Why is no one talking about Leaving Neverland 2 Or contradictions of the accusers?

[leavingnever2]

I noticed no one seems to care about Leaving Neverland 2 or be talking about it. Why aren't more people discussing the factual problems with "Leaving Neverland"?

I've noticed that many discussions about Michael Jackson focus on the allegations without examining the serious inconsistencies in the accusers' stories such as:

1. James Safechuck claimed abuse at Neverland's train station between 1988-1992, but construction records prove it wasn't built until 1994-1995 - this is a major lie!

1. Wade Robson claimed his first abuse happened in January 1990 when his family went to the Grand Canyon without him, but his mother Joy testified under oath that Wade went WITH the family on that trip

1. Robson testified IN DETAIL as an adult under oath in 2005 that nothing inappropriate ever happened

1. Wade Robson asked Michael Jackson for permission to get married at Neverland Ranch in 2005 - why would he want to celebrate his wedding at the place he later claimed he was abused?

1. Stephanie Safechuck (James Safechuck's mother) stated in the documentary that when she heard about Michael Jackson's death in 2009, she "danced" and was "so happy he died" because she thought "Oh thank God, he can't hurt any more children." However, according to her son James, he never told anyone about his alleged abuse until after seeing Wade Robson's interview in 2013, and only then told his family about it.

This creates a major contradiction: Stephanie Safechuck couldn't have known about the alleged abuse in 2009 when Michael Jackson died if James didn't tell her until 2013 - four years later.

This is another significant timeline inconsistency that calls into question the narrative presented in the documentary. It's difficult to reconcile how Stephanie could have had this specific reaction to Jackson's death if she was unaware of any alleged abuse at that time. This type of contradiction represents more than just hazy memory - it's a fundamental issue with the timeline of disclosure that the documentary doesn't address or explain.

These aren't minor discrepancies but fundamental contradictions in their stories.
I'm not saying we shouldn't take abuse allegations seriously, but shouldn't we also consider verifiable facts that directly contradict these specific accusations?

People seem to take the documentary at face value, without question - it’s strange to not want to consider all the facts especially when some of them are major.

Honestly, I wouldn’t bet my life of MJ innocence but I also thinks it’s entirely plausible he’s innocent when I heard the above.

Why is there so little interest in most people to examine the full picture/the pure financial greed of these two accusers constantly attempting to get millions after their case is thrown out so many times in Leaving Neverland 2?

To add, in the podcast mentioned above, they have a clip of one Jackson's lawyers where he basically admits he was guilty and acknowledges that they settled the chandler case mainly due to the fact that the child accurately described markings on Jackson's penis. He says they were extremely worried about that particular piece of evidence which he called "the 300lb gorilla in the room" . He spoke to the Podcasters and compares fans who still believe in his innocence to people who refuse to admit that R Kelly is guilty. I'd value his opinion over mj super fans who spend their time disparaging victims of abuse tbh

@Readyornot8565 James said that didn't realise he'd been abused until 2013.

What about the couple who reported him to the fbi who witnessed disturbing behaviour with a boy and heard suspicious sounds coming from his cabin on a train that he was sharing with this boy? They weren't after money and never came forward to the media at all, so why else would they report him if not for genuine suspicions? As far as I recall this was before the first settlement so they wouldnt even have been aware of any previous accusations.

@Firealarm1414ive never heard this account do you have a source?

Is it maybe this? Took about 10 seconds to find.

Ah, sensitive image. The Google search term I used was 'michael jackson train cabin'.

Here is a news story about it

https://nypost.com/2009/12/22/fbi-releases-files-on-michael-jackson/

There are conflicting reports on this though. Some sources say he was not accurate at all and some say he was. I've seen reports Jordy said he was circumcised-he wasn't. Pretty fundamental thing to get wrong. There's so much disinformation it's hard to know what's true and what isn't.

Furthermore, this couple worked for child protective services in Canada. I think they would have had the correct qualifications and experience to recogonise untoward behaviour when they see it

There are at least five boys on the record.

@fieldofstars i was watching part 2 but I admit I freaked out a bit when “duck butter’ and swallowing was mentioned, I stopped watching it was an earlier case wasn’t it one of those five

Why is nobody talking about it? Possibly because Michael Jackson fans are unhinged and nobody needs that in their lives.

I'm amazed it didn't feature more in the media, especially over the last six years.

Nobody is defending paedophiles.

Except yourself and OP, and one other poster on here who are defending an obvious paedophile.

Yes, they never answer any questions put to them. It's obviously a brainwashed Jackson fan.

Why do you think a victim isn't entitled to compensation?

To debunk, there is no evidence he showed them porn. Apparently Arvizo was the one running around Neverland with questionable material.

There were different boys fingerprints on porn magazines that Jackson kept in a LOCKED BRIEFCASE. Meaning only Jackson could take them out. How could Arvizo run around with he couldn't get access to, only Jackson could?

There was no porn found of young boys - it was classified as artwork (if there was actual child pornography, he would have been jailed).

Oh that is a load of bullshit and you know it! One of the books he had is basically by Boylove international. It is the number one paedophile book and is world-renowned as such. He also had in his possession a photo of a completely naked boy.

My point was, I'm not convinced either way (I literally said this in the original post), but if I had to lean toward one side, I'd say he's not guilty due to the questionable motives and contradictions from his accusers.

Oh don't play us for fools, every single post of yours shows you are well and truly convinced. 'questionable motives'? What are they? Wanting compensation for being wronged? Needing to tell their story? And there are no contradictions either, so that's a lie there.

The point of my thread was that people who say he's guilty often don't acknowledge any information is sketchy.

There is no sketchy information.

They want to dismiss any contradictions

There are no contradictions.

and holes in the narrative as completely normal and expected when people get abused, and I strongly disagree.

Then you are ignorant because it is common when someone is abused and any Child Psychologist will tell you this. You've been told it's common, you don't want to acknowledge that fact. So at this stage it's dishonesty and wilfull ignorance from you.

Both sides should be questioned when people make accusations - or else how would you feel if someone you love got wrongly accused and people just took someone's word and never questioned anything?

Except your posts only question the victims. Not once till now did you even admit he did anything inappropriate. All of your posts are about cross-examining every single word of the victims and desperately, desperately looking for some hole or contradiction when there aren't any.

No one has around 20-odd children accusing them if it weren't true. No one.

Are you playing naive? Or do you honestly not know of how these two men have been hounded and abused and called liars by the public, even receiving death threats? They've had to hire security!

As I said in an earlier post; Yep, the rape and death threats they get, they need to hire security. Their names are recognisable, if they ever try to get work. They are tracked down on social media and hounded.
Why go through all that? Only someone strong and knowing they are telling the truth can go through all that. The fans are still doxxing and abusing the original claimants (such as Jordan Chandler) all these years later. You make yourself a hated person for life, and can never ever ever escape it.

They are. It's obvious where they stood all along. The faux innocence about the intent of their thread really stands out. Too far gone to see reason.

I'm not watching all that. I seldom watch videos clips anyway. I read faster than I watch. So could you please summarise what the lies are?

Let me guess, they are all the 'points' you've already put, and have had debunked a few times over, on this thread. Right?

Very strange also, that for someone who is 'undecided', you only look for videos that are pro-Jackson. None that are anti. I wonder why that is?

It's around 22, I believe. This is from what FBI have said.

Oooohhhhh! A dentist! That is so totally like a doctor or a lawyer. Totally! 🤦‍♀️

I have so much to say on this.

But I’ll star with: I’m always so so surprised when people think that Jackson wasn’t a pedophile. I mean he’s the world most obvious pedophile!! What is wrong with people who can’t see it?!

If it was Barry from Asda who walked around holding the hands of little boys, had about a dozen accusers, built a theme park to attract children in his back garden, and had a merry go round of little boys “friends”, and paid off countless accusers, and had books full of pictures of naked boys, absolutely nobody would be saying he was innocent just because he was good at his job. But Jackson has scores of half wits defending his corner?!

Another thing about grooming: you’re groomed into covering things up and thinking what’s happening is an expression of love, not abuse. And children aren’t the best historians, you can’t expect a deeply traumatised person to get dates right from a highly abusive period decades ago (although the train station thing has been debunked)

If you think Jackson is innocent I seriously suggest you keep away from children, you’re not safe to be round them, and maybe get your head checked to ensure there isn’t a great big turd where your brain should be.

Yes that’s about right plus LN2 said he paid off a little girl in the 80’s.

People who say it’s for money - isn’t it funny how other rich pop stars don’t have isles of false accusations from children? Is Jackson just seriously unlucky?! Or is he indeed a big fat dirty fucking pedophile

Not only this but say to their relatives - “Hey you know I’ve lied about being abused? Come and speak to a documentary maker and lie along with me” and they’ve said “Sure OK!”

I hope they rinse his estate dry I really do. The pain they exude is unbearable to witness.

Also OP you haven’t seen watched the first documentary properly. James did tell his mum around the time of the criminal trial that he wouldn’t be testifying as “Michael was a bad man” and he begged her not to press him for more information. She agreed as she didn’t want to alienate him. But she said when the Gavin accusation came along she had her doubts by then anyway.