Leaving Neverland: Michael Jackson and Me

[SachaStark]

Anybody else planning to watch tonight? Part 1 of 2, 9pm, Channel 4.

I'm very intrigued to watch. I remember the Martin Bashir documentary being aired years ago, and the various backlashes/criticisms that happened afterwards.

Led. I can't type.

Yes - the FBI keeps coming up but all that was released iirc is ten pages of documentation related to Terry George. This Terry George.
mjandboys.wordpress.com/2017/03/17/michael-jackson-and-terry-george-1979-1981/
It contains the original tabloid stories (the Sun?) and says that London are not taking further action.
I assume they checked phone records and found the claim unsubstantiated.

But that isn't a ten year deep dive, no.

www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/celebrity/early-probe-cleared-michael-jackson

Social services report with regard to Gavin Arviso available here.
Not sure how far the FBI would have been involved (?). The social workers interviewed the family and Gavin, who was denying abuse at the time. Referral came from school following the Bashir documentary.
Some say the social services leaked the report themselves to cover their back when Gavin later disclosed. It was claimed by Maureen Orth that Jackson's people said they would be sending Gavin to private school after he dropped out due to bullying/would be providing the family with a house (Janet Arvizo was being investigated for neglect because of allowing the sleepovers) - neither happened (but the Arvizos did stay at Neverland in the interim. How this or any offer by the Jackson regarding schooling/accommodation would have been appropriate in the circumstances - the alleged perp offering such things - is beyond me).

Megabat care to share your new evidence. I’m all ears. If he had been convicted beyond all reasonable doubt and I was defending him, fine I’d get it.

Just accept the fact you have your opinion and I have mine. At least I have gone to effort of researching it before making my mind up. You however have just jumped to conclusions.

Definitely as if THAT kind of abuse is just too taboo to go near, the vapid hollywood machine didnt want to know the irony!!

His interest in very young, very pretty boys is absolutely pathological, even if you can't prove whether they had actual sex. He sought them out, lived with them, slept with them and found more of them even when accused of being a paedophile. Over a 30 year period. This is not normal behaviour. There are literally hundreds of photos and videos showing him with young boys, arms around them, holding hands, taking them on tour with him, faxes to them, hours of phone-calls, one was called every day for two years, this is not even in dispute and is evidenced by the multiple adults around them plus photos/video. This is evidence of deeply disturbed and abnormal child/adult relations, even if it is not evidence of actual sexual contact.

I couldn't watch all of it because I felt it too hard to watch but may catchup with it all later.

I just found it strange when one of the mother's was recalling their time with MJ - she didn't seem that distraught. Then again I didn't watch the whole thing!

I have no idea how anyone who has watched this could believe Jackson is innocent. The line that keeps getting pedalled about them changing their story is more than adequately addressed. First court case they were still v young, terrified of prison for themselves and Jackson who had brainwashed them into loving him. They were scared of him getting into trouble. Second court case they didn’t want to testify at all but had no choice legally. They were now ready to admit the abuse, simply couldn’t face it and still at that point didn’t really accept that what had happened to them had been assault and how wrong it was. It was only when the one had the baby that he realised how terrible it actually was. Their admissions in this programme really shone a light onto how complex an issue being groomed and brainwashed really is. Their feelings of love for Jackson took a long time to subside and still haven’t died totally, he messed with their heard in such a huge way. It such a complex issue being abused by someone you believe cares about you and for those saying they were acting, shame on you

not ready I meant of course

She wasn't distraught because she was groomed and there were good parts of it! Even Safechuck and Robson have said one awful aspect of it is that they truly did love MJ and the life they had together, at the time they saw the abuse as part of the 'love'. Robson's mother is particularly delusional and still in denial so it doesn't surprise me that she is almost wistful rather than distraught.

Tootrousers - No I'm talkin about now, they can't get their story straight. They gave one answer in the documentary to the same point, and then another in the Oprah interview. Both recent, both when they knew what it was and what they say happened to them. Still different answers now, why??

Also, I post video to a Mum of a kid who Michael was friends with. He wasn't a young boy and it all happened before 1993 (i.e. the first court case) when nobody suspect anything. He befriended this sick boy and did exactly the same as he did with the young buys he was friends with, had sleepovers etc. Listen to the Mum's version who was there. Don't take my word for it. To say he was only interested in young boys is wrong.

Ccmrob. As you believe it possible or probable that the accusers are lying, what do you think MJ and the little children were doing for the 30 years of sleepovers. Describe what you think happened on a typical sleepover.

Why do you keep ranting on about their "stories not being straight"? I've watched both episodes and the Oprah Winfrey interview in the last 24 hours and everything they said was entirely logical and consistent.

I see nothing inconsistent either.
But even if there was something, let’s not forget that these men were kids at the time and their minds have been completely messed with.

These boys sticking up for him clearly have Stockholm Syndrome. Again, I watched Abducted in Plain Sight (and you should watch it if you haven't already) and the girl who was abducted and raped was brainwashed and loved her captor. She ran off again with him willingly and wanted to marry him.

When Elizabeth Smart was first rescued, after being abducted and held captive and abused, at first she wanted to stay with her captor and said she was his wife. I remember being shocked that she had been rescued and that she was begging to see him.

And they're talking about traumatic and confusing events that happened 20-30 years ago.

Exactly. That’s exactly what it is, he made it so normal and loving that they didn’t realise it was so wrong and they in turn, loved him. So complex and I feel for them trying to unravel and work through it all

The first 30 minutes of the documentary before any of the sexual abuse started were hugely disturbing on their own and there was plenty of evidence with photos, videos and recordings that although not sexual would be concerning to any safeguarding professionals . Major red flags that if I had heard or seen I would be referring to social care- the taped interview on the plane was unsettling with Jackson saying jimmy was his best friend forever etc etc

I've just watched Mark Lester's interview with Lorraine about the documentary. His response is VERY strange. As are the comments of Paris, his 'daughter', just saying 'look at the bigger picture'. It's like everyone around him have been brainwashed, not just the children. Really sinister.
If Michael was such a childlike man, why did the FBI find his home full of porn?

No, the most basic and important question one of which there could be little confusion or disparity. Oprah asked James in her interview, when did you know it was abuse, when did you know it was wrong. He told her when Wade came out in 2013. In the documentary he claims he told his Mum Michael was bad in 2005, when he was asked to testify for him again? Which is it?

Out of interest, why did they leave the whole thing about him dating Michael's niece out of the whole story, considering the timelines cross? It should have been in their naturally to include all facts. Why was this left out? It is a fact after all, it's because it wouldn't suit the agenda here. You all seem to be forgetting if it was a truthful account these facts would be in there but they aren't.

All I am interested in is the truth. No more, no less.

I found the statements from the two men about how they were 'in love' with Michael as children just chilling. A child of 7 cannot be 'in love' with a grown man.

Certainly merry, did they???

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/no-child-porn-found-at-neverland-thenor-now-the_us_577fdfbce4b0f06648f4a3f8

MJ wanted to marry Mark Lester's daughter when she was a child because she looked like Princess Diana.

It is a shitshow.

I can’t get over the people on my Facebook rushing to defend MJ and brand these men liars without any shadow of doubt. These people are big fans who I would wager haven’t actually watched the doc. I don’t know how you could still be so strong in your belief in his innocence if you had.

No wonder victims of abuse don’t come forward. No wonder there’s such a crisis in men’s mental health. No fucking wonder.