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?

For those who are questions the victims motives for seeking justice and focusing on the money, the sense of injustice for the victims that the perpetrators get away without being found guilty is very difficult to come to terms with. I can’t imagine being a victim and not only not being believed but people so strongly defending my attacker that people who have never met me or the perpetrator not only doesn’t believe me, but attack me further. Some people might just be able to ‘leave it’ and get on with their lives, but many people wouldn’t be able to.

He tried to get James to be a witness in his trial as well and was angry with him when he refused. He got Wade to be a witness because he was secure still in his hold over him and he knew that it would be helpful to his case.

My thoughts on all sexual allegations are just what’s more likely - that multiple accusers are telling similar lies or that they are telling the truth.

I believe Jackson was a sex offender.

MJ had three children. What has childlessness got to do with it? P,entry offathers are abusers.

I haven’t watched it but I imagine people aren’t that interested in disproving he was a sex offender because it’s generally pretty obvious he was, and they recognise that children may not always be the best witnesses in terms of exact recollections but that doesn’t mean we should immediately discredit them and allow sex offenders to have ongoing access to children.

The podcast “Real Crime Profile” did an episode on Leaving Neverland in 2019. Hosted by 2 experts (ex-FBI agent who was sexually abused himself and tracked down countless abusers during his career and a crime psychologist from Scotland Yard who specialises in domestic abuse), both of them were in no doubt, given the evidence in the documentary, that Jackson was an abuser.

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/real-crime-profile/id1081244497?i=1000434021398

We were fooled by his little lost boy act and the story he spun of wanting to relive his childhood

I’ve no doubt there is some truth in this, he didn’t have a childhood and his father was horrendously abusive

he was the most amazingly talented performer few can match him but he was also a sex offender

he told us he was having sleep overs we just choose to believe they were innocent because of who he is and his persona sold to us

it’s so sad all those who suffered and still have to because people refuse to believe their idol or someone they admire is a deeply flawed and sometimes cruel individual

and many people knew they were just living off his money and choose to look the other way it’s the same old tragic story

Why is it that some people are so desperate to believe he wasn’t a pedophile? Is it that they were fans of his and can’t stand that their idol was a beast? Do people just love a conspiracy theory?

Is it guilt over still liking his music? Personally I have no problem listening to his music - he was an outstanding musician who wrote some great music. I have no issue enjoying his music while still being reasonably sure he was a monster.

Also fascinated in how many people around him knew what he was and what was happening and helped hide it.

Tell you this right now. I wouldn’t go betting my life on anyone’s innocence.

CSA is a horrific thing and oftentimes parents sweep it under, adults won’t want to admit it happened, and memories around dates etc can be fuzzy or misremembered. None of these things mean the abuse itself didn’t happen.

None one realistically wants to be remembered, or famous, as the child who was abused. No one assumes they’ll get rich that way either. Cause chances are 99% they won’t get a penny back they put in trying to win their case. What they will do is ruin their own life and have people distrust them forevermore. “Aren’t you that pos who told the worst lie imaginable about a truly beloved celebrity!?”
Who tf signs up for that unless on some level it’s absolutely real?

I haven't read a lot around this at the moment but I wanted to comment on 2 of your "issues"

1 it is not uncommon for victims of abuse to want to be close to their abuser. Even see them as close confidences. This is likely why he asked to get married there. He had not yet fully processed what had occurred to him.

2 when Jackson died it was known that there were children who claimed he was an abuser. That could be what Stephanie Safechuck was talking about even if she wasn't aware of her own child's involvement.

Repeating what I said earlier, @curiositykilledthiscat , Yes, he previously said nothing happened. And? Many abusers cover up for their abuser, even battered women lie on the stand for their husbands, and later admit their husband did hit them.

And if it were pure financial greed, they would have come out BEFORE Jackson died when it was more profitable. It makes zero sense to come out now, when his estate was going bankrupt and in other people's hands.

Yes. And only ever boys. Never girls. Like as if girls wouldn't want to spend time with him at the park and sleep in his bed?

Paedophiles almost always have a preference for one sex.

Also, while I’m here, your comments about people initially denying child sexual abuse happened to them or having mixed feelings about their abuser show that you’re clearly lacking a great deal of understanding of how child sexual abuse impacts a person. Children very very very rarely disclose child sexual abuse for a number of reasons and the average age for a person to make a disclosure, if they ever do, is in their twenties. Sex offenders also often gain access to children by meeting any unmet needs they have and showing them kindness and building relationships before they are abusive, to reduce victim resistance, which causes the conflicted feelings.
Having read your post again I really really really
really hope you’re not a parent, because presumably if you suspected your child had been sexually abused but you asked them and they denied it, then showed mixed feelings about their abuser before later making a disclosure, you wouldn’t believe them and would be trying to gather support for their abuser.

Their brain has a choice- am I the incredibly lucky kid who’s practically adopted by a megastar, or am I a victim of a serial child rapist?
Guess what one your brain picks to believe as long as it possibly can?

This is very profound and thought provoking. I never thought of it like that before.

Isn’t there a similar mentality with victims of
domestic violence? Our ego doesn’t like to see us as a victim and that leads to the it was my fault, they hit me because I did xyz way of thinking.

And this happens in adults. Hardly surprising children take much longer to see the truth of what happened to them and to be comfortable going public as a victim.

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.

You didn't read the OP then?

But Robson hadn't seen Jackson for years. It is extremely rare for someone who had been sexually abused to still be defending their abuser, years on.

And the 2013 lawsuit was worth over a billion dollars.

@ElizaDolittle4321see I think the opposite, it’s easier to come out since he died because there’s no defamation to be accused of.

i also used to watch wade robson from his Britney Spears days - he had a show on MTV for years and is exceptionally talented as a dancer himself.

His relationship with michael was very strong for many years and honestly, I feel he probably wouldn’t have had the guts back then and also fear of defamation lawsuits now to come out.

I just don’t buy MJ being that stupid to put him as his strongest most reliable witness on a stand as an adult - it’d make zeros sense to risk your life behind bars to do this when there were plenty of other witnesses. Sorry but I can’t get my head around that part either

I watched the Oprah interview and that was enough. One of them admitted still feeling guilty for telling what happened because of how much he'd loved him and idolised him. He felt bad because of how much the grooming had messed him up. Honestly as an adult, that was my first real understanding of the absolute betrayal of grooming. You would think someone abuses you, it is wrong, tell someone.. but is so much more complex. My heart goes out to them and all SA survivors.

He groomed those boys into thinking it was a relationship, not abuse.

They loved him, because they were groomed into doing so.

Some victims have one light bulb moment where they realise what happened was actually abuse, for many of us it takes years to comprehend.

There's not a doubt in my mind that MJ abused those boys and there's not a doubt in my mind that the parents knew on some level but essentially sold their sons to him.

How anyone can defend CSA because literal children don't get details exactly correct is beyond me.

You really think they didn't keep in touch?

One of the most horrible things about CSA I’ve always thought is how many children are told that it makes them special by their abuser. That dissonance must be so very difficult.

I just don’t buy MJ being that stupid to put him as his strongest most reliable witness on a stand as an adult - it’d make zeros sense to risk your life behind bars to do this when there were plenty of other witnesses. Sorry but I can’t get my head around that part either

Do you understand how grooming works?

That's not true, his estate have sued for defamation.

And Jackson most definitely would not have risked putting him on trial if he wasn't 10000% sure he would keep quiet. We all saw the abuse his previous claimants got from the public. That would have kept Robson toeing the line.

That is what grooming does to you.