Michael Jackson - Leaving Neverland documentary

If you take the line that they are acting, then you have to be saying that their entire families are acting as well.

And I do not see anything in their words to camera that gives any sense of them acting or playing a part.

We have no way of obtaining physical evidence in these cases. Which is the situation with many cases of abuse.

But we have compelling testimony, we have patterns of inappropriate behaviour. We have very clear evidence of psychological and emotional damage.

Will this ever be proven beyond reasonable doubt in a court? Almost certainly not. But even on the lower test of the balance of probabilities, I would find no problem in ruling in favour of the complainants. They are not actors, they are men who were damaged in childhood and who are now coming to terms with what that means for them, their families and their relationships.

It is such a sad case - but I have no problem in condemning the perpetrator of this abuse - just as I have no problem in condemning Jimmy Savile. Being dead does not mean we cannot draw conclusions about the behaviour of people who used their power, influence and money to allow them to commit abuse.

I completely respect that, and I want to 100% believe these two men, and I do believe aspects of their stories wholeheartedly, but there are many questions I still have, so I'm not going to say whether everything that is alleged is true because I don't and thats OK.

I found James to actually be throughly compelling and believable, whereas I struggle with Wade because of his performance at the court case and now. I get his arguement of being scared or not wanting to mention it etc, but he lied under oath and we all, including those in the court room, believed whst he was saying. So if we were convinced then, remembering that after he was smiling and laughing outside of the court, how do we know he isn't doing the same now?

I don't want to not believe these men, and I'm not defending the actions of Michael if true, but there are points that should be brought up to make it fair.

A 4 hour documentary is never going to be a huge cash cow....

Even so, it still not be a huge source of income for the producers. They won't lose out - but this is more of a calling card/prestige project - plus telling an important story.

I don't want their testimony to be clouded by accusations of only being in it for the money.

I wouldn't want that either, but it was always going to be a documentary that would divide people and cause an uproar with passionate debate on both sides. I was at a family dinner last night and we got discussing it and it was pretty much split down the middle as to who believed the men, who didn't. My Nan was the only one who didn't have a clue what was going on. The men and the filmmakers knew that going in, they know what they're up against. This documentary was always going to be taken by alot of people as a serious testimony, and also, for alot of people, more stories about Michael Jackson that we were used to hearing when he was alive that were found not guilty. So it makes sense why people question them and the men are aware of that.

Innocent until proven guilty I say.

My personal opinion is that abuse in any form is horrid, but that doesn’t mean we can believe claims simply because they are made. We live in a time where it is not acceptable to question the validity of abuse claims and for all sorts of reasons that is not something I can support. It becomes very dangerous territory - ask Cliff Richard, for example.

It’s not the same, but look at Jussie Smollett - supposedly faked racist and homophobic attacks (on himself) in an attempt to increase his own salary. If we had said 3 months ago he arranged it all himself we’d be accused of defending racism, homophobia and victim shaming, when in fact there very well may be no truth to it whatsoever.

To say that there is no financial incentive to this documentary is incorrect though. There is a pending appeal against a decision allowing the accusers to sue the estate for damages. As it stands, I believe they are using trial by media in order to improve their chances - apparently $1.5B is on the line.

You didn’t watch the Oprah episode. She had a whole audience full of sexual abuse survivors. The point being: abusers are always someone you know, someone you love and respect, someone you admire. Whether it’s the school teacher to the neighbourhood police officer or a charity fundraiser or the local priest, it’s a person is a position of authority and esteem who exploits their position to get access to children.

You don’t have to be Michael Jackson or Jimmy Saville to do that. They’re just the most out-sized examples of the process.

Exactly this. And that's also why I take issue with the attitude of blaming the parents/saying things like 'I would never...' because you simply don't know. Those parents if asked would have said 'I would never let my child get abused' (obviously) but abusers are clever, and manipulative, they twist the way you think so that 'I would never' becomes the new normal. And that happens with 'normal' people...add to that the power and influence of someone like MJ (which DOES very much play into this) then you have almost a blank canvass of how people can be influenced. 

At the end of the day, a predator is a predator, and smarter people than any of us here have fallen foul of them. Do you know how heartbreaking it is watching someone you love blame themselves for the stuff that a manipulative POS did to them? You're not dumb just because someone has successfully groomed you, and that goes for the parents as well as the victims. One really positive thing about all the recent high profile discussion of abuse cases is that people are now SO much better equipped to be on the look-out for warning signs and red flags in a way they may not have been historically, but ultimately the absolute responsibility comes down to the abusers themselves. I'm sure there are loads of things that people do that can make it easier for an abuser to abuse, but it's only the abuser who makes the choice to commit abuse.

I don’t think there’s money on the line in terms of MJ’s estate. A judge has already ruled that Robson and Safechuck’s claim against the estate has time expired. In the Oprah interview it’s said that neither of them or their families received payment for appearing in the documentary. Im sure they’ll be getting appearance fees etc but can’t see it being megabucks. There’s no more story to tell because they’ve told it all. So where’s the big sum of money coming from?

How people process trauma is entirely up to the individual and I don't think we should criticise James and Wade for dealing with that in the way that they have. We may not agree with their route but that doesn't mean that they should do it behind closed doors and not in public if they believe that this is the right route for them to get some sort of peace of mind. It's difficult to hear for everyone but it's nothing compared to actual abuse itself. We don't know the details of the deal for their appearance in the documentary so we can't assume that just because the documentary is "popular" that they are making anywhere near large amounts of money for it. However, I personally choose to believe them (although I appreciate that others may not or wish to wait for "hard evidence") because of that I hope that they are making lots of money. Nothing will make what they've gone through go away, not even millions of dollars, they have to live with it for the rest of their lives and I believe that they are clearly damaged because of it forever so if they get a few million dollars for appearing in this documentary then good for them. And while I would expect them to continue to defend him of course, forshame to the Jackson family for continuing to peddle this tale that he was some sort of childlike innocent who wouldn't have hurt a fly and only had goodness in his heart. Good people often do bad things.

Jackson may be dead but putting other people under oath may be a way to try and get to the truth. There is a chance that other family members/employees played a part in covering up any alleged abuse, which, in itself, would be a crime. It can (and should) be only be settled in the courts.