# Leaving Neverland: Michael Jackson Documentary **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 29, 2019, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586 "2019-01-29T02:10:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2019, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586/221 "2019-03-10T07:29:35Z")
“Um, I was there and the song is indeed strictly autobiographical.” - Sean Lennon on his Facebook page. ‘Strictly autobiographical’ means that ‘Bubbles’ in the video is Lennon himself. Let’s just say the video wasn’t made by someone who has a positive view of Michael Jackson. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [March 15, 2019, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586/222 "2019-03-15T02:13:29Z")
I watched the 4 hour documentary. It is fascinating in a grotesque way, as it provides a textbook look at grooming from someone with the vast resources and fame to have worldwide acclaim. Also, if you haven’t, you should look up the one hour Oprah special about the documentary. She talks to Jimmy Safechuck, Wade Robson, and the director. Her audience is made up of victims of childhood abuse. My takeaway is that Jackson was definitely a pedophile and child molester. He groomed the children and groomed the parents to make them trust him and love him. He spent hours on the phone talking with them, visited them for days or even weeks at a time. > [@WOOKINPANUB](#): > > I’m no MJ fangirl and certainly not an apologist but I guess I’m not sure what more there is to say, other than to get in to details of the molestation itself. Why on earth would anyone want to watch 4 hours of that? Well, there is the details of the molestation and also the whole grooming process, how he used dance competitions connected with his worldwide tours to identify boys to win backstage access and meet him in person. Then he would befriend them, and talk about how he could help promote them and their careers. There’s also the opportunity to hear from the mothers and why they allowed the behavior, how much in denial they were. It also talks about the psychology of why the boys denied the abuse for so long, going so far as to testify in defense of Michael in two separate court cases. The documentary also discusses the emotional and psychological repercussions. It talks about how they didn’t view the sex as abuse until adulthood. It was very much a seduction and falling in love. And then the heartbreak of no longer being the special boy he took everywhere with him at all times. And it addresses why they are coming forward as adults when they previously denied and actively defended Jackson in the past. It is awareness of their own lost childhoods by seeing their sons growing up that broke the wall and made them address the cause of their emotional difficulties. > [@Icarus](#): > > Whenever these stories come up again, I always say the same thing - these boys had parents who delivered them to MJ. They deserve equal levels of opprobrium. And both moms acknowledge their utter failure to protect their sons, and both men are having to work to find forgiveness for their parents. > [@Sir\_T-Cups](#): > > That was the statement from the Jackson estate. Now, obviously, they’re going to defend MJ, and the men in the doc are going to say what they need to say, but to go from “testify under oath nothing happened to them” to “ALL THIS HAPPENED TO US” seems a bit…off. > > I’m sure the excuse is they were kids and scared or whatever, but it doesn’t make the doc as ironclad as it seems IMO. Plus, all documentaries are lying in their own way anyway so there’s that too… > [@spifflog](#): > > These men had more than enough chance to bring these accusations against Jackson while he was alive, when he had an opportunity to defend himself. It does seem a bit self-serving and opportunistic to trot these accusations out now. They are not honest brokers in this situation, so I really don’t know what to make of their stance. Have you watched the documentary? Because especially part 2 delves into their motivations and why they changed their stories and the difficulty they face even now confronting the emotional baggage put on them by Michael. As for why they are suing the Michael Jackson estate, it’s not really about the money. The interview with Oprah asks that question. Wade talks about how he was made to defend the lie and spent so much of his own identity into protecting Michael and he thought himself, that he wanted a platform to bring the truth to light. He wanted to proclaim as loudly the truth as the previous lies. He wants to put it in the Jackson estate and confront them with the abuse and coverups and all the children who were abused and then the ones who were abused a second time by bringing forward accusations and not being believed. > [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Does anyone other than I wonder how in hell this guy knows with such authority what child sexual abuse is defined as to most people? I’ve perused a bit of this site, and saw documents and such that lend credence to some claims of abuse by Jackson. But when the author makes unsupported claims like in the first three paragraphs you quoted, quite frankly it sounds like he’s talking out of his ass. Oh, he may have got it right, but if so it could very well just be a lucky supposition on his part. IOW, I would be very wary of falling into the trap of taking things like this at face value. I don’t wish this as a provocation to **Fiddle Pighead** , I know he’s been thread banned and I don’t expect a response from him, but this is something I feel needs to be addressed. I won’t get into trying to justify how many people feel certain ways, but Oprah makes the same point in her interview. She talks about how she did however many hours of shows about child sexual abuse (in part because she was herself abused), and too many people make too much of “was there penetration?” and the acts themselves. But the thing is, this kind of abuse doesn’t _feel_ like abuse at the time. The boys enjoyed it and just felt it was part of expressing their love like Michael said. The real problems are caused by the lies and coverups and emotional damage done by the need to lie. And the emotional abandonment felt when the perpetrator moves on. > [@davidm](#): > > After these cases, did he continue the behavior that people considered suspect? Did he continue the odd friendships with little boys? Did he continue to spend time alone with them? Did he continue sleeping with them? If so, why? Yes, he continued the relationships through both court cases and beyond. Yes, he continued to have new boys he doted on and took everywhere. As for why, if not the sexual predation, you have to really buy into the whole man-child, “it’s okay to have sleepovers with children” thing to justify it. I suppose the argument could be made that “If I’m not doing anything wrong, then stopping will make it look true.” > [@Sherrerd](#): > > My biggest problem was with a major discrepancy between the story told by Wade and the story told by Jimmy—a discrepancy that was not addressed at all in the documentary (so far). And that is that Jimmy’s story was of a ‘courtship’ of Jimmy’s entire family over months—MJ coming to their home repeatedly, all of them going to Hawaii, etc, with NO physical contact in all that time. When sexual stuff started, it started with ‘here’s how you masturbate’ with no touching. Only gradually was touching introduced, again, over a period of weeks. > > With Wade, the story was ‘_ **the first time** we were alone_ he did a multitude of sex acts to me and asked me to do a multitude of sex acts.’ > > As I understand it, sex offenders have recognizable patterns of conduct. But here, we are asked to believe in an entirely different M.O. coming from the same person. That inconsistency should have been addressed in the documentary. They could have addressed that better, especially the timeline because it’s a little tricky to keep it all straight. But Wade Robson actually first met MJ when he was _five_ and won a dance competition. He got to go backstage and meet Michael in person. It was two years later that he traveled to America and the family looked up Michael and he started the sexual activity. During that time, Michael had met and formed the relationship with Jimmy Safechuck. It is plausible that Michael became more comfortable with his own safety, having worked out the various ways to ensure they would be alone and uninterrupted and how to be warned if someone was coming. > [@](#): > > Another issue for me is that so far, certain problems with the testimony of the two men haven’t been mentioned: that they swore under oath that MJ had never touched them sexually, that there have been attempts to obtain money from MJ or his estate, etc. Perhaps these will be discussed in tonight’s installment. This is discussed in detail. It comes down to the emotional blackmail, the fear of getting caught hurting Michael and them getting in trouble as well. They both were seduced and very much loved Michael. As for the lawsuits, these are attempts to get back some sense of self against Michael. They want to make the world see it, and the mechanism they have is legal recourse through lawsuits. > [@](#): > > My general view is that all accusations of sexual misconduct must be heard fully, and that they should be investigated. So far, this documentary is falling short as “investigation.” We’ll see if that picture looks different with tonight’s portion. If you’re looking for an investigation, you will be sorely disappointed, as that wasn’t the goal for the director of this film. He was not out trying to collect evidence to prove a case. > [@Sherrerd](#): > > The fact that a jury looked at all this and didn’t find it credible is worth noting. They may have been presented with evidence that indicated that the testimony wasn’t factual. Part of the most convincing elements was the testimony of the boys who said it didn’t happen. When Wade Robson was so adamant that nothing happened, he was coached so well and never broke or admitted anything to anyone, even his parents. > [@Sir\_T-Cups](#): > > The answer to all of these questions is what I said in my post before the one in question…I absolutely don’t believe he was that smart and cunning. I don’t think he pre-planned as much as most on this board do and I don’t think he was so dedicated to his cause of finding young boys that he would make the elaborate stories and target just the right families and do that much damn work. He had neverland ranch built, a giant amusement park. He had hideaway rooms throughout the grounds that were difficult to get to and alarms and bells so he had notice if anyone was approaching. He deliberately lead the boys away from their parents and played hide-and-seek across the park avoiding the moms. He had hours long phone calls with the boys and with their parents. He repeatedly went and spent the night at the Safechuck’s house in Simi Valley, sleeping in Jimmy’s bed with him there. He had dance contests to find young talented boys for him. > [@Hampshire](#): > > Interesting that Corey Feldman who just recently has accused quite a few of molesting him and Corey Haim when they were young, and is not one to shy away from attention, has maintained that for all of Jackson’s odd behavior that he witnessed, he himself was never touched by Jackson. > He admits he speaks only for himself. Macauly Culkin is similar in his experiences. > Really weird guy, really inappropriate stuff with kids (sleepovers in beds), but never anything sexual. > You’d think one of these two would speak up if they knew something now that Jackson’s dead and they really have nothing to lose by doing so. The lack of some people being molested doesn’t mean others were not. The fact some claim to be molested doesn’t mean all were. > [@GreenWyvern](#): > > “Um, I was there and the song is indeed strictly autobiographical.” - Sean Lennon on his Facebook page. > > ‘Strictly autobiographical’ means that ‘Bubbles’ in the video is Lennon himself. Let’s just say the video wasn’t made by someone who has a positive view of Michael Jackson. I disagree. > [@](#): > > “I just thought it was an interesting metaphor for what happened to a lot of Michael’s friends who were my age. It felt like there was something odd going on, and I still don’t know what it was. Nothing ever happened with me in an illegal way, but the whole place just felt like I was in some Peter Pan fantasy land. And there was a sense that when Bubbles got too old, he’d have to be gotten rid of, because chimpanzees turn into angry adults or dangerous adults.” > -Sean Lennon > [@](#): > > “I actually wrote a song about it, ‘Bubbles Burst,’ on the last Delirium album,” Lennon explains over the phone from his home in upstate New York (see the video at the bottom of the page), "and I think it’s just one of many stories I have that are interesting from having a different kind of childhood but it’s a song about being friends with Bubbles, Michael Jackson’s chimpanzee, and spending time out at Michael’s house in California with Bubbles and the boa constrictor and a bunch of other animals. > > “I think that was a super strange time, but not in a dark way. In an odd way, in a unique way. It was odd because Bubbles was all dressed up in dandy outfits and we were all running around playing videogames with this chimpanzee. It was a surreal scene. It was kind of part _Charlie and the Chocolate Factory_, part _Dr. Doolittle_, and part, you know, ‘Motown’s Greatest Hits’ or something. It was a convergence of a lot of disparate universes that merged for a while. And that was a strange scene but it was really fun. I mean it was amazing to hang out with all those animals, but there was also something very eccentric about it, you know?” > > [snip] > > “I mean whatever happened with him and anyone else, I have no opinion of because I wasn’t there, you know? But when I talked about it in ‘Bubbles Burst,’ the song, I wasn’t trying to be critical. I was simply trying to document the truth. You know, ‘This happened,’ is all I would say. I think a lot of people thought I was criticizing him or not criticizing him or whatever but it wasn’t about that. The song was really just documenting a strange time — like a surrealist moment of my life that was memorable.” So it was autobiographical in the sense that he was there and spent time with Bubbles the chimp, but doesn’t mean he sees himself _as_ Bubbles or that he’s claiming anything illegal happened to him (or the chimp). ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586/223 "2019-03-25T00:23:29Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > What are the reason(s) you believe he is guilty? You mean besides the law suites and his interview where he describes sleeping with little boys? seems innocent to me. There should be a Michael Jackson Pre-School chain set up from his estate. Clearly he loved children. Meanwhile, Barbara Streisand is on her way to a shoe store to pick out something with a nice citrus aftertaste. Once her foot is out of her mouth she needs to back-peddle in something nice. Possible a nice 6 inch pump. [quote] ([Barbra Streisand “Profoundly Sorry” for Comments on Michael Jackson Accusers | Vanity Fair](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/03/barbra-streisand-profoundly-sorry-for-michael-jackson-accusers-comments)): Jackson’s “sexual needs were his sexual needs… ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 5:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586/224 "2019-03-25T05:49:33Z")
[quote=“Magiver, post:223, topic:828586”] > [@](#): > > ([Barbra Streisand “Profoundly Sorry” for Comments on Michael Jackson Accusers | Vanity Fair](https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/03/barbra-streisand-profoundly-sorry-for-michael-jackson-accusers-comments)): Jackson’s “sexual needs were his sexual needs… Steisand has given a full non-apology: “I am profoundly sorry for … not choosing my words more carefully … I truly respect and admire them for speaking _ **their** _ truth.” ---
**Author:** ![Royal\_Nonesutch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ecb155/32.png) [@Royal\_Nonesutch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Royal_Nonesutch)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2019, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586/225 "2019-03-25T11:14:26Z")
Streisand’s heartfelt “Well, even with all of the Fiddlin’ & Diddlin’ that wuz going on, the kids clearly were having the time of their lives, and they are now both married with chldren of their own, so it is not like they both permanantly caught Teh Gay from St. Michael of Tragically Taboo Needs” was a real window into her soul. She is vile Human Garbage. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2019, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586/226 "2019-04-19T06:18:41Z")
Okay, I finally watched the whole thing, both parts, and there really isn’t any doubt that he was guilty as sin. One thing that struck me – once they started growing up, he’d drop them until he needed something from them. And then he’d come around and act like nothing happened. The fact that he didn’t want to continue being friends with these people – what does that tell you? > [@F.U.Shakespeare](#): > > I disagree. If you can hire expensive lawyers and investigators, you’re more powerful than most people facing such charges. It’s not that jurors were afraid of offending him, but the prosecution was outgunned. Remember OJ? If you watched the interview with the jurors, it seemed they were more offended by the kid’s parents, than by the credibility of the whole thing. Remember the old lady who was all upset because the mother “snapped her fingers at me”? (And fuck Barbra Streisand) ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2019, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586/227 "2019-05-20T21:08:37Z")
First of all, I already said Fuck Barbra Streisand because back in 2003 she tried to sue an eco-photographer for publishing photographs documenting the erosion of the Malibu bluffs, which had the audacity to include her oceanfront estate. (She lost.) Secondly, it was no secret that MJ had major psychological issues as evidenced by the fact that he tried to have his face surgically removed. Not normal. But a pedophile? After the first lawsuit, I wasn’t convinced…because I just didn’t believe that a normal parent would allow him to escape with a monetary settlement in lieu of jail. But when the 2nd allegation cropped up, and after interviews where he protested his innocence but also refused to concede that he should alter his behavior, I became less convinced of his innocence. And now, I’m completely convinced that he was guilty. While I have to admit that I didn’t really pay close attention to all the headlines and connect the dots as they happened in real time, in retrospect, it’s pretty clear that he was engaged in a carefully crafted plan to surround himself with young boys, and that he used his money, his fame, and his “innocence” to woo starstruck kids and parents into his web. It’s clear in hindsight that he created Neverland to help lure children to his bed, and that he also used these pre-tour dance competitions as a means to identify starstruck kids whom he could exploit and transform into his next sexual conquest. He also clearly married Lisa Marie Presley in order to convince people that he was a normal man instead of a homosexual pedophile. I found both victims believable, even though I wasn’t the greatest fan of Wade Robeson after he deflowered Britney Spears and caused she and JT to break up. (Yeah, I know.) I get why they protected Jackson at first and I also get why they came forth only after he died. While I wish they hadn’t sued the estate because IMO it weakens their case by making them look like moneygrubbers, I am now convinced that MJ was the worst type of predator, one who doesn’t even recognize that his behavior is wrong and sick, because he’s confused perversion with love. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/leaving-neverland-michael-jackson-documentary/828586.md?page=11)