Leaving Neverland
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 14, 15, 16  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:40 am    Post subject:

so because a good story is told during an era of #metoo. are we to believe every single story we hear? even if we have mounds of evidence to the contrary? at what point do we say, just maybe every...single...person thats calling themselves victims were not actual victims and yes that means some of these people are talking for $$ and other reasons. Is that at all possible?

I mean, are we going to completely ignore everything that ContagiousInspiration just posted? and i dont care if it was MJ, MP, or ND. If you have all that evidence stating otherwise for that many years and secret investigations, etc, etc. and still Nada... when can you say...maybe the dude was just a weirdo that wished he was a kid again but thats it?

Basically you guys are saying, any docuseries that pops up that hells nice tear jerking stories and moments will convince you that the people in those series are victims no matter what the evidence says otherwise.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53713

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 9:49 am    Post subject:

Jackson has been accused of abuse by several young boys. If you find their stories meaningless, there's also this to consider courtesy of Vanity Fair:

Quote:
1. There is no dispute that, at age 34, Michael Jackson slept more than 30 nights in a row in the same bed with 13-year-old Jordie Chandler at the boy’s house with Chandler’s mother present. He also slept in the same bed with Jordie Chandler at Chandler’s father’s house. The parents were divorced.

2. So far, five boys Michael Jackson shared beds with have accused him of abuse: Jordie Chandler, Jason Francia, Gavin Arvizo, Wade Robson, and Jimmy Safechuck. Jackson had the same nickname for Chandler and Arvizo: “Rubba.” He called Robson “Little One” and Safechuck “Applehead.”

3. Jackson paid $25 million to settle the Chandlers’ lawsuit, with $18 million going to Jordie, $2.5 million to each of the parents, and the rest to lawyers. Jackson said he paid that sum to avoid something “long and drawn out.” Francia also received $2.4 million from Jackson.

4. Michael Jackson suffered from the skin discoloration disease vitiligo. Jordie Chandler drew a picture of the markings on the underside of Jackson’s penis. His drawings were sealed in an envelope. A few months later, investigators photographed Jackson’s genitalia. The photographs matched Chandler’s drawings.

5. The hallway leading to Jackson’s bedroom was a serious security zone covered by video and wired for sound so that the steps of anyone approaching would make ding-dong sounds.

6. Jackson had an extensive collection of adult erotic material he kept in a suitcase next to his bed, including S&M bondage photos and a study of naked boys. Forensic experts with experience in the Secret Service found the fingerprints of boys alongside Jackson’s on the same pages. Jackson also had bondage sculptures of women with ball gags in their mouths on his desk, in full view of the boys who slept there.

7. According to the Neverland staff interviewed by the Santa Barbara authorities, no one ever saw or knew of a woman spending the night with Michael Jackson, including his two spouses, Debbie Rowe or Lisa Marie Presley. Rowe, the mother of two of Jackson’s children, made it clear to the Santa Barbara authorities that she never had sex with Jackson.

8. The parents of boys Jackson shared beds with were courted assiduously and given myriad expensive gifts. Wade Robson’s mother testified in the 2005 trial that she funneled wages through Jackson’s company and was given a permanent resident visa. Jimmy Safechuck’s parents got a house. Jordie Chandler’s mother got a diamond bracelet.

9. Two of the fathers of those who have accused Jackson, Jordie Chandler and Wade Robson, committed suicide. Both were estranged from their sons at the time.

10. In a 2002 documentary, Living with Michael Jackson, Jackson told Martin Bashir there was nothing wrong with sharing his bed with boys.


10 Undeniable Facts About the Jackson Allegations
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
loslakersss
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 11853
Location: LA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 10:43 am    Post subject:

splashmtn wrote:
so because a good story is told during an era of #metoo. are we to believe every single story we hear? even if we have mounds of evidence to the contrary? at what point do we say, just maybe every...single...person thats calling themselves victims were not actual victims and yes that means some of these people are talking for $$ and other reasons. Is that at all possible?

I mean, are we going to completely ignore everything that ContagiousInspiration just posted? and i dont care if it was MJ, MP, or ND. If you have all that evidence stating otherwise for that many years and secret investigations, etc, etc. and still Nada... when can you say...maybe the dude was just a weirdo that wished he was a kid again but thats it?

Basically you guys are saying, any docuseries that pops up that hells nice tear jerking stories and moments will convince you that the people in those series are victims no matter what the evidence says otherwise.


I don't think anyone is saying to ignore valid evidence or believe anything someone says - I agree there have been plenty of cases of false accusations for a number of reasons. But you also cannot discount everything someone says simply because it would be "convenient" for them to do so (easy way to get money, fame, ruin someone's reputation).

There is evidence supporting both sides in this case, which side has the stronger case? You should consider all evidence, not just the evidence that supports your side of the issue.

I don't know why you would bash the #metoo movement when it has proven how corrupt people with money/power can be and how much they can get away with. And the whole "they're probably just making this up because of this movement" is the whole reason the movement started in the first place - to fight that kind of thinking. How many victims in cases of sexual assault were ignored? Only later on do we find out that what they were saying was true and they weren't the only victim. This isn't about "hey believe everything I say even if i can't prove it", it's about listening to people and not making up your mind before you have enough information to make an informed decision.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:13 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Never convicted
Taking the word of people who already swore under oath nothing happened

Investigated by FBI for 10 years No conviction

Convenient to make this after he cannot defend himself


Also, Corey Feldman & Maculy Calkin both to this day claim that nothing even close to sexual ever happened with them and MJ.


Which proves nothing.


He was investigated by the FBI for 10 years. He had 2 court cases. None of that ever turned up tangible evidence of child sexual abuse. It's innocent until proven guilty. These documentaries and such are witch hunts on a deceased person that was already exonerated for these allegations.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:15 am    Post subject:

As a singer, dancer and performer, Michael Jackson was special. Extremely talented, one of a kind. Amazing.

But as a child predator he is wholly ordinary. He used the same lies, the same manipulation, the same secretive games with the same veiled threats. He used the same basic lures, just camouflaged with money and fame. He used the same tactics of isolation, the same coercion with drugs and alcohol. He used the same inappropriate sexual images to arouse and desensitize. He even used the same justification of 'equality' between he as a man-child and the children blessed with wisdom beyond their years.

And he wove his elaborate web so that he could do terrible things to male children, just like every other child predator.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
anth2000
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 12070
Location: Pasadena, CA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:45 pm    Post subject:

People that still defend Michael Jackson are just blind, deaf and very very dumb. There is enough dirt on MJ to bury a small village. I mean, its crazy how many people are so blinded by his stardom and forget that he was a very troubled soul and was not all there. I don't doubt some folks might be out for money, fame, etc., but I have no doubt that the man committed crimes with boys. Its hard for hardcore fans to separate the man from the entertainer.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:13 pm    Post subject:

anth2000 wrote:
People that still defend Michael Jackson are just blind, deaf and very very dumb. There is enough dirt on MJ to bury a small village. I mean, its crazy how many people are so blinded by his stardom and forget that he was a very troubled soul and was not all there. I don't doubt some folks might be out for money, fame, etc., but I have no doubt that the man committed crimes with boys. Its hard for hardcore fans to separate the man from the entertainer.


Interesting. So much dirt yet the FBI couldn't get enough on him over a 10 year period secretly investigating him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31783
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:52 pm    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
anth2000 wrote:
People that still defend Michael Jackson are just blind, deaf and very very dumb. There is enough dirt on MJ to bury a small village. I mean, its crazy how many people are so blinded by his stardom and forget that he was a very troubled soul and was not all there. I don't doubt some folks might be out for money, fame, etc., but I have no doubt that the man committed crimes with boys. Its hard for hardcore fans to separate the man from the entertainer.


Interesting. So much dirt yet the FBI couldn't get enough on him over a 10 year period secretly investigating him.


They didn't get R Kelly for a while, either. Doesn't mean he wasn't committing crimes. By the way, what you said earlier about "exoneration", I don't know about that. He wasn't convicted, but that doesn't mean he was necessarily innocent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:57 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:


4. Michael Jackson suffered from the skin discoloration disease vitiligo. Jordie Chandler drew a picture of the markings on the underside of Jackson’s penis. His drawings were sealed in an envelope. A few months later, investigators photographed Jackson’s genitalia. The photographs matched Chandler’s drawings.



I picked the most disturbing one first
https://themichaeljacksonallegations.com/2016/12/26/did-jordan-chandlers-description-of-michael-jacksons-penis-match-the-photographs-taken-of-the-stars-genitalia-by-the-police/

More (bleep) CHAOS and lies from parents and DA

They forced Michael to strip and give them permission to take pictures
Of his genitals and ass because the boy said he knew all about it because he'd seen it multiple times

His descriptions we're all wrong and potentially aided by his father who stripped Jackson himself


I'm not defending a person here

I'm trying to defend Truth

Porn 24x7 on his bed and parents still let their children in there?

I'll dig for that later
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:01 pm    Post subject:

I would like one answer
Is there anything a court of law can do to someone
Who writes a deeply disparaging documentary
About a dead person

If "No"

Is the same true if they wrote it about a person who is alive?

Just checking
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53713

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:19 pm    Post subject:

A blog someone set up to discredit the victims is not a legitimate news source.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67312
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:32 pm    Post subject:

Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:35 pm    Post subject:

The choice to defend Michael Jackson says nothing about Michael Jackson and quite a bit about the defender.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:38 pm    Post subject:

JerryMagicKobe wrote:
The choice to defend Michael Jackson says nothing about Michael Jackson and quite a bit about the defender.


This is projection at it's finest. Where is your legal proof and evidence that MJ did what has been accused of him? There were 2 trials and a decade long investigation in which both exonerated MJ.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53713

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:40 pm    Post subject:

JerryMagicKobe wrote:
The choice to defend Michael Jackson says nothing about Michael Jackson and quite a bit about the defender.


People are entitled to their opinions, but faced with this much those who continue to defend him should at least admit that short of videotaped evidence there's nothing that could change their minds.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53713

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:41 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They both had their suits dismissed based on the California statute of limitations and are in appeal. Neither man received payment for participating in the doc.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
numero-ocho
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 18190
Location: Los Angeles, CA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:41 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They already did.

Quote:
In 2013, Robson said he was finally ready to come forward with the truth: He was molested by Jackson as a young boy. He filed a lawsuit claiming he was sexually abused by Jackson over a seven-year period. Safechuck filed a similar lawsuit a year later.

A court ruled in 2015 that Robson had filed his lawsuit too late to get any of Jackson’s estate, leaving two remaining defendants: MJJ Productions, Inc., and MJJ Ventures, Inc. Two years later, a judge found that MJJ Productions, Inc., and MJJ Ventures, Inc., both Jackson-owned corporations, were not liable for Robson’s exposure to Jackson. The judge did not rule on the credibility of Robson’s allegations.

_________________
"Suck it up. Don't be a baby. Do your job." - Kobe Bryant
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:48 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They both had their suits dismissed based on the California statute of limitations and are in appeal. Neither man received payment for participating in the doc.


Wade testified under oath in 2005 that no molestation or sexual abuse occurred. As soon as MJ dies, Wade and Safechuck try to get a piece of the MJ estate pie.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ocho
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 53713

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:53 pm    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
ocho wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They both had their suits dismissed based on the California statute of limitations and are in appeal. Neither man received payment for participating in the doc.


Wade testified under oath in 2005 that no molestation or sexual abuse occurred. As soon as MJ dies, Wade and Safechuck try to get a piece of the MJ estate pie.


I understand that abuse dynamics are relatively new to the broader conventional wisdom out there...but it is 2019. There's plenty of information out there about this stuff and at this point there's not much of an excuse to be ignorant to it.
_________________
14-5-3-12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31783
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:53 pm    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
ocho wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They both had their suits dismissed based on the California statute of limitations and are in appeal. Neither man received payment for participating in the doc.


Wade testified under oath in 2005 that no molestation or sexual abuse occurred. As soon as MJ dies, Wade and Safechuck try to get a piece of the MJ estate pie.


I do agree that Robson's credibility should be in question, and that if it were a trial and he were the sole accuser, MJ would not be convicted. Reasonable doubt would likely come into play based on his previous testimony.

However, when you take the totality of everything into account, I find it implausible that he didn't commit crimes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31783
Location: Anaheim, CA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:54 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
ocho wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They both had their suits dismissed based on the California statute of limitations and are in appeal. Neither man received payment for participating in the doc.


Wade testified under oath in 2005 that no molestation or sexual abuse occurred. As soon as MJ dies, Wade and Safechuck try to get a piece of the MJ estate pie.


I understand that abuse dynamics are relatively new to the broader conventional wisdom out there...but it is 2019. There's plenty of information out there about this stuff and at this point there's not much of an excuse to be ignorant to it.


Yep.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:05 pm    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
So much dirt yet the FBI couldn't get enough on him over a 10 year period secretly investigating him.


And OJ wasn't convicted in the criminal trial . . . doesn't mean he didn't kill Ron and Nicole.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:14 pm    Post subject:

ChickenStu wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
ocho wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They both had their suits dismissed based on the California statute of limitations and are in appeal. Neither man received payment for participating in the doc.


Wade testified under oath in 2005 that no molestation or sexual abuse occurred. As soon as MJ dies, Wade and Safechuck try to get a piece of the MJ estate pie.


I do agree that Robson's credibility should be in question, and that if it were a trial and he were the sole accuser, MJ would not be convicted. Reasonable doubt would likely come into play based on his previous testimony.

However, when you take the totality of everything into account, I find it implausible that he didn't commit crimes.


Quote:
According to the grand juries, the evidence presented by the Santa Barbara police and the LAPD was not convincing enough to indict Jackson or subpoena him,[69][100] even though grand juries can indict the accused purely on hearsay evidence.[104][105] According to a 1994 report by Variety, a source in contact with the grand juries said that none of the witnesses had produced anything to directly implicate Jackson.[73] According to a 1994 report by Showbiz Today, one of the 1994 grand jurors claimed they "did not hear any damaging testimony" during the hearings.[106]


Quote:
On April 11, 1994, the grand jury session in Santa Barbara was extended by 90 days to allow Sneddon to gather more evidence. Prosecution sources said they were frustrated in their grand jury probe, failing to find direct evidence of the molestation charges.[110] The final grand jury disbanded without returning an indictment against Jackson.[111]


Quote:
Music journalist Charles Thomson noted a continued media bias against Jackson after Chandler's suicide. Thomson said he was contacted by a British tabloid to supply information about the 1993 allegations, only to have them replace his carefully researched information with the misinformation he advised them to avoid.[15] According to Thomson, when Jackson's FBI file was released the following month, the media reported that it created the impression of guilt, even though the file supported his innocence.[15] He noted that Gene Simmons' allegations in 2010 about Jackson molesting children received over a hundred times more coverage than his interview with Jackson's long-time guitarist, Jennifer Batten, who rebutted Simmons' claims.[15]


Quote:
The lawsuit was settled on January 25, 1994,[82] with $15,331,250 to be held in a trust fund for Jordan,[83] $1.5 million for each of his parents, and $5 million for the family's lawyer, for a total of approximately $23 million.[84] Another source showed Feldman was to receive $3 million based on a September 1993 retainer, for a total of $21 million.[85] According to a motion passed to Judge Melville in 2004, it was Chandler who initiated the settlement with Jackson's insurer.[86]

Jackson's insurance company "negotiated and paid the settlement, over the protests of Mr. Jackson and his personal legal counsel" and was "the source of the settlement amounts", as noted in a 2005 memorandum in People v. Jackson.[87


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_child_sexual_abuse_accusations_against_Michael_Jackson#Civil_lawsuit

Quote:
Gavin and Star's mother, Janet, was the star witness.[9] The Guardian described her as eccentric, "talking over lawyers, extemporising, and turning dramatically during cross-examination by Mr Jackson's lawyer to address the jurors ... Her appearance was a disaster for the prosecution, but if not called by the prosecution, she would have been called by the defence to even worse effect."[9] According to the BBC, Janet Arvizo was an "explosive"[32] witness who gave a "combative and rambling" testimony,[28] made erratic outbursts, rarely gave straight answers, and used the same phrases repeatedly.[32] The jurors said she would "stare down at them" and snap her fingers at them.[36]

The defense sought to portray Janet as untrustworthy, with a history of perjury and fraud. She admitted to having lied under oath in an earlier lawsuit.[28] The prosecution planned to have an expert on domestic violence testify that she may have lied because she had been beaten by her ex-husband, but the judge did not allow it, saying it would be irrelevant.[28] The defense also presented evidence of Janet having committed welfare fraud, for which she was later convicted.[37]


Quote:
Comedian George Lopez testified that he had given the Arvizo family money when Gavin was fighting cancer, but came to believe that Gavin's father was more interested in money than helping his son. Lopez cut ties with the family after the father became more demanding. Lopez also said that the father had accused him of stealing $300 from Gavin's wallet. When the father asked what he was supposed to tell his son, Lopez testified that he responded: "Tell him his father’s an extortionist."[40]



Quote:
Comedian Chris Tucker claimed he had felt sorry for the Arvizos and bought them gifts and given them money. He felt the Arvizos expected too much, calling him their "brother" and taking advantage of him. He testified that he had warned Jackson about the family, whom he called "cunning".[41]



Quote:
In 2017, the documentary series The Jury Speaks (2017) covered the trial with four members of the jury.[43] Some reported receiving anonymous threats, and one said someone had loosened the wheels on her car.[43] All said they would acquit Jackson again, even in the wake of later allegations.[43] One juror said: "It was pretty obvious that there were ulterior motives on behalf of the family ... there wasn't a shred of evidence that was able to show us or give us any doubt in voting guilty."[36]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Michael_Jackson#Janet_Arvizo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67312
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:24 pm    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
ocho wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Are Wade Robson and James Safechuck suing Michael's estate?


They both had their suits dismissed based on the California statute of limitations and are in appeal. Neither man received payment for participating in the doc.


Wade testified under oath in 2005 that no molestation or sexual abuse occurred. As soon as MJ dies, Wade and Safechuck try to get a piece of the MJ estate pie.

That's what I see, a possible money grab. I think Michael was a pedophile but think these two are in it for monetary gain.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 06, 2019 5:35 pm    Post subject:

ocho wrote:
A blog someone set up to discredit the victims is not a legitimate news source.


Are there footnotes or citations

Money to produce a video does not convict you
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 14, 15, 16  Next
Page 2 of 16
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB