For decades Michael Jackson reigned as the ‘King Of Pop.’ With Thriller he had the best selling album of all time and his influence traversed music, fashion and pop culture globally. (1) His music is the soundtrack to lives of several generations from the Motown magic of the Jackson 5ive, the lush Philly Soul and sophisticated disco of the The Jacksons to his perfect fusion of R&B and pop as a solo artist. But his career was not without controversy. In 1993 he was accused of molesting 13 year-old Jordan Chandler, later exposed as an extortion racket by the child’s father. Against his own wishes his lawyers settled and that chapter effectively closed, save for an over zealous District Attorney named Tom Sneddon. (2)
Ostensibly borne out of Martin Bashir’s disparaging documentary Living With Michael Jackson, he was accused again in 2005. This case went to trial and he was acquitted of all charges. (3) In spite of the stigma of these and other attempts accuse him, nothing was able to bring him down. Indeed, his memorial in 2009 that was recorded as the most watched live television broadcast in history worldwide only proved that Michael Joseph Jackson remained the pre-eminent global icon. (4)
That is until now. A new documentary, Leaving Neverland featuring the accounts of two men alleging sexual abuse by him while they were children, threatens to de-throne the King, amid cries to #mute and #cancel Michael Jackson, almost a decade after his death. A global campaign, comprising the Sundance film festival, HBO, Channel 4 and the media juggernaut that is Oprah Winfrey is the most serious assault on the legacy of Michael Jackson yet. The four hour epic film was premiered at the Sundance film festival and later broadcast on HBO in the USA, followed by an interview of the films two accusers alongside director Dan Reed with Oprah Winfrey. (5)
The film features centres on James Safechuck who, aged nine first met Jackson, in January 1987 on set of a Pepsi advert and Wade Robson who first met Jackson as a five-year old in Australia in 1987 but didn’t spend any time with him until his family holidayed in the USA two years later. Safechuck alleges he was groomed by Jackson for over a year and the sexual abuse began in June 1988, and lasted until 1992, when he was fourteen. For his part, Robson claims the abuse began immediately and lasted until 1996 when he was fourteen. However, during this period and for years afterwards both publicly denied any wrongdoing by Jackson, initially in 1993 and Robson made a second denial during the Gavin Arvizo trial in 2005. (6)
Both men say that at the time they did not consider their experiences with Jackson as abuse but loving sexual relationships, that they describe in graphic detail in the film – seemingly its most potent selling point. Another key part of the narrative is that the two are not in it for the money but to help other victims. The film’s director states the two received no money for the film but the two launched lawsuits against Michael Jackson’s estate. Reed explained:
“Their cases were dismissed on technical grounds, but the judge made no ruling on the validity of the abuse claims. The cases have both gone to appeal.” (7)
But this claim is only partially true. While it was dismissed because of statutes of limitations, the ruling does include implicit judgements about the truthfulness of some of their claims. For example, Robson claimed that he did not know about the administration of the Michael Jackson Estate before March 4, 2013 but in 2011, he was negotiating with the estate to get a leading creative job on Cirque du Soleil’s Michael Jackson-themed Las Vegas show ONE. He was ultimately unsuccessful in this endeavour. Then in May 2012 he “realized” that he had been sexually abused by Jackson as a child and then used that allegation to sue Jackson’s entities for money. According to his mother’s deposition, he was also in financial difficulties. (8) Similarly, Safechuck’s parents were faced with as near $1 million lawsuit in 2013, right about that time he was contacted by Robson’s lawyers about his case against the Jackson estate. (9) Safechuck filed his case against the Jackson estate in 2014, using the same legal firm as Robson. (10)
Michael Jackson’s nephew Taj crystalised these points in his response to the film and the pending appeal:
“They can say it’s not about money but they are up for appeal and I think if they can get enough backlash or public opinion they’re in a good position.” (11)
The family’s official response was no less scathing, calling the film a ‘Public Lynching’ by Media and ‘Vulture Tweeters’:
“Michael Jackson is our brother and son. We are furious that the media, who without a shred of proof or single piece of physical evidence, chose to believe the word of two admitted liars over the word of hundreds of families and friends around the world who spent time with Michael, many at Neverland, and experienced his legendary kindness and global generosity. We are proud of what Michael Jackson stands for.
People have always loved to go after Michael. He was an easy target because he was unique. But Michael was subjected to a thorough investigation which included a surprise raid of Neverland and other properties as well as a jury trial where Michael was found to be COMPLETELY INNOCENT. There has never been one piece of proof of anything. Yet the media is eager to believe these lies.
Michael always turned the other cheek, and we have always turned the other cheek when people have gone after members of our family – that is the Jackson way. But we can’t just stand by while this public lynching goes on, and the vulture tweeters and others who never met Michael go after him. Michael is not here to defend himself, otherwise these allegations would not have been made.
The creators of this film were not interested in the truth. They never interviewed a single solitary soul who knew Michael except the two perjurers and their families. That is not journalism, and it’s not fair, yet the media are perpetuating these stories.
But the truth is on our side. Go do your research about these opportunists. The facts don’t lie, people do. Michael Jackson was and always will be 100% innocent of these false allegations.” (12)
The family also pledged to sue HBO for $100 million for “posthumous character assassination.” (13)
It could easily be argued that, had the subject been anything else, Leaving Neverland could easily be dismissed as a woefully one-sided piece of propaganda. The claims made by Robson and Safechuck deliberately lack corroboration, apparently relying on urban myths about Michael Jackson to fill in the blanks. In this regard, Michael Jackson is the epitome of the proverbial ‘low hanging fruit.’ As Tom Mesereau, the lead counsel in his 2005 trial said in reference to the Chandler case:
“Settling was the worst decision Michael made. It sent a message out to the world – Why work when you can sue Michael Jackson?” (14)
The Release of the film has initiated a deluge of articles purporting to include “indisputable facts,” but “facts” like Jordan Chandler accurately describing Michael Jackson’s genitalia, his possession of a hoard of child porn, him not being sexually active with women and showering families with expensive gifts (when it was mainly they that pursued Jackson) have all been debunked. (15)
There is also Brandi Jackson, daughter of the eldest Jackson sibling Jackie, who ‘dated’ Wade Robson for about seven years between 1994 and 2001 and it was her uncle Michael that brought them together. None of this is mentioned in Leaving Neverland and she believes she knows why:
“Wade and I were together for over 7 years, but I bet that isn’t in his ‘documentary’ because it would ruin his timeline.” (16)
In addition to Brandi and her cousins Taj, TJ, and Taryell, there’s a host child friends of Jackson who say they were never molested or saw anything like that happening, including: Macaulay Culkin, Corey Feldman, Corey Haim, Kelly Parker, Brett Barnes, Ray J, Alfonso Ribeiro and Emmanuel Lewis. (17)
So even though the film is arguably a child of the times – a confluence of ‘fake news,’ #Me Too and reality TV fame-seekers, many are calling for Jackson to be ‘cancelled’ or ‘muted.’ (18) Interestingly, the debate around this tends not to spread to the likes of David Bowie, Led Zepplin regarding guitarist Jimmy Page or Bill Wyman era Rolling Stones known for unsavoury dalliances with under age girls. (19). A more stark example of the selectivity that can occur (with all its attendant undercurrents) is the fact that it took the US Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences forty years after Roman Polanski absconded pending a conviction for child rape (and sixteen years after they awarded him a ‘Best Director’ Oscar) to expel him. It took them eight days to expel Bill Cosby after his conviction for sexual assault. (20)
Similar to the recent Surviving R Kelly series, Leaving Neverland is designed to overwhelm (some might say bludgeon) viewers with its sheer intensity. The main difference is that Surviving R Kelly, including a variety of evidence, interviewees and the producers are on record as actually trying to pursue more. (21) One aspect of the R Kelly narrative is that it’s taken so long to bring him to any kind of account because his victims were Afrikan women and girls. (22) However, if media projections are to be believed, Michael Jackson did tend to surround himself with white children and boys in particular, leading some to dismiss him as a sell-out, having turned his back on his race and that there is only alarm now because the alleged victims were white. (23)
It should also be clear that the saga is as much about director Dan Reed who appears to be using this film to propel himself to international prominence in a similar way Martin Bashir did , also on the back of Michael Jackson in 2003. (24)
The Blog, The Michael Jackson Allegations, that offers a detailed analysis of the Robson and Safechuck’s claims and the inconsistencies contained therein, concludes with the following:
“Why exactly are we supposed to brush aside all the red flags in this case, suspend critical thinking and just believe them? Because they have a huge platform in the form of a one-sided, manipulatively put together film backed by a huge promotional campaign? Because their stories are sexually explicit and shocking? Because the Zeitgeist is that we should just believe anyone who makes a sexual abuse claim and Robson and Safechuck use that Zeitgeist in their favor?
The presumption of innocence until found guilty is a very important pillar in modern societies that we should insist on. Otherwise we might as well as go back to witch hunts and lynch mobs. These two men have proven nothing. They are making one-sided allegations and they are simply given a huge platform to do so, while Jackson is not here to defend himself, face and confront his accusers. Accusers who have changed their stories amidst monetary demands and have a very compromised credibility.” (25)
Even aside from apparent inconsistencies in the accounts of Robson and Safechuck, there are those, based on their performance in the film, who remain unconvinced of their veracity, especially when their projections are compared with real life abuse victims. (26)
In terms of the global fallout the Children’s Museum of Indianapolis, Louis Vuitton, Drake, the Los Angeles Lakers and The Simpsons are among those that ‘muted’ Michael Jackson as well his music being (officially and unofficially) dropped from radio playlists around the world. (27) But this raises the question of if there is going to be any ‘muting’ or ‘cancelling’ how far should it go – his entire career, just his adult career, his adult collaborators (e.g. Quincy Jones, Stevie Wonder, Paul McCartney, Steven Spielberg, etc.), his family, the Moonwalk and other dance styles? Of course such a question seems to predicated entirely on the acceptance or rejection of the premise of Leaving Neverland, as this didn’t seem to be a significant issue before it was released.
(1) Hampton Stevens (24/06/10) Michael Jackson’s Unparalleled Influence. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2010/06/michael-jacksons-unparalleled-influence/58616/
(2) Mary A. Fischer (1994) Was Michael Jackson Framed? The Untold Story. https://mjjtruthnow.wordpress.com/2014/05/20/was-michael-jackson-framed-the-defining-1994-gq-article-by-mary-a-fischer-that-set-the-record-straight-on-the-1993-allegations/
(3) Andrew Gumbel (13/06/05) Jackson walks free after child abuse trial. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jackson-walks-free-after-child-abuse-trial-225696.html
(4) MSN News (15/11/11) Hazarika”s funeral creates world record. https://web.archive.org/web/20140807110046/http://news.in.msn.com/national/article.aspx?cp-documentid=5592621
(5) Vanessa Thorpe (02/03/19) Channel 4 refuses to pull film on Michael Jackson’s alleged abuse. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/mar/02/channel-4-refuses-to-pull-leaving-neverland-documentary-on-michael-jackson-alleged-abuse
(6) Dusty Baxter-Wright (08/03/19) A timeline of Michael Jackson’s relationships with Wade Robson and James Safechuck https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/entertainment/a26762732/michael-jacksons-wade-robson-james-safechuck-allegations-timeline/
(7) Catherine Earp (12/03/19) Leaving Neverland director Dan Reed dismantles theories that say Wade Robson and James Safechuck are lying. https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/a26795919/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-wade-robson-james-safechuck-lying-truth-proof-dan-reed/
(8) The Michael Jackson Allegations (25/02/19) A Critical Analysis of “Leaving Neverland.”: Claim 3: It is not about money. https://themichaeljacksonallegations.com/2019/02/25/a-critical-analysis-of-leaving-neverland/#claim3
(9) Inaworldoflove (25/02/19) Revealed! Why Safechuck is REALLY Suing Michael Jackson! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_CL5VpNKWU
(10) The Michael Jackson Allegations (06/03/19) A Critical Analysis of “Leaving Neverland.”: Claim 1: Wade Robson and James Safechuck did not have the opportunity to harmonize their stories. Despite of that their stories are so parallel. It proves they are telling the truth . https://themichaeljacksonallegations.com/2019/02/25/a-critical-analysis-of-leaving-neverland/#claim3
(11) Cherry Wilson and Sinead Garvan (06/03/19) Michael Jackson abuse claims are ‘the ultimate betrayal’. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-47469142
(12) Tonja Renée Stidhum (28/01/19) Michael Jackson’s Family Condemns Leaving Neverland Doc, Says There’s a ‘Public Lynching’ by Media and ‘Vulture Tweeters’. https://thegrapevine.theroot.com/michael-jacksons-family-condemns-leaving-neverland-doc-1832122261
(13) Edvard Pettersson (21/02/19) Michael Jackson Estate Sues HBO Over ‘Character Assassination’. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-21/michael-jackson-estate-sues-hbo-over-character-assassination
(14) Damdamfino (12/01/19) Michael Is Innocent. https://old.reddit.com/r/MichaelJackson/comments/afnz1w/michael_is_innocent/
(15) Ibid.
(16) Jade Boren (12/03/19) Brandi Jackson: 5 Things About Michael Jackson’s Niece Defending Her Uncle Against Sex Abuse Allegations. https://hollywoodlife.com/2019/03/12/who-is-brandi-jackson-michael-jackson-niece-wade-robson-ex/
(17) Damdamfino. Op. Cit.
(18) Greg Tate, Alexis Petridis, Lyndsey Winship, Priya Elan, Chuck Klosterman, Laura Snapes and Simran Hans (01/03/19) ‘Too big to cancel’: can we still listen to Michael Jackson? https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/mar/01/leaving-neverland-is-it-still-ok-to-listen-to-michael-jackson
(19) Stereo Williams (17/01/16) David Bowie and Rock ‘n’ Roll’s Statutory Rape Problem. https://www.thedailybeast.com/david-bowie-and-rock-n-rolls-statutory-rape-problem?ref=scroll
(20) BBC News (03/05/18) Bill Cosby and Roman Polanski expelled from Oscars academy. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43994591.
(21) Winston Cook-Wilson (03/01/19) Surviving R. Kelly Producer Says Jay-Z, Lady Gaga, Questlove and More Declined Interviews for the Series. https://www.spin.com/2019/01/r-kelly-miniseries-documentary-jay-z-lady-gaga-interviews-declined/
(22) Soraya Nadia McDonald (19/07/17) R. Kelly story makes us realize that no one cares about black women. https://theundefeated.com/features/r-kelly-cult-accusations-no-one-cares-about-black-women/(
(23) Black Star News (05/07/09) Michael Jackson Hated His Skin. http://www.blackstarnews.com/others/extras/michael-jackson-hated-his-skin.html
(24) Damdamfino. Op. Cit.
(25) The Michael Jackson Allegations . Op cit.
(26) Rob Ager (24/03/19) Leaving Neverland – Robson & Safechuck vs real abuse victims. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFdnhmRpdFE
(27) Biba Kang (18/03/19) The Leaving Neverland fallout: everyone who has dropped Michael Jackson so far. https://uk.movies.yahoo.com/leaving-neverland-fallout-everyone-dropped-162615414.html
We ask the question:
Should we ‘cancel’/’Mute’ Michael Jackson?
1) Have you seen Leaving Neverland or the Oprah interview and do you believe the claims made?
2) Why have so many people so readily accept the allegations?
3) Is there consistent focus on alleged abusers in all genres/industries?
4) Did Michael Jackson bring all of this on himself with his ‘eccentric’ lifestyle?
5) Will his legacy recover?
6) Was Michael Jackson a self-hater we should not be concerned with?
Our Special Guest:
Bro. Ldr. Mbandaka: Resident guest who is Spiritual Leader of the Alkebu-Lan Revivalist Movement and UNIA-ACL Ambassador for the UK and national co-Chair of the interim National Afrikan People’s Parliament. Bro. Ldr is a veteran activist of over 30 years standing, a featured columnist in The Whirlwind newspaper and author of Mosiah Daily Affirmations and Education: An African-Centred Guide To Excellence.