Jim Carrey Online

Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit

Jim Carrey discussion on non-movie related topics or topics which doesn't fit anywhere else...

Re: :(

Postby sianlee » Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:30 am

Yes!!!! I was thinking the same!! Who would write "Jim Carrey!" As the name on a phone?! And after all of his tweets... his writing is rather bland. Very short, it's like it's not him at all. We might not know him, but that certain seems like an older man writing who doesn't prefer texting by the sounds of those messages.

Has anyone added up this ex husbands name to see if it adds up to 23???? That's our answer.
Image
User avatar
sianlee
Horton Hears a Who!
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 9:46 am
Location: Wherever Jim is, I am

Re: :(

Postby AdaL » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:10 pm

sianlee wrote:Yes!!!! I was thinking the same!! Who would write "Jim Carrey!" As the name on a phone?!



It could just be naiivety on Cathriona's part and I know the iphone has the option to include first and last names on its contacts but I think it's odd to be dating someone so high profile and easily identifiable and have their full name on your phone. If not just Jim, why not, Jim C or another name entirely?
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby AdaL » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:18 pm

sianlee wrote:I know you're all right. I guess for me it was just one of those moments that were like "woah" when you see all the messages and stuff. Don't get me wrong, I am one of the first people that will critize something. But it's like... we're all those messages fake? I know they've skewed the truth... but it just seems to paint a new image for Jim for me. I know he's human and all, I just wish he got a scan done and proved to the cost that he didn't have any of that. Because then the whole case is false! Why can't Jenny speak out about this?


As I said, the messages are just very private examples of completely non-contextual communications between two people having a difficult time. The only real proof of anything from them is how despicable Mark Burton is.
There's no new image of Jim. He isn't hateful or nasty - he's having a very private exchange with someone over an issue that we nothing about. I've certainly been there and I'm sure most people have.
Being forced into divulging very private details about his medical history will prove nothing. Burton is just hoping that Jim will be so keen to preseve that privacy that he'll pay him to shut up. As I said, there's no shame at all in having an STD (and Jim is under no obligation to share whether he has or hasn't with anyone) but there is an overwhelming amount of shame in being Mark Burton.

sianlee wrote:Why can't Jenny speak out about this?


Oh, blimey, don't invoke her. That's the last thing we need. :shock:
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby AdaL » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:19 pm

sianlee wrote:The world is so sad


Indeed it is. :cry:
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

Re: :(

Postby AdaL » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:29 pm

fluffy wrote:who keeps 2 1/2 year old texts?...........i think you are spot on when you said you thought the 'organisation' had been keeping tabs on Jim for possible future use. :shock: :(


Yep, very odd to hold on to texts for that long.

And, yes, sadly I think that's what they were doing. I think they may have been privvy to everything all the way along. There's no way they would've approved of her dating him or not pressured her about it. They hate 'outsiders' having an influence over their members - particularly high profile influences that have publicly mocked them and rebuffed their advances in the past.
I think the main and only reason they could've encouraged it is so they can 'keep tabs' on him and possibly drain money from him via her.
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby fluffy » Tue Sep 27, 2016 3:17 pm

Jenny's got nothing to do with this so i hope the media leaves her alone.
Fluffy

Image
User avatar
fluffy
JCO Staff
 
Posts: 20507
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 3:03 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby EvaAraujo » Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:50 pm

fluffy wrote:Jenny's got nothing to do with this so i hope the media leaves her alone.


Jenny who?
His ex?
Oh please... her ship has sailed.
I'm a guardian of the spark...
Image
I'm a God damn and proud good fan... and I love it! = )>
User avatar
EvaAraujo
JCO Staff
 
Posts: 2095
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:29 pm
Location: Lisbon

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby EvaAraujo » Tue Sep 27, 2016 7:51 pm

sianlee wrote:I know you're all right. I guess for me it was just one of those moments that were like "woah" when you see all the messages and stuff. Don't get me wrong, I am one of the first people that will critize something. But it's like... we're all those messages fake? I know they've skewed the truth... but it just seems to paint a new image for Jim for me. I know he's human and all, I just wish he got a scan done and proved to the cost that he didn't have any of that. Because then the whole case is false! Why can't Jenny speak out about this?


Truth will come in do time.
I'm a guardian of the spark...
Image
I'm a God damn and proud good fan... and I love it! = )>
User avatar
EvaAraujo
JCO Staff
 
Posts: 2095
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:29 pm
Location: Lisbon

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby AdaL » Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:35 pm

fluffy wrote:Yeah, i've been reading about Scientology for years too....i think i've read every book ever written about it and if the members actually knew the truth, there would be nothing short of a revolution within the organistation. But they're brainwashed drones who are told the rest of us are basically Satan and they are made to believe that it's the voice of Satan, rather than reason and common sense, which argues against them.....if only they really knew the truth.........


Have you read 'The Unbreakable Miss Lovely'?
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

Re: :(

Postby fluffy » Tue Sep 27, 2016 10:41 pm

There's no way they would've approved of her dating him or not pressured her about it.

i kinda think they wanted them to hook up, they've been after Jim long before Cat came along...i'd go so far as to say it wouldn't surprise me if the organisation conveniently 'arranged' for Jim and Cat to 'bump' into each other. Regardless, they should let the poor girl be remembered for the good things and not for this. Mark is despicable.
Fluffy

Image
User avatar
fluffy
JCO Staff
 
Posts: 20507
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 3:03 pm
Location: Scotland

Re: :(

Postby AdaL » Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:02 pm

fluffy wrote:
There's no way they would've approved of her dating him or not pressured her about it.

i kinda think they wanted them to hook up, they've been after Jim long before Cat came along...i'd go so far as to say it wouldn't surprise me if the organisation conveniently 'arranged' for Jim and Cat to 'bump' into each other. Regardless, they should let the poor girl be remembered for the good things and not for this. Mark is despicable.


You could very well be right. It's unlikely that she would do anything without their approval and that could have only come if a) there was access to Jim in some way - for the ultimate gain of money or recruitment or B) If, like you say, they'd engineered the whole thing in the first place.

And you can bet your last penny it's not just Burton behind this.. he's had assistance from her vile friends. For sure.
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby sianlee » Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:28 pm

What about the video footage currently revealed? Cocain and 50 Shades Of Jim :( :(
Image
User avatar
sianlee
Horton Hears a Who!
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 9:46 am
Location: Wherever Jim is, I am

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby AdaL » Wed Sep 28, 2016 12:15 am

sianlee wrote:What about the video footage currently revealed? Cocain and 50 Shades Of Jim :( :(


Ah, what a surprise. Radar - the sister of National Enquirer, who also ran this shite last month.
Absolute.fucking.idiots.
Sugar means....... sugar. The guy has talked about how it effects him and his moods several times in the past. That's why he cut it out of his diet.
Jesus...
Apparently that makes him depraved. WTF..

And if this legendary video exists, then it confirms that Burton broke the law by fake marrying her. End this awful character assassination and arrest him for his crime please.
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby sianlee » Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:15 am

Yeah it didn't say that it could help Jims case.... I didn't know Jim said that before. But reading that article doesn't it make sense that they were talking about Coke? Weed and sugar do t seem to go hand in hand in the same sentence... and what's with the Christmas thing? Sugar over Christmas :O maybe... is it just me or does it really sound a little bad? Still don't get me wrong, I'm still all for Jim to make it through this and hopefully everything is disproven!!
Image
User avatar
sianlee
Horton Hears a Who!
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 9:46 am
Location: Wherever Jim is, I am

Re: Jim Carrey Statement about Lawsuit.

Postby AdaL » Wed Sep 28, 2016 2:34 am

sianlee wrote:Yeah it didn't say that it could help Jims case.... I didn't know Jim said that before. But reading that article doesn't it make sense that they were talking about Coke? Weed and sugar do t seem to go hand in hand in the same sentence... and what's with the Christmas thing? Sugar over Christmas :O maybe... is it just me or does it really sound a little bad? Still don't get me wrong, I'm still all for Jim to make it through this and hopefully everything is disproven!!


No, trust me. It's sugar. And you don't 'eat' cocaine. I'm sure even trash sites like that realise it too, but they're taking such glee in printing this BS that they don't care.
It's not really bad. It's just some National Enquirer shit that's been rehashed.
User avatar
AdaL
The Majestic
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: London, UK.

PreviousNext

Return to The Speakeasy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests