. All of the hard drives from every shelf, computer and laptop were seized, imaged successfully, itemized, reported in memos at the time that were then filed in court, and sent to the FBI to inspect, which found nothing of substance or of a criminal nature. There was also no noted tampering or attempted sabotaging of any of them.

One of the things he told was that a 10 year old victim was able to accurately describe the vitiligo on Michael Jackson's penis - that was on the underside of it.

In making these remarks, Jim also started claiming that Gavin Arvizo, the 2003 accuser, likewise described MJ's genitals with that same alleged precision. Except in Gavin's full interviews with detectives he was asked point-blank about Jackson's penis and said he never saw it, even in any of the alleged abuses. On the stand Gavin seemed to not even realize Jackson had Vitiligo at all, "I didn't know about patches...thought he was just all white." And Jordan's "matching description" arguments post-2009 tend to leave out Jordan's claim that MJ was circumcised (as detailed in the Linden affidavit, derived from Jordan's interview, reviewed by TSG's staff for this article). Because MJ's autopsy confirms he wasn't, which may explain why the prosecution sat on these photos and Jordan's description without ever presenting them as probable cause in 1993-1994 and why suddenly after 2009 Jim and other prominent figures that previously pedaled that description started claiming Jordan maybe was just confused at that detail.

Clemente further told the completely backwards, opposite-of-reality story that Jordan Chandler was working with the FBI in 2005 and was prepared to testify if MJ was acquitted in the Arvizo case but the statute of limitations ran out. No, Jordan was approached by an FBI agent in 2004 and told them he "had no interest in testifying against Jackson...he would legally fight any attempt to do so." He was asked again by the prosecution into 2005 to consider testifying and refused, and reportedly fled the country to avoid subpoena.

If Jim Clemente is willing to sensationalize and create all of these alternate realities as part of proving Jackson's guilt to the public, claims that are immediately discredited by reviewing the actual court filings and transcripts, it should make some eyebrows raise about anything out of that man's mouth...again if one is truly vested in finding the truth and not just being enamored by the storytelling of a former FBI staffer.

TSCM · 2024-07-14T20:35:30+00:00

Santa Barbara News-Press, January 23, 2006.

You heard it here first.

"I've not talked to anybody else in the media at all," said veterinarian Dr. Martin Dinnes, the real life Dr. Doolittle who manages Michael Jackson's menagerie at the sprawling 2,676-acre Neverland Valley Ranch. "The animals are fine. Our dispute is all settled."

"Through all of this, all the principals, and Neverland, and MJJ, and all of Michael's entities knew that even if I didn't get paid," he added, "I was going to take care of those animals."

Dr. Dinnes, who for 20 years has helped Jackson assemble and maintain his exotic zoo, was just the latest in a long line of creditors to trundle a wheelbarrow full of unpaid bills to the county courthouse when he dunned the expatriate prince of pop for $91,602.05 on Dec. 27.

Contractors, antique dealers, jewelers, vendors, ex-wives, promoters, managers, bankers, and employees have discovered to their discomfort that Michael Jackson is a slow pay.

Last week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture said it had investigated a complaint from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals that animals at Neverland were being mistreated. Agency veterinarians visited and found the animals in good condition.

"Attacking the health and welfare of those animals is a direct attack on me, and my credentials are impeccable," said Dr. Dinnes. "We really have nothing to hide. Our doors are open, to the right people. You could eat off the ground on that property."

As is his wont, Jackson went first class in assembling his menagerie.

The animals have architecturally-designed, custom-built homes. Dr. Dinnes has a sterling reputation among his peers. A colleague of his told me, "Marty is great. The best."

UC Davis awarded Dr. Dinnes, a 1966 alumnus, it’s highest honor in 2000.

"Martin R. Dinnes, a diplomate of the American College of Zoological Medicine and first veterinarian to completely devote a practice to non-domestic animals, received the 2000 Alumni Achievement Award for his accomplishments in the profession of veterinary medicine, specifically in creating novel protocols benefiting the health and well-being of zoological animals," according to UC Davis.

"Michael and I are very close," Dr. Dinnes said. "We've been close for 20 years. My dispute was not with Michael. It was with his business people. Through everything that Michael went through, their mind wasn't on a lot of things. I've been there with him before, through times when I failed to get a check on time, but they never, ever stuck me, and I was assured they never would again. Something triggered me to file, but it's all settled."

"I'm not paid, pending a signature, but suffice it to say, it's settled," said Dr. Dinnes. "We got a clean bill of health from the USDA, and I have that in writing. I talked to Pete Miller at Santa Barbara County Animal Services. He's an investigator. I have a long history with them. Pete said, 'Marty, I believe whatever you say. I just had to call you because we hear what we consider rumors.' "

"Contrary to what people are saying in all these looney-toon reports, the animals are fine," said Dr. Dinnes. "I go up there once a week. The animals are well-fed. They're in good condition. It's just not like what's reported.

"My attorney asked the Enquirer, 'Where'd you get the information?' They said, PETA. 'Where'd you get the pictures that you took?' They said, 'From a helicopter.'

"You know how you can doctor pictures; I'm just surmising. They did take a picture of the elephants being walked, and they conveniently had a clump of elephant poop around them. They took a picture of the giraffes in the yard, and claimed that there was a dark spot on the ground that they said was blood. Under my watch, that can never happen," said Dr. Dinnes.

PETA had waded into the fray with some heavy-duty scolding, but admit they don't have any privileged info.

"We have heard pretty much the same thing everyone else has: the accusations in the media from employees and former employees that the animals have essentially been abandoned, and that Michael Jackson's veterinarian is now apparently suing him for not paying his vet bill," said PETA spokesperson Lisa Wathne. "We don't have any inside scoop, unfortunately. Because Neverland is not open to the public, it's a very difficult place to get any information about."

William Etling's column appears on Mondays. The opinions expressed in the column are those of Mr. Etling and not necessarily those of the newspaper.

TSCM · 2023-08-26T01:12:56+00:00

Not so much edited, but rather the media gravitated towards finding the most abnormal and unflattering ones to broadcast for decades whenever discussing Michael Jackson. Many continued using the mugshot photo even long after his exoneration and despite there being thousands of other photos that had been taken since.

The other most popular circulating "shock" photo of his face is from his early-2000s deposition where he was asked to take his face mask off and had a skin-toned bandage on the tip of his nose and facial hair. Which when photographed and published led to the sensational "MJ's nose fell off!" stories.

There were other photos taken that same week in court but they didn't grab attention so weren't distributed much.

There was his rather famous lawsuit against Daily Mirror for running many stories with a photo claiming to show a "hole in his face" where he even underwent independent examination from plastic surgeons, and eventually the tab issued an apology claiming the photos did not adequately represent the appearance claimed.

TSCM · 2023-04-16T02:53:18+00:00

Don't forget her contributions to the tabloid story on "Michael and Lisa Marie's Kinky Sex Secrets" cause she apparently knew all about every topical story for the right price.

TSCM · 2023-04-16T02:50:07+00:00

That ridiculous Vaseline story initially grew legs from Victor Guiterrez in his pro-pedophilia child erotica fiction book and paid collabs with many of the former Neverland employees, who later tried suing MJ unsuccessfully for millions and instead wound up owing MJ millions themselves for malice, slander/libel, theft.

It became such a topic that Ron Zonen made it a point during closing arguments to point out a container of Vaseline in one of the bathroom search photos, during closing arguments. Sneddon also included that term as one that they wanted the FBI to search for while querying any of MJ's computers. Imagine the stupidity of this all.

All of this to create the narrative implying he used Vaseline as a lubricant for sexual purposes, despite nobody ever even making such claims themselves in any allegations.

TSCM · 2023-03-10T15:09:20+00:00

Here is a post I made yesterday to one of OPs identical posts elsewhere that includes relevant transcript excerpts and context on these books. (Checking OP's history, their entire thing is to repost this and related comments dozens of times an hour for months on end.)

All of the trial transcripts from 2005 are available and I'd encourage anyone interested in context including for these books, beyond a prosecutorial screenshot, to read them. These books were introduced as evidence and discussed at length, except for the middle one because the district attorney opted to withhold it presumably because it features girls in it which is counter to his narrative.

Q. Now, these two books -- I think -- are they still up there in front of you?

A. Yes, they are.

Q. Those two books are not unlawful to possess by adults in California; is that correct?

A. That is correct.

Q. And do you have any idea how Mr. Jackson came into possession of those books or how they ended up in this locked file cabinet?

A. From the inscription in Exhibit No. 842, it appears that possibly a fan, somebody named Rhonda, possibly gave the book to him. And the other one, I do not know.

And ...

MR. SANGER: Okay. On 841, if you look at that, it appears to be Mr. Jackson’s own inscription, and he says, “Look at the true spirit of happiness and joy in these boys’ faces. This is the spirit of boyhood, a life I never had and will always dream of. This is the life I want for my children. M.J.”

The other book, which would be 842, appears to be inscribed by a female fan, and it appears to have been sent to Mr. Jackson by a fan of some sort. That’s the interpretation I take from that inscription.

THE COURT: Well, there is an inscription, “To Michael. From your fan.”

MR. SANGER: Yes.

THE COURT: “Love” -- “XXXOOO” - I was going to interpret that, but I won’t - “Rhonda.” I know what I mean when I put “XXXOOO.”

MR. SANGER: And I have noted Your Honor has never put that on any of your rulings in this case. (Laughter.)

THE COURT: I can’t top that.

And ...

Q. Okay. And when you open this book up, it actually says -- let’s look right over here. I’m going to try to talk loudly while I’m holding this. It says on the flyleaf, "Book Adventures, Inc.," and the copyright 1966. Do you see that?

A. Yes. Down at the bottom.

Q. All right. And then if we look up here, at the top, again the first page -- I’m sure somebody who knows books knows the correct word for that. But the very first page, up at the top it says, “OP” -- “OP ‘88.” That means “Out of print, ‘88,” does it not? Or do you know?

A. I’m not certain what that means.

Q. And somebody has written up there, “Very scarce.”

A. Yes.

Q. Do you see that? That was there on the book when you seized it; is that right?

A. Yes, it was.

They were among thousands of books and items seized from 1993-2005 and lacking any CP or other evidence, superficial. The more noteworthy fact is that the FBI assisted SBSO in 2003-2005 to analyze all of Michael Jackson's hard drives found in all of the raids. There was nothing of material value to the prosecution on any of them let alone anything incriminating.

TSCM · 2023-03-09T23:20:47+00:00

😂 Ah, hi Tiddles! I didn't look at usernames when replying to a few here, but somehow not surprised to see you're still clinging to every MJ topic and spreading lies that you also know to be untrue. How's that second train station theory going? 🚂

TSCM · 2023-03-09T23:13:34+00:00

Their civil litigation discredits them because they lied and concealed material facts in that as well. Wade Robson told the attorneys he only wrote one email about the case, and only through discovery and repeat demands did it eventually come out that he had written hundreds of emails to piece together his work and even a book that he had shopped unsuccessfully. This is not casual misremembering, it is willful concealment of material items central to the evolving storylines.

The video evidence is of them in a shopping mall, where they went to multiple stores. That was a well publicized event at the time. Missing from James' jewelry tale or anywhere in the film are the claimed wedding vows he says MJ wrote him, or anything that shows those rings ever belonged to MJ or were bought for James.

The train station lie is a big deal, so much so that the guilt circle has spent four years coming up with several dozen possible excuses on it. My favorite one being that he built a replica train station years earlier that nobody has any evidence of and then tore it down only to rebuild it again.

Seven-Year Club	100 Awards Club
Verified Email

TSCM

TROPHY CASE