Allegations against Michael Jackson

Some disturbing claims here.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3651294/Michael-Jackson-underage-sex-collection-photos-naked-teenage-boys-male-erotica-depicting-men-children-detailed-newly-released-police-report-2003-search-Neverland-Ranch.html?ito=social-facebook

And more claims.......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3788328/Wade-Robson-claims-Michael-Jackson-companies-ran-child-sex-abuse-operation.html?ito=social-facebook

Freedom wrote:And more claims.......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3788328/Wade-Robson-claims-Michael-Jackson-companies-ran-child-sex-abuse-operation.html?ito=social-facebook

There were some excellent comments re this story and Wade Robson, money grabbing was one of the nicer ones. I'm afraid I agreed with most of them. As someone commented yesterday, whichever way it goes he is making money. If he did know and suffer all this why not come forward years sooner, if true did he receive payment for his silence? If not why wait, and why wait till now - it is all about the money. Doesn't make for a very believable story to me!

My thoughts too.

I do not believe that Michael's relationships with children were healthy but I'm not convinced that he did anything illegal.

As I say about Cliff Richard, if MJ was a serial abuser, why weren't people coming forward in their hundreds when the first allegations were made?

Oh dear - it's hardly surprising that Michael's daughter is having more than normal problems with growing up.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4152432/Paris-Jackson-reveals-talks-growing-Neverland.html

Another controversial programme coming up. Wade Robson has been mentioned here earlier but I've never heard of the other person.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/tv/we-wont-shy-away-from-controversies-bbc-announce-rival-michael-jackson-film/ar-BBU96Ss?li=BBoPJKU&ocid=mailsignout

Here is a link to the first part of the Leaving Neverland documentary.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-and-me/on-demand/63905-001

I'll be interested to hear others' views on this. I won't comment until I've seen the second part.

Freedom wrote:Here is a link to the first part of the Leaving Neverland documentary.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-and-me/on-demand/63905-001

I'll be interested to hear others' views on this. I won't comment until I've seen the second part.

I haven't watched much apart from the first half hour so far.  But I think it is despicable to trash a man who can't defend himself, who has been scrutinised by police, FBI and courts and found innocent, to have these men make allegations 10 years after MJ's death!! WTF.  They originally said he never molested them, in a court of law and under oath.  There is no proof just their story..... 

I thought Piers Morgan did a pretty good job of interviewing the director of that docu.  He was spot on in what he said.

I don't know what Piers Morgan said but it sounds as if I'd agree with him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaving_Neverland

Good for Denise Fergus (mother of James Bulger) who tweeted that she doesn't believe a word of the men's stories.

Could Wade Robson not have been charged with perjury after saying that he lied on oath as a witness at the 2005 court case?

When did the other man James Safechuck (what a strange surname) appear and start telling his story? Wade Robson is well known but I've never heard of him (JS) before.

Here's the second part of the programme.

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-and-me/on-demand/63905-002

It might just be me but I found the presentation confusing. I could not remember who was Wade and who was James and who were their respective mothers.

P.S. I see from the link in the first post on this page that JS was mentioned there in 2015.

I haven't watched this latest documentary, nor will I as it is hard to believe that the accusers are not just trying to cash in now that MJ is dead. They had both sworn in court previously,that they hadnt been abused but it is possible they lied then, either under threat or having been paid to lie. We will never know.
However, no matter that there were investigations that found nothing and court cases where he was found not guilty of molestation, I cannot understand how a parent could allow their child to sleep in the same bed as a grown man. Nor can I understand why he twice paid millions to families if he was entirely innocent.
Without being too graphic about it, there doesn't have to be intercourse for abuse to have taken place. The mere act of having young children sleep in your bed, if not related to you, would be considered abuse if it were anyone else doing it.
What do people make of his sister LaToya saying he was a paedophile?

I'm not sure if James swore on oath that he hadn't been abused.

As I've said before, it's my view that Michael's relationships with children were unhealthy but not illegal.

What "normal" parent would allow their children to go for sleepovers with an adult? It was mentioned in the documentary that it caused a rift in Wade's family (if I have got the right one because of my trouble in knowing which one was which) when his elder brother found out that their mother had allowed him (Wade) to sleep in Michael's bed.

