Michael Jackson

[Dexy]

I can understand both sides of this, but for those just condemning Jackson based on the Leaving Neverland documentary- would you please watch the Square One documentary posted? It makes for a fairer picture overall. It's filled with facts whilst the former is purposefully leading people by emotions in the absence of hard facts. Both of them together provide a clearer picture.

The other thing to note (which I think others have mentioned before me) is that MJ was investigated 20 times (or some such insane number) by the FBI but they found absolutely nothing incriminating against him and said so repeatedly.
It's not like Weinstein where the local police and press were on his payroll and covered up for him (I think I read that tidbit in 'Catch and Kill'). This wasn't a coverup by a local police station (because none of the accusers or their families ever informed the police or filed a criminal case against Jackson). This was various departments in the FBI each coming up empty when they raided MJ and his family's homes repeatedly.

Guilty or innocent, nobody will know for sure, and I'm not trying to convince anyone. I was swayed by the documentary and then found the facts to mostly be proven false. I appreciate a counter documentary that aims to present a more factually researched picture of what occurred (and since this is a "documentary" and not fiction, I am shocked that Leaving Neverland didn't get fact checked).

You’re like me. You’ve done your research I see and there is just so much that doesn’t add up. There was something like 60 lies found in that “documentary “ hit piece. So anyone can be tried and convicted on two charlatans bad acting now? Disturbing and graphic accounts do not make for evidence and facts. He went through court and they found nothing. He wasn’t even in the same country when one of the man claim abuse happened. They also only went public with their allegations after the stature of limitations were up so they couldn’t get done for purgery and lying under oath.
The media have loved to peddle the narrative. Oprah Winfrey, got the “victims” on her show and watched LN on a boat on her birthday ( who does that ??) . Someone who then turns out to be best friends with Harvey Weinstein and lined up girls for Harvey to sexually abuse. Call me daft but I do believe that MJ knew too much about what was going on in Hollywood and that’s why they tried to pin it on him. He was used as a scapegoat for the likes of all the pedophiles coming out now.

 

[Web30]

Iv watched the first part today. Now iv read and seen so much about Wade and his pushy stage mum that i just dont believe him at all. Jimmy iv not really heard much about. Im not falling for it though, i just dont look at mj as someone who would do those things to a kid.

 

[Web30]

I'm not really sure what to believe. Apparently Macaulay Culkin & Corey Feldman have both defended Michael Jackson again. I think they've always said their relationship with him was innocent. I feel like if it was otherwise they would've said - especially once he died. Corey has been going on about making his own documentary on paedos in Hollywood for years (he even set up a fundraiser at some point) but nothing has come of it.

I read Corys tweets. Apparently he has a phone convo of him at 13 and michael at 30 thats shows how innocent their friendship was. Also Bret barnes has always said nothing happend.

I find it hard to belive only 5 people have ever come foward with claims when thier were hundreds of kids he was friends with.

 

[Tothemoonandback]

Completely understand @vikka but Wade Robson deliberately concealed his emails and book drafts from the court (in his multi million pound civil suit against the MJ estate). The documents he tried to hide from the court make for interesting reading.

I cried after the MJ documentary, I felt so sad for those poor boys. But having done some research I’m now angry that I was so misled as a viewer. Recipients of false accusations are victims too. I don’t know if these are false but everyone even Fred West deserves a fair trial, not a one sided hit piece that leaves out so much key information.

I say this as a victim of abuse.

I noticed after the documentary, Wade Robson set up a “charity fund” registered in Hawaii (so no need to declare what happens to the money). The minimum donation he was accepting was 250 dollars. I feel very uneasy about this amongst other things.

 

[Tothemoonandback]

Ha. No need for a trial then, just show the judge the album covers! Haha
I previously assumed he was guilty because of the number of accusers. Every time anyone would raise it with me I'd be like "oh come on now. So all 4 accusers are lying?! Yeah right"
But then someone pointed out how often Jackson has been sued. He's had more paternity suits than abuse allegations. And paternity suits are easily disproven now that DNA evidence is so easy. In the time before DNA forensics I could imagine people saying "ok so Jackson has 10 paternity suits against him. I really doubt 10 people are lying". Yet they were.

Where you've got a situation with 2 broke accusers who are suing the Jackson estate seeking millions of dollars, I think this brings credibility into question and you have to look at the allegations more closely.

I don't know if Jackson did it. I certainly won't be muting or cancelling him on the basis of posthumous allegations though when there's such a huge financial incentive to potentially lie about this and you can see from the court documents that both accusers were in dire financial difficulty in the weeks and months before they claim to have remembered the abuse they had always previously denied

 

[Tothemoonandback]

Yes famous people can definitely get the best lawyers.
But I read all the OJ details and I see how he got away with murder there. It wasn't just the best defence lawyers, the prosecution messed up sadly.

I don't rely on the media reporting of the 2005 Jackson trial as they were ridiculously anti Jackson and I couldn't understand what was going on. I stuck to reading the court transcripts (because I'm a bit of a nerd like that!).

I found this article very interesting about 2005 trial:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/m.huffpost.com/us/entry/610258/amp

I don't agree about all these "rumoured" NDAs that you have no evidence of whatsoever and is based purely on speculation. If you look at the court transcript from the AEG wrongful death suit after Jackson died (brought by the Jackson family), the court went through all Jackson's accounts and no huge NDA payments mentioned. Also the FBI were investigating Jackson on and off for a ten year period. Tapping phones and all sorts. They never found any evidence and NDAs with big payouts, would very likely have been picked up. If you have the time or inclination I'd personally read the court transcripts - very interesting !

 

[Horatio]

Yes I have x

I watched the documentary and I believed they had been abused. It's very convincing and upsetting. But I wanted to look into it further. There's a good documentary on YouTube called entering Neverland which is an eye opener. Wade is so shady. I just thought, Michael isn't here to defend himself and it's only fair I took a look at the other side x

Ok fair enough. I was asking genuinely and wondered how anyone could watch it and not believe them so I will look into these things.
I do think the argument of him “‘not being here to defend himself” is a weak one though. In fact him being dead is quite clearly what seems to be empowering people to speak - his power was too great when he was alive. People were scared.
And no one said that about Jimmy Saville - because he doesn’t have a devoted fan base determined to defend him.
But still, as I said, I will look into your links.

 

[Zozzat]

I've seen a lot of interviews and articles post this documentary..and I'm convinced it's all about money. Wade and James definitely lying. Hopefully the truth will come out one day and clear Michaels name x

 

[Belleeyes]

I haven't had a chance to see the doc yet, but from what I've heard it could be convincing.

There's definitely something wrong, everyone can agree that sleeping with young boys is wrong even if nothing happened. Boundaries were crossed.

What I don't understand though, is the fact that the parents were okay with these sleepovers? Everyone is having a go at the parents of the Abuducted in Plain Sight documentary, quite rightly. Why isn't it as clear cut in this case?

I still am in two minds, having heard that there were lawsuits against Jackson's estate that didn't come to anything, and that they testified for him but now are coming out and saying they lied under oath?

It seems a bit suspect that now they aren't benefiting from their relationship with him, now they have produced this documentary.

Also I hate that on Twitter and elsewhere that people are saying that if I dont believe these two particular people I am victim blaming, and I am contributing to why victims don't come forward in a general sense.

I have no doubt the relationships were not conventional and definitely crossed some boundarys. But I also don't want to ignore that the parents continued to support these 'friendships' as they benefited from them on a lot of ways, as did these two men. Plus their testimonials under oath. I just don't think it is as clear cut I'm afraid.

 

[Tothemoonandback]

I can't help but believe the allergations. They have nothing to gain by saying this now surely.

these two accusers have literally millions of dollars to gain by saying this now.

they may well not have been paid for the documentary but they are suing MJs estate for millions in the civil courts

I personally found the documentary really believable at first but the more I’ve read about the accusers the more their credibility is brought into question and I’ve realised how biased that tv programme actually is. I think MJ is a total weirdo but even a dead weirdo deserves a fair hearing and he’s not been given that.

Both of the accusers have money troubles and one of the accusers (James Saffechuck) happened to remember he was abused by MJ just a few days after his family business was sued for millions. He also says he was abused daily in a building which categorically has been shown not to have existed until years after the abuse ended.

the judge in the civil case has reprimanded one of the accusers for lying about certain technical matters (existence of the estate) and also fabricating evidence. If some of what they are saying is clearly lies in just not sure it’s fair to say we must believe them unquestionably about the alleged abuse

one final thing. I know all too well from personal experience that abuse victims can be in all sorts of denial and shame about their abuse for many years. But Wade Robson stood in the dock of the criminal court in 2005 *AS AN ADULT* and denied he had ever been abused by MJ. He was asked if MJ had ever touched him inappropriately and all sorts of specific questions. Wade said no. But now (2020), Wade claims that in 2005 (when he was already an adult) he didn’t know what abuse was (he has to say this because of statute of limitations and because he wants max financial
Compensation ). I feel like there’s some really obvious questions here that aren’t being asked. The whole thing with Saville is that it was always covered up when Saville was alive and victims were not given a chance to come forward. Many were silenced when they tried to talk. With MJ these questions were asking in a courtroom when MJ was alive. Total opposite . MJ stuff makes no sense.

I think MJ might well be innocent here

I was a Michael Jackson fan (not fanatic) and was ready to disbelieve them. Having watched it all and other interviews, such as Oprah I have NO doubt he was a very powerful, manipulative paedophile. I believe every word those two men shared.

Just because a predator is dead, does not mean we should discount the victims and in this case does not make his HIDEOUS crimes forgivable.

im sort of in the same camp as you in that I used to love MJs music but was never a fan

I completely believed the documentary at first

after a couple of weeks of feeling disgusted by it all, I decided to do some research. At the very least what I would say is that “documentary” is ridiculously biased and I’m actually angry as a viewer that I was misled like that. It made it seem as if both accusers would have no reason to lie but actually both Have denied abuse while lives but claimed abuse when facing financial difficulty (that doesn’t mean they’re lying but it should have been mentioned). Also these accusers conduct in the civil court case has actually been a disgrace. They’ve been reprimanded by judge for lying about various issues (not the abuse, other matters) and for Deliberately concealing evidence.Whole thing is actually shocking and has made me really distrust TV programmes and journalists as they just go with a story and run with it and don’t give their audience all the information. If you’re interested in reading more about this it’s actually fascinating but remember not to rely on tabloid sources and instead rely on court documents and transcripts

 

[Dexy]

Still can't get away from the fact he let (mostly)young boys in his bed. Whatever the facts,this is wrong surely??

Of course facts matter! I think he was maybe naive or eccentric but it doesn’t automatically mean sexual behaviour between adult and child if you are a normal human being. He’d grown up in the limelight, I don’t think he had a grasp on what we would call normal behaviour. How could you? Everyone knows your face since five years old. But that still doesn’t make me label him a pedophile.
Most importantly though in court the mother said they only visited four times and I think three he wasn’t even there! It’s just stuff like that that makes me query it. It wasn’t mostly boys either. Lisa Marie Presley has done many interviews explaining this. I’d rather listen to his wife than The Sun paper. I just feel there’s so much that doesn’t add up with this case. No one can know for sure of course but it makes for food for thought. I’m not media lead that’s all. I read the court documents and it really opened my eyes to how much was wrongly put in the press. Since all this stuff with Epstein came out I’ve been a lot more open minded. It seems the real people were protected for years and he’s been labelled over and over in death. Why do they constantly bleat on about it? It just seems really odd to me. Dead, black man accused even in death despite being proven not guilty in court ( even the term Wacko Jacko is racist ) but elite, white men get away with it for decades.

 

[Prodcon21]

I just think that once a person is dead it should be laid to rest.

Sorry - but That Is such an awful attitude to have.

 

[Handerton]

Hey you can tell a lot from song titles! Rick Astley sang “together forever”... and is still married to the same woman and no gossip on him cheating over his entire career. He must love his wife and be sure he’s “never gonna give her up” let alone run around and desert her.

Anyway remember how Jackson was so broke before he died? Anyone wondering how a man who owned the rights to thousands of famous songs by other artists couldn’t be making enough cash to pay his bills or support his spending habits would apparently be amazed to find that much of his income was going towards dozens of multimillion dollar pay offs that included NDAs and so haven’t ever been disclosed, so the rumour goes. I mean, we all heard allegations about Weinstein and a handful of actresses, but what came out involved hundreds of women nobody had mentioned, from office workers to hotel maids to interns and nannies. I don’t think Jackson is likely to have only ever had a handful of accusers, it’s just the majority aren’t public knowledge
I won’t listen to his music again. It’s too creepy now.

Stings that his prosecution was in a country that showed how they deal with the famous when OJ was in court

 

[Prince fan 1999]

Either way,I really can't bring myself to listen to any of his songs anymore,which is a huge shame. It just feels so wrong...

 

[GiggleBee]

You know that for a FACT do you?

Also from what I understand this documentary focuses around 4 boys. All of who ‘came out of the woodwork’ years and years ago and their parents took money to be silenced didn’t they???

Wasn't it proven years ago that he wasn't guilty? And let's face it who lets there child sleep round a mans house?
Micheal was allowed custody of all his children, so obviously the social didn't think he was a danger.
Yes MJ was weird but I honestly believe he was to child like to actually do anything to these boys.
Jimmy Saville on the other hand looked dirty and perverted.

At the end of the day I'm just stating my opinion, were all entitled to our own opinion.

 

[uwu]

You know that for a FACT do you?

Also from what I understand this documentary focuses around 4 boys. All of who ‘came out of the woodwork’ years and years ago and their parents took money to be silenced didn’t they???

I'd like to add that it was MJ's insurance company that paid them, he didn't want to give them anything but they said it was better for him to just pay them rather than fight. Probably the worst thing he could of done looking back if he really was innocent of these claims.

 

[Prettylittleliar29]

I’m very torn by the whole thing....Wade robson is a known liar! He burnt a lot of bridges with people MJ introduced him too he only came out with all these allegations after he was dropped as choreographer on the this is it tour..up until that point he sang MJs praises...but fishy if you ask me.

 

[Dexy]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8821432/michael-jackson-leaving-neverland-evidence-james-safechuck/

I think there was a train station, but maybe didn't have planning permission or for some reason they decided to change it and build another train station later on? who knows, but a few accounts suggest he is actually telling the truth, however it's not the train station we all thought he meant.

I personally believe James and think MJ took a very unhealthy liking to him, I don't know why he tried to pretend him and Wade had never met before though or maybe he just didn't remember. I do actually believe Wade Robson in half of his story.. even though he is so sneaky and has actually done himself an injustice, obviously stretched his truth alot. I don't even think Michael liked him and kept trying to fob him off onto his cousin to get rid of him.

Surely if Wade just wanted to make money and sell a book like originally planned before he tried suing, he would of sold his story about Britney and Justin affair as I believe he is the reason they broke up and any inside information he has on that, back in 2013 that would of been a huge story?

I personally don’t believe Wade Robson.

Wade Robson defended Michael Jackson for 20 years, then in court under oath( memory wasn’t triggered by all this CSA talk at all ?! As a grown man? Really ? So he committed perjury ) he was the star DEFENSE ( wow risky or what? MJ was cocky AF ), actually DATED MJ’s niece Brandi during this time for 7 years ( while alleged abuse was going on apparently and it was MJ who set them up - say what?! ) he begs to go to his funeral, writes two full pages on how much he loves him in the Opus, hangs out with the family, asks the family can he get married at Neverland because it’s his favourite place ( say what ?! ) , does tributes after his death, begs to work on MJ Cirque de Soleil , copies his moves in his own video wearing a glove given to him to ‘ be close to him.’ This is all by a GROWN MAN not a child. But he didn’t know it was abuse…
He then tried to get a book deal, it flopped, tried to sue the Michael Jackson estate and failed , got no work on and won’t be touched by Hollywood after being known for cheating and lying ( the Britney/JT saga cry me a river ) a note found written by him states ‘ my abuse story will make me relatable ‘ and - oh wait.. It’s all coming back to me ...
That’s the victim “ the child “ you are talking about. A 40 something year old man who’s pissed because MJ died and he couldn’t fleece him for any more cash or contacts. Him dying also meant he couldn’t defend himself He didn’t go to the POLICE when he suddenly remembered the abuse, oh no let’s go on Oprah! Wade Robson has been trying to sue the estate for the last few years and failed. Three times in total. He also set up a website shortly after the documentary with “ help SA victims “ and the minimum donation was $250. However it didn’t say what the money would be used for or where it actually went. It’s all about the dollar, dollar, dollar.
His wife threatened to leave him because he’s such a loser.
If MJ hadn’t of passed away these claims would not of happened. It’s all about money and cashing in on his name. They were clever in that they used the #metoo movement to propel this but not so clever they could get facts or dates right. There was only one train station and it wasn’t even built when they claim the abuse took place. This is fact. In the court documents Joyce Robson states they only visited Neverland five times and three of those Michael Jackson wasn’t even there. One time he claims abuse took place Michael Jackson was on his Bad tour, on stage, in Oz, in a different country!! He’s the most documented, followed, photographed human being! The whole thing would be laughable if it wasn’t such a disgusting claim to make. They are the lowest of the low. It’ll eventually all come out when people can finally use some critical thinking and see none of it makes sense.

Anyways, I hope I have given you some points to think about.

 

[Web30]

Ok I’ve not watched this yet but my opinion right now.

These two guys I wouldn’t trust and the documentary seems to be based around them more than anything? Stories and accusations that were told/made were made with no way to prove if they were true, as there was only 2 people involved every time. The 2 guys were in contact behind the scenes before the documentary came out am I right?
And this seems off. It also looks like the director had in his mind what way he wanted this to go, so his narrative was always going to be that the abuse happened. Regardless of facts.

Apparently none of the Jackson family were given the chance to speak out or be involved in the documentary? I don’t think they could make much of a difference but I do think they should have had the chance to speak.
I’m on the fence on this one because of the people involved and how sketchy they seem.
Like @Web30 has said, if you can’t trust the source it’s hard to believe the facts.
Interested to see if my opinion changes after watching it.

Iv now seen the second part and it hasnt changed what i thought. I enjoyed it when wade said "i was abused till i was 14" about 10 mins after he claims MJ tried to have sex with him at 16. Lie right thier!

 

[uwu]

Ok I’ve not watched this yet but my opinion right now.

These two guys I wouldn’t trust and the documentary seems to be based around them more than anything? Stories and accusations that were told/made were made with no way to prove if they were true, as there was only 2 people involved every time. The 2 guys were in contact behind the scenes before the documentary came out am I right?
And this seems off. It also looks like the director had in his mind what way he wanted this to go, so his narrative was always going to be that the abuse happened. Regardless of facts.

Apparently none of the Jackson family were given the chance to speak out or be involved in the documentary? I don’t think they could make much of a difference but I do think they should have had the chance to speak.
I’m on the fence on this one because of the people involved and how sketchy they seem.
Like @Web30 has said, if you can’t trust the source it’s hard to believe the facts.
Interested to see if my opinion changes after watching it.

I watched 1 hour of it so far and it sounds like a badly written fan fiction. I also totally agree with your whole post. We will never really know the truth and I'm not going to vindicate someone when they can't stand up for themselves and when no evidence was found that would point them being a child molester.