Watched Part 1 of the HBO Documentary last night detailing how Michael Jackson sexually abused two kids. It was disturbing and sickening listening to these stories. What I do not get is why these parents let their child sleep with a grown, adult man.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Safechuck is the more credible accuser, for sure.
But my trial practice professor always hammered home a point to us and it was that any argument that you make that isn't actively helping your case is actively harming it.
Robson's credibility is just so shot to hell that Reed's decision to make him 1/2 of the entire foundation of this movie makes you question every motive he has. When you have to lean that heavily into someone that really has credibility problems, it makes me wonder just how good you thought your 'case in chief' really was. Why use such a shoddy source to bolster a case that was seemingly so obvious. And if you'll gloss over his clear credibility issues, why should I trust anything you have to say.
He wasn't making a case, though, was he? He was making a documentary. And he's made a lot of money doing it. The fact that people still question based on using Robson's story means that more people are talking about it and more people are watching it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRock:
John Ziegler also staunchly believes Jerry Sandusky is innocent. It's like he's never met a pedo he couldn't defend.
Thanks for making this point....anyone that believes Jerry fucking Sandusky is automatically disqualifed for having an opinion on any sort of case like this.
Don't believe Wade Robson or the other accusers but believe a Jerry Sandusky stan.....ha uh no thank you. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kysirsoze:
Whatever your opinion about this whole mess, the guy in this video is an insufferable ****ing moron.
To be fair I'm not saying Jackson isn't a pedo. I think he is.
I'm just saying I think these two guys are trying to make money off of the suffering of other children.
I don't have any sympathy for Jackson. To me this pointing out someone else is a POS (like the woman who wasn't there on 9/11 claiming benefits.) [Reply]