Right?! Their wives, moms and siblings weren't in the room either so with Dan Greed's logic, why are they in the documentary. They weren't in the room!! Still they had a lot of BS to talk about but the Jackson's were excluded because they were not in the room. 🙄
Dan Reed is trying to reach out and help other abuse victims. Many comments on youtube prove it is difficult to come out and tell their story. Poor kids
That is how I see it. I feel that the director negotiated with the two story-tellers (who already testified on the side of MJ in Court) to come up with this story, all for money, not caring a slight bit about the harm that they are doing. The director seems anything but genuine. He shows traits of a narcissist, instead.
If you don't believe that a grown man with a zoo and a theme park hanging out with only younger boys and even admitting sleeping in bed with them is a child molester than I feel sorry for you. The kid touching freak blatantly flaunted what he was doing to the world then laughed about it. I mean it doesn't take a genius to see what was going on even back then.
@@seonggihun5069 ...if you believe that, then clearly Wade should be: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hT64RdTQ8jI.html (..did you catch the 'UNDERAGE' part? 4 seconds into the clip)
@@kylealexander1514 Choosing to believe accusers who have records of repeatedly changing their stories over the years, and have especially changed stories in courts countless times, is absolutely ridiculous. It's also quite convenient how when he's suddenly getting to a low point in his life, he's wanting to "tell his story" so he gets support to get his life back together. There are almost no facts to support these works of fiction from the two accusers.
The “documentary” is so painfully fake. It amazes me how so many people believe this BS. Leave MJ alone, he suffered enough during his lifetime. This is torture for his kids...
I wouldn't settle for anything but death. That's justice. Cutting off his wanna be white penis and choking him with it. But sadly, there are horrible parents in the world. MJ has gone on camera to say he wasn't close to his family. They didn't understand him. Why are his family members acting like they did? MJ was a very creepy person. Too many children coming out then retracting their statements. Victims are rarely believed. It's the same old thing.
@@hatenation4064 It's not about Michael Jackson it's also about justice. There are right now 30 lies from Safechuck and Robson. I think it's really bad to make up such a horrible story about someone who is dead, just to get money from Michaels inheritance. Reed knows everything better than the judges, FBI, law enforcement, police, the American Legal system. Michael was acquitted innocent. Safechuck and Robson told already so many proven lies. They fooled the audience with intention, treated people like idiots. As if no one has access to the court documents and legal documents. They are caught up in their stupid lies. Like the train station that didn't exist, the stupid wedding took place in an amusement park in Paris that wasn't even built, he was abused in New York at the Grammys when Michael was on tour and the Grammys were in Los Angeles. His mother danced when she heard the Michael was dead, although Safechuck didn't tell her he was abused, Robson was Michael Jackson niece's girlfriend, she was in the same Room, Robson mother said in an interview they saw Michael only 3 times in the first years, Robson cheated on Brandi and lied to her, he wanted his wedding on Neverland ......on and on and on. If you have a little bit of brain left how come you believe people who are notorious liars! They have to apologize to the public!
Hate Nation should I show you the real facts and proofs then maybe you will know who has brain cells and who doesn't. Cuz just by watching a one sided mockumentary you claim a man to be guilty instead of seeing all the statements of the judge , officers and jury members . What has happened to people's logic😕😟
In the book written by MJ's bodyguards; Bill Whitfield & Javon Beard written in 1990, they wrote: Neverland visitors entered the ranch @ the train station boarding a steam engine that took them up to the house. Author, Randall Sullivan wrote in his book (also written in 1990): they climbed a hill out back that led to a near replica of the Main Street station at Disneyland. Both of these confirm Safechuck's account.
@@saltychips4866 " Now a professional aerial picture, licensed by Getty Images, of the ranch proves that the building did not exist in August 1993. This comes after two different accounts appeared to claim that the train station opened in 1990. Jackson biographer Mike Smallcombe has debunked the claims of the star’s bodyguards Bill Whitfield and Javon Beard as well as author Randall Sullivan. In Sullivan’s book Untouchable: The Strange Life and Tragic Death of Michael Jackson, he includes the train station in his description of the ranch during its public opening in 1990. PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE However, Smallcombe points out the book states that it uses a 2003 sheriff’s department video as a source for its description of the ranch. He said: “While there was a public opening of sorts at Neverland in 1990, the train station had not yet opened. “In fact, half of what became Neverland hadn’t been built, including much of the amusement park. “Randall Sullivan’s book mentions that the train station was there in 1990 at that press gathering. “He also mentions many other things being there then which weren’t, like the Zipper rollercoaster, which was approved in August 1991, and the bumper car arena, which was approved in December 1993, as was the high slide. “So while Sullivan mentioned all these things being there at the time of that 1990 opening, they weren’t. “The explanation for this is simple - Sullivan states in his source notes at the back of his book that his description of what Neverland might have looked like to visitors in 1990 was in fact based on a 2003 sheriff’s department video, taken during a raid of Neverland.” Smallcome points out that Santa Barbara County permits prove that construction on the train station was approved in September 1993 before the building opened in mid-1994. Speaking about the aerial picture, he said: “There is a picture on Getty Images, taken on August 25, 1993 by photographer Steven Starr, which shows that work on the station hadn’t even started on that date. “There’s nothing there, except the floral clock.” The Jackson defender also points that the bodyguards Bill Whitfield and Javon Beard did not start working for the eccentric entertainer until the mid-2000s. Smallcombe said: ““Their book ‘Remember The Time’ was a collaboration with a ghost writer named Tanner Colby. “That ghost writer, like Sullivan, said Neverland opened to the public in 1990. The difference is, he did not say the train station was there that year. “The train station is not mentioned until a few paragraphs later. “The book merely states, ‘Neverland’s visitors entered the ranch at its train station’. “This is a general remark, which has nothing to do with the public opening in 1990, mentioned much further up the page.” " The Sun By Mark Hodge 10th April 2019
they investigated poor MJ for at least 6 years ...raided his home twice.... and found nothing .. it was many law enforcement entities cooperating against Michael Jackson
oh the FBI found plenty of evidence, but never revealed because of "classified type material" documents only have becaome partly available after MJ's death so they really can't be used. No solid evidence could be used in court either. Jackson had everyone that stayed with him sign Non disclosures, if staff or anyone under such a contract, not only cannot testify against him, but they themselves would be brought to court and made to pay heafty damages. No wonder hardly anyone dared to speak against him Jackson was a BAD man and a Smooth Criminal, he told us himself this.
Illustraful if the Catholic priest was investigated by the FBI, was a victim of previous proven extortion, and was vindicated on all charges against him, I’d say all arrows point to yes 🙄 But you’re missing the point, why did he feel the need to say that when it wasn’t true?
If you think there's nothing suspicious about a grown adult sharing his bed with boys not related to him, then go to a neighbour and ask if you can sleep in the same bed as their kids.
Illustraful yeah he wasn’t exactly your next door neighbour though was he? He literally had NO experience of normal social situations. Also, if he was doing that to groom and rape young boys... why would he voluntarily admit it to the whole world?....
Illustraful and by the way Michael has stated he slept on the floor while the kids slept in the bed. And every time he asked the children to ask the parents for permission. He has also stated that every time they were in their own rooms they almost always wanted to be near Michael. Now what crime was committed when a child wants to be near the adult???? Where is this manipulative lie you’ve suddenly told yourself come from? Maybe you need some help.
When he was alive there was a trial back in 2005 and these same guys testified under oath saying Jackson never ever touched them or did anything inappropriate to them ! And other people like the stupid maid were also testified against Michael and the juries didn’t buy their stories ! Money , money , money
I'm glad John Dickerson and the others asked this guy some tough questions (which he didn't really answer). I won't be watching this exploitative "documentary".
@@sarathnandakumar9639 They asked why MJ's family or MJ's lawyers weren't contacted to contribute to this movie-- 3:30 -- So the director says "This movie isn't about Micheal Jackson, its about the two boys..." Then John Dickerson follows up and says "You can't get answers if you don't ask questions..." And the director just mumbles....
The director said any Jackson family member that knew Wade or James should come forward. Wade's ex girlfriend of 7 years Brandi Jackson (who is MJ's niece) came forward but of course no one is really giving her the time of day.
@@niroshrathod9045 Either way - Dan Reed's is either **definitively** a liar, or simply ignorant/incompetent: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JPakhp24pN4.html
@@aniapietruszczak9684 She was with wade for nearly 10 years since they were children till teens until Wade cheated on her with Britney does that sound incredibly sus to you plus Wade asked MJ to bring them together in the first place
I'm not a Michael Jackson "superfan" by any and will not defend him blindly but I must say the more and more i looked into safechuck and Robson the more I firmly believe Jackson is not guilty of any these allegations! Robson in particular has made so many contradictory and false statements in the past that he will get ripped to shreds in a court of law! You've got to remember these guys are saying that there is no financial incentive whatsoever behind these abuse claims but why then are they both in the process of sueing the Michael Jackson Estate to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars? I'm looking forward to actually seeing wether or not Robson and safechucks testimonies hold up in a court of law!
The most compelling suit to date is the Estate of Michael Jackson against HBO. When MJ legally owns any production, and therefore owns LN, it will not be aired. Italy has already refused to show it no matter what. They know it is a one-sided load of trash.
In my opinion even outside the facts and just the extra details point of view it doesn't make sense... Like when he was alive all of the media was one sided ready to crucify him no matter what now that he's dead all of a sudden they are open minded and looking at both sides -_- that makes me think before it was a witch hunt to make mj look bad, they wanted him to be taken down now that he is taken down and everybody but mjs family has his money now they want to use logic. He's not here anymore to put secret messages in his songs or to be half owner of sony,or to buy Marvel. So the attack against him is called off
the Robson Safechuck court case was not thrown out of court for statue of limitations, it was thrown out because the stories were unbelievable. as the judge put it there were “contradictory”.
@@firenze5555 Which of their many stories do you think is credible? The one they kept telling between 1993 and 2013, even under oath? Or the one when they said MJ called it "love"? Or when they said MJ called what they accuse him of doing "dirty stuff", not love? Etc etc, Which one? Or you think you can freely chose the version that best fits your agenda? Sure. Serial liars are the most credible sources. Esp when NOTHING backs up their story.
That's just a lie. You can literally find transcripts online. The judge NEVER ruled on the veracity or credibility of their claims. To claim otherwise makes you a liar, plain and simple.
I understand the question about Wade's credibility but people keep trying to lump James in with him and that's just not being honest in the slightest. I am much more skeptical of Wade than James.
When you look at the allegations, try rationalizing the claims with evidence. Takes James Safechucks claims, for example: 1. Safechuck claims he was abused from '88-92 (until the age of 14). I, the "Honeymoon stage" (the beginning), he was repeatedly taken to the second floor of the train station to be abused. ---> The train station was built in 1994 (construction began Q4 93) 2. Safechuck claims he was flown to NYC as MJ was there to perform at the 1989 Grammy's and was abused on that trip. ---> The 89 Grammy's were not in NYC, nor did MJ attend or perform.
Exactly. It's not about Michael and he doesn't characterize Michael. Just like I'm not characterizing him (Dan Reed) when I call him a filthy, opportunistic evil bottom feeder.
I am no Jackson fan but I can sense that this director is an opportunist, riding on the wave of the #metoo movement to get known. How can he say that the film is not about Michael Jackson when it totally is? And by saying that he just based his film with all the facts that was investigated for 3 weeks and from old clippings of what Michael said ... hmmm. but isn't it so easy to do a lot of editing just to make everything look sinister? I'd do my own research and not just take what this film is conveying line hook and sinker. The documentary is so one sided. CBS should do an interview with Brandi Jackson, Jackson's niece who claims to have been introduced and set up by Michael with Wade to date when they were kids and they had a 7 year relationship. Wade never mentioned her in his interviews. I think that relationship is very crucial.
Indeed. At first I wasn't sure what to make of this documentary, then took a look at his twitter and there was no question. He's basically the journalist equivalent of an ambulance chaser. He retweets just about every tabloid piece that mentions Michael Jackson. When Barbara Streisand had a foot in mouth moment when asked about these new allegations, he of course retweeted that 6-7 times over, just so he could vilify her as well. Now, he's even talking about making a sequel! Dan Reed is one sick individual.
@@KarmaKahn I think he is obsessed with MJ lol! I think he has a lot to gain from this coz he was an unknown before but now he is notoriously known because of Michael. I've now come to the conclusion that these three are indeed the opportunists in this situation.
also he said the two guys have no financial benefit but then at the end says he found them cause they were seeking litigation assumingly to get money... and this documentary is gonna convict him in the eyes of the public...
Don’t you guys think it’s weird how Michael would hold kid’s hands and talk about sleeping in the same bed with them? I don’t want to believe this. But doesn’t that behavior seem kind of obvious
Schmuck is bitter because MJ didn't make him rich and famous. It's not MJ's fault that he didn't make it in the entertainment industry. He didn't know that he was molested until Robbingson contacted him. Robbingson is bitter because he didn't get the Cirque Du Soleil gig. This is their revenge. It's all about the love of money.
And that's exactly why you wont entertain the idea that he did it. Because then you have to admit to yourself that you enjoy the music of a child molester
@@idiosyncrazy1980 hi Dan Reed is thinking of making a sequel to leaving neverland 🤣🤣😂😂😂is he completely off his bald head🌕🌕🌕🌕🤣😂🤣😂🙄🙄🙄The first 1 is full of lies, inconsistencies and contradictions 🤣🤣😂😂UK has made their own documentary proving them liars being aired next month I cannot wait🤓👍😎🇬🇧🇬🇧😂😂🤣🤣🤣😎🙏🙏😋
It baffles me that Dan Reed apparently is a professional when it comes to pedophilia, but last time I checked he was only a director and producer. They say they don't do this for money, but to put a light on sexual abuse and those kind of horrific events. However, when checking Dan Reed's twitter and interviews - he's always talking about Michael Jackson and how he did this or that - rather than bringing awareness into the matter of issue that the "documentary" supposedly is about. This man is a joke to journalism. He's put together a one-sided film to torment and rip up the legacy of Michael Jackson - not to raise awareness of child abuse. He should be ashamed. There's not much to say other than the fact that FBI found nothing on Michael Jackson. And the fact that Wade Robson and Safechuck have been proved to lie several times since 2011. It doesn't take much time to debunk the material in "Leaving Neverland" on your own.
If he really wanted to help actual victims of child abuse, he wouldn't make a "documentary" that he knows damn well is going to cause a backlash and lots of questioning about the credibility of these accusers. That is the very reason real victims don't want to come forward. He's perpetuating that. This is all about obscuring the rampant sexual abuse and pedophilia in Hollywood. And money, of course. And if he can get credit for assassinating Michael Jackson's legacy, he'll take that too.
@@AnotherPart0fMe That literally makes no sense. You're saying people don't want to come forward because of backlash. YOU people are the ones providing the backlash. I mean really.
@@endlesspoetry5411 He's in to money all right, but his agenda is obvious. He smugly tries to pass off these lies as facts and acts like people who question anything about his one-sided hit piece are the crazy ones. He's lying right along with them. Just like Oprah. He knows about filmmaking and knows this is no documentary. His agenda is clear in this excerpt from a USA Today article: Dan Reed, 54, the British director of the film, has led the campaign to promote and defend the film. In an interview with New York magazine's Vulture column last month, he said he made the film because there was already a question at large in the culture about Jackson's behavior. "And I think we’ve delivered the answer to that question," Reed said. "Why are people so interested in the truth about what this man did in the late ’80s and early ’90s? I think it’s because of his presence in the fabric of American life and people’s lives worldwide, the fact that he means something to people." "And the meaning of that thing is going to change, and we’re attempting to change it." Reed declined to be interviewed by USA TODAY.
ndoto9 me too. Glad to see people have researched this 25 year witch hunt on MJ and researched the background of these two accusers who defended him for 20 years until they became broke and needed a job so decided to ‘realize’ abuse and sue MJ’s estate for hundreds of millions of dollars. Their lawsuit was tossed out of court by the way. They are currently trying to appeal the verdict.
I don't necessarily think they are telling the truth, but this does not discount his story. Read into molestation and how children react before posting something ignorant like this.
@@ancamarialacatusu7938 they were CHILDREN when the supposed sexual abuse happened. Their response is not abnormal to other adults reacting to their abuse. I am not saying I believe them, but their stories are in line with other adults recollecting their abuse.
@@moishe43 in reply to JDara #So are we going to ignore the fact that Wade lied under oath in 2005? He was no child.. and neither in 2009 when their "agressor" died. what is their excuse for not saying anything then? I don't know what to believe, but their allegations seem too far stretched
@@ancamarialacatusu7938 I am not going into a discussion about whether Wade lied or not. I am not on any side of the argument. If you take other factors into the mix, there are a multitude of opinions. I merely state that their lack of saying anything before this is in keeping with child abuse and the ridiculous argument 'they never said anything until now', is therefore irrelevant. This doesn't mean I believe them. But other, more convincing arguments need to be given. Also, to claim he was 'no child' is irrelevant. He was a child at the time of the supposed abuse and is looking back to the trauma he supposedly suffered.
Dan Reed says Wade Robson and James Safechuck have never had interest in money, before or after his documentary. Yet they have both tried and failed to sue Michael Jackson’s Estate. Their allegations weren’t just thrown out because of the ‘Statute of Limitations’, but also because the judge said their allegations were inconsistent and unbelievable. As both Wade Robson and James Safechuck keep changing their story. Dan Reed looks nervous and shifty in this interview. His answers have no depth, and I don’t think the interviewers like him or believe what he says.
OMR Judge did say that since Wade had so blatantly lied under oath about not knowing of the existence of the Estate, nothing he said could be believed.
Had the same here in the UK with Jimmy Savile and Rolf Harris. A childhood hero must be celebrated as a hero. Immune to any criticism. Sadly, if they f**k up, it's often the fans who are 'bad' for calling them out.
Kelly Sloan And its crazy how people are siding with these men by only words ita crazy how they both say its not about money but yet suing mj its crazy how people are not doing any research in any of mj past cases its crazy how wade robinson was dating mj niece and michael was the one who hooked them up but he was being molested its crazy how people are choosing words over evidence proof facts and a 10 to 13 years fbi investigation you wanna talk about crazy if you ask me thats insane and yet yall still believe he did it
@@sandraopi5489 hi Dan Reed is thinking of making a sequel to leaving neverland 🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂🌕🌕is he completely off his bald head 🌕🌕🌕🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😁🤓🤓💜They are going down, UK has made a documentary being aired next month proving them liars 👍😎😎😎💪💪💪🙏🙏🙏🙏💜
@@firenze5555 Michael Jackson was no pedophile he was the only victim all along but you people are too stupid to see it🙄🙄🙄and 'hey'!!! Mj died 10 years ago🙄🙄🤔🤔this should not be happening, these jerks and their stupid mothers are liars 100 percent, and are all in on it together, hope they get jail and not 1 cent😎👍👌😎
The trailer alone was bad acting ,one of the negatives side of this me too movement is providing platform to everyone including LIERS ,so move on people and don't pay any attention to this BS. Next !
Dan Reed thought this was a big story in the world?! Michael Jackson passed away about a decade ago, these accusations haven't been out in the news for a while. I think Reed wanted to work on a subject that would guarantee attention to his project 👎
Who you trying to fool you're not fooling us might be fooling people on TV are you not for us this is for the money you're lying on TV is what people watch the show you can stop loving Michael Jackson Michael Jackson live on forever
They are just after money. They need to get over themselves. IF it were true, They need to concentrate on therapy and not on lining their pockets off the back of a deceased guy.
@@AFRoSHEENT3ARCMICHAEL69 Free speech when you are caught in LIES? I think if they start sending these people to jail for making FALSE allegations, it will stop this nonsense.
Say anything? He was investigated multiple times and indicted multiple times. Just because he wasn’t found guilty does not mean the accusations had no validity. All it means is the man had the money to get a legal team that was unbeatable. Which did not surprise anybody.
I had my doubts. Who wouldn't? But when I heard them describe the stages of grooming and how the abuse escalated, I immediately knew they were telling the truth. Why? Because they basically described my own experience as a child. And I didn't come forward until I was almost 40. It's amazing how capable we are of burying and hiding our stories out of shame, especially when the abuser was someone close to us (as in my case). For those of you jumping to conclusions and assuming they're lying, I encourage you to dig into childhood abuse and trauma so you can understand how it affects the way we think and how that manifests throughout our lives. It's a very complicated brain and nervous system injury.
Illustraful what your point here ? Did you ever group up in a super bands groups and live in hotel sharing room with your brother. custom are base on what you group up to be the norm so your argument make no sense
REGIMENT65 okay I'm really getting tired of you going around the comment section talking about the same dang thing every comment you post