Michael Jackson

Only DNA evidence will prove that MJ was or was not the children's biological father. However I know black people married to white people and their children very often look completely white, with light eyes and blond hair. The white gene is very strong. My husband was dark skinned, Indian, both our children are darkish but they married white people and all the children look white. All the thousands of black slaves once in Britain disappeared as they intermarried and there is now little evidence of them ever having been here.

After watching the documentary on t,v,, I am now convinced he was a paedophile.

But it’s a bit late now for those two men to come forward.
They should have done so when he was alive.

If it’s money they are after, then No, it’s not acceptable.

Oh dear Ellan, after the Amber Rudd affair this week, no one is supposed to say ‘coloured’ though to be honest, I think it was all a storm in a teacup.

Wade and jimmy swore under oath, that they were never sexually assaulted by Michael, on 2 occasions. That the relationship was never inappropriate or sexual, and maintained this under rigorous cross examination.
Wade repeatedly praised Jackson as his idol after death, until he was rejected as the lead choreographer in a Jackson themed Las Vegas tribute show in 2011. With well known financial troubles he claimed repressed memories led to him “remembering” the abuse. An initial book deal attempt was unsuccessful there after. In 2013 and 2014, wade and jimmy hired the same lawyer and filed multi million dollar civil lawsuits against the MJ estate, these were thrown out of court in 2017 with a judge commenting “no rational fact finder could possibly believe Robson’s sworn statement”. They now owe the MJ estate over 100,000 dollars in legal fees.
Robson referred to himself as the master of deception in his 2016 court deposition, and both him and safechucks stories have changed multiple times during the course of proceedings, revealing a large number of inconsistencies, contradictions and outright lies.
Director dan Reed has admitted he made no attempt to interview anyone who could provide a counter view to the narrative, in the leaving neverland documentary nor does he corroborate the claims with any form of evidence. As such, the documentary violates all standards for responsible journalism.
Any shocking claim can be made about MJ, without challenge or penalty, as there are currently no laws to protect a deceased person from defamation or slander.
After an FBI investigation spanning 10 years, a 70 man police raid on his neverland home and a lengthy trial that included evidence from prior cases, Jackson was found innocent on all charges of sex abuse.
Safechuck said in his lawsuit he was abused by MJ after the Grammys in 1989, in New York after he’d performed. Fact, the Grammys were in LA that year, and MJ didn’t even perform there in 89 !!
One of them also said that Michael had performed an oral sex act on him, whilst asleep, but he didn’t wake up ??! How do you know anyone’s done that when you were asleep

I always enjoyed his music and dancing but, as a person, he was certainly an odd-ball. If you compare pictures of him as a child with those as an adult, he scarcely seems like the same person. How can someone who is full-blooded negro change their skin colour? Apparently his nose was falling apart because of the plastic surgery done on it. He obviously hated being black, and did his best to metamorph into a white person.

I always believe in the old saying, there is no smoke without fire.

Anja I totally agree with you. One of these guys was helped through his career by MJ, he was introduced to producers and directors and got into the industry with MJ's help and contacts but when he failed at this type of career again and again over years and was getting no work and suddenly he comes out with these accusations against Jackson. Another director in the industry who knew the situation is convinced the guy persuaded the other one to agree to co accuse Jackson of the acts. Coincidence or What? When you read the full article MJ's children and brothers are suing the two in the documentary. I was never a fan of Jackson's music but no one can deny he was a successful artist albeit a strange young man which really is no surprise in his family business. I honestly believe he has been used over the years by people he genuinely loved in his childish way.

That's the whole nature of sexual abuse of children, surely?
There is a reason why we teach our children that adults should never ask them to keep secrets, because we know that is how they operate.

Many children of paedophiles only begin to deal with it once they are grown; pupils only after they've left school, Jimmy Saville's victims only after his death.

Very true rizlett
My GP said it’s very rarely ‘stranger danger’.
The abused often bury the memories for years.
A coping mechanism.

I think Michael Jackson was an amazing performer. He could sing, he could dance. I never tire of watching his music videos. He was very talented. He was brilliant. His addiction to plastic surgery ruined his once beautiful face. I do wonder whether the stories about him abusing children are true. He’s not here to defend himself. Why do these stories only come out when the person is dead?

If you believed someone had sexually abused your children would you really settle out of court?

Wouldn't you want proper justice - and also avoid the same happening to others.

Why aren't there many others coming forward?

It's a sad fact that one child in every class in the country is sexually abused usually by someone they know and often this is someone from their own family. We must all have unknowingly had some interaction with a paedophile.

I wonder how many people who are posting actually watched the documentary at all? Charges were brought against him when Jordan Chandler's family complained to the police in 1993, but it was "settled out of court" by a $23m payoff. When he was accused again, and it went to trial in 2005, it's clear in the documentary that one of the men was pressured by his family to give evidence on MJ's behalf - he still hadn't told them at that point and had no intention of doing so, and the other one refused when MJ rang him to ask for help - he says that MJ got very angry and threatened him with his powerful lawyers. Previous victims may have been silenced with payoffs (including the signing of non-disclosure agreements). MJ's staff all had to sign iron-clad NDAs - 5 of them were prosecuted for breaking them and fined $1.5m (enough to make sure that none of the others dared to). A jury can only make up its mind on what is put before it, and in another country it would probably have ended up as "not proven" rather than not guilty.

I just thought I would mention how edited those interviews will have been. To say the mother’s were only interested in how they had been affected is unfair when hours of filming get reduced to ten minutes. If that’s the way the programme makers wanted to show the mothers that’s what we get to see. They were naive and probably greedy but groomed like their children. I wept for the boys but also for their mothers and for the guilt they will always carry. And for so many other mothers who couldn’t believe it could possibly happen to their children.

I can quite easily separate my liking for some of his music from the allegations of his conduct.
It's a fact that fame, or being in the presence of someone famous, can turn heads. The parents of those boys were to blame for allowing unfettered access including overnight stays with a male adult they did not 'know'.

The mother of one of the boys said Jackson asked her if she would leave her son with him (I think she said for a year) while she went home. She refused and MJ said 'I always get what I want'. She didn't leave her son with him for that long.

I read that he had two children by one donor and one by another but all three had the same carrier.
Whatever the truth is we shall probably never know.
Michael IMO wiped out as much of his racial looks as possible and put it down to other causes.

PS Forgot to say - LaToya said that she was sexually abused by her father, Joe, hence her need to speak out and try to protect other victims.

I am pretty sure none of the children are biologically his. Two of them share one mother - Debbie Rowe. But according to them, he was a good loving father. That's good enough for me.

About the allegations. I do believe them - in fact I was amazed when he was found not guilty at his trial. But to me the HUGE difference between this case and that of Savile, is that in Jackson's case he was investigated and did go to trial, and the evidence just wasn't enough to convince the jury for whatever reason. While I feel for the victims I am very dubious about the benefits of dragging it all up again in public, not least because two of Jackson's kids have had their own struggles coming to terms with everything and I'd have preferred if they would not be immersed in another scandal surrounding their family. With Savile it was different because the victims had never had the chance to be heard before and they deserved some airing, while with Jackson all the victims would have been able to have their testimony heard at court but some of them chose not to at the time for various reasons. If they had, then he might have been found guilty.

I decided to watch it and make my own mind up - which is that I believe them. When this is coupled with the $23 million he paid out to silence Jordan Chandler and others, plus a previous documentary I saw where one of his "minders" talked about the system of alarms leading up to his bedroom (so that he had plenty of notice if anyone was approaching) & another one who basically said: yes, he took boys into his bedroom and so what? Plus the guy who talked about himself as the person stars call in to "clear the evidence". Then there's his sister LaToya speaking out in 1993: "Michael Jackson's sister LaToya said her brother was a paedophile - and demanded that his alleged victims are listened to. LaToya, 62, claimed that she had seen cheques paid out to boys for "very, very large sums" to keep them quiet". (She later withdraw the statement, it is said under pressure from her family and her abusive husband of the time - who is said to have links to the mafia). I'm sorry - but it all adds up to one thing - he was a paedophile who groomed boys and their parents; and then paid them off later. And those around him covered his tracks (he was, literally, the goose that laid the golden egg for all of them). And his family still own the rights to his music, so they want to keep the cash flowing in.

Childlike to me suggests somebody with limited faculties who is trusting and kind. MJ in my opinion faked this to get what he wanted.

I totally agree Willow.

The parents have a lot to answer for, not just the mothers but the fathers as well. Safechuck's father was very "pro MJ" according to Mrs S.

However, Wade Robson's mother left her oldest son and her husband in Australia and went out to the US with Wade and her daughter, all for MJ. As my Mum would say "Her head was turned". And now she seems surprised that the older son also doesn't want to speak to her.

For those who say they don't believe these men's stories, there is no doubting that MJ entertained young boys at Neverland and that they had sleepovers. What do the doubters think was happening during these times? Even MJ's sister, La Toya, spoke out against this back in the 1990s. www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9JBIk-Xh9M

I haven’t yet watched the documentary, but my work colleagues have and were discussing it... my question is what on earth were these children’s parents thinking/doing/ allowing these situations to develop, my feeling is that that they have to take an element of responsibility in all this....

I watched it and have absolutely no doubt that those children were abused by MJ. It wasn't until they were adults and realised that it was abuse and not 'love' as he told them, that the horrific phsycological effects hit them. It takes years for an abused child to be able to talk about what happened, if at all, and the shame never goes away. It's only in recent years that we have brought this sort of thing into the open and have started to teach our children to recognise it and speak about it. As for those mothers - words fail me. They were obviously seduced by money and refused to see what was going on under their noses. Even now all they could talk about was how it had affected them - me, me, me, not the children. It was only his fame and money that allowed him to get away with it for as long as he did.

I’m watching the MJ film in first and starts. It needed some serious editing in my opinion. Overlong and leaden.

I stopped playing MJ songs years ago, even though I was a fan of his music. I just felt uncomfortable.

In 1993, Oprah Winfrey visited Michael Jackson at his Neverland ranch for a television special – Jackson’s first interview in 14 years, watched by more than 90 million people worldwide.

This week, Winfrey hosted an hour-long show about the King of Pop with a very different tone, in front of a studio audience of sexual abuse survivors.

Radio 2 has stopped playing his music and in America the film could prompt “America’s [Jimmy] Savile moment”.

Like JS I think it was grooming in plain sight. I believe the allegations.

And like Savile he is still dead. I am cynical about some of these allegations around Jackson. There was undoubtedly some criminal activity but I agree with KatyK the parents must bear a great deal of responsibility for allowing their children to be vulnerable to this predator. Money & fame were more important than their children's safety it seems.