I think that La Toya may be an attention seeker. She also wrote a book and stated that her father sexually abused some if not all of his children. This was hotly denied by all of them.

LaToya has distanced herself from the rest of the family. Who knows whether she has ulterior motives for her claims but I remain sceptical about the family dynamic. The father is known to have been a hard man and we must remember that most of the boys were part of the J5 therefore would they have been prepared to kill the golden goose by ratting daddy out? ( if guilty)

I also think that it is possible that children brought up in a sexually abusive family can possibly, but not always, become desensitised to the wrongful nature of what is going on. Or be afraid to speak out, even when older.
I'm not suggesting this was the case in the Jackson household though.

They weren't still performing together as the Jackson 5 though when La Toya made her claims - would it have mattered then if they had agreed with her?

By all accounts Joe Jackson was a nasty piece of work - certainly physically abusive to his children.

Yes true but when they were performing and world famous they could have felt that they had too much to lose so didn't talk about any possible abuse. Then when LaToya spoke about it they denied it because they hadn't reported it before.
Again I'm only speculating. Even if there had been no sexual abuse, they certainly were physically abused. That in itself would have been reason to mention it but they all seemed to accept it. In fact one of them even saw it as an acceptable thing.
I think there is a strong possibility the two men have made these allegations for money or out of some kind of revenge but it doesn't mean that things didn't happen with others who haven't come forward. There are many reasons victims of abuse don't report. Fear, embarrassment, paid off, love, etc all can have a bearing so I remain unconvinced that MJ was entirely innocent. No grown man sleeps in the same bed as a young boy (many times) without there being an ulterior motive.
I don't get how anyone can defend that proven fact. The parents should be prosecuted for allowing it.

I do agree, Chirpy.

The fact that many parents allowed their children to sleep in the same bed as an unrelated adult is mind-boggling!

Heh, it wasn't like he was giving them a bath or anything! That would be really.... wrong.

Will any of us who are parents say if they have ever allowed a family friend to bathe their children without them being present?

Some bizarre alleged remarks from Barbra Streisand.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6841461/Barbra-Streisand-says-Michael-Jacksons-accusers-thrilled-there.html?ico=pushly-notifcation-small

I wonder how she would feel if her son was treated like that as a child?

Not that I think personally that the two now adults were.

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/tv/jackson-family-responds-to-leaving-neverland-by-releasing-30-minute-documentary-of-their-own/ar-BBVGSY9?li=AAnZ9Ug&ocid=mailsignout

Interesting to learn that one of the men in the documentary was at one time the boyfriend of Michael Jackson's niece.

I really don't know. It seems possible that the 'victims' were groomed over very many years and their parents might also have been 'groomed'. The cult of celebrity is HUGE. I think that it goes to people's heads and they just can't think straight.

If you think about what happened with Jimmy Savile - there are early reports from the 1960s I do believe where it was reported he abused a child or children but they were ignored. In 1990, despite rumours swirling, Savile was knighted. That's 30 years later and by then there had been many complaints. But he was a 'celebrity' and a 'do-gooder' so who could criticize him (plus he also had high-up connections by then).

Speaking purely theoretically, if a child had complained about Jackson, it would have been possible for the family of that child to have received a huge 'pay out' to keep them quiet.

I always used to think that he was probably a bit weird and having children sleeping in his bed was inappropriate but I assumed largely innocent. That's probably naive.

The motive for coming forward years later could of course be money but it seems to be the nature of the beast in these types of situations that it takes many, many years before victims come forward.

I don't know if you've watched that video issued by the Jackson Estate, poster, but I did find it very convincing. It did help of course that I didn't believe the stories of the two men anyway.

I'm just watching Pat Brown's take on the case and so far I agree with her thoughts - not illegal but inappropriate is what I have always said.

Pat made a good point near the end. Michael's besotted fans won't hear any criticism of him but how would they react if it was some ordinary bloke in their neighbourhood who behaved as he did with children?

They would probably round up vigilante mobs to run him out of town!

A programme from 2019 which I have only just seen.

I've never heard of the maid and her story before - another one who denied on oath in 2005 that she had ever seen anything inappropriate, then changed her mind after Michael was dead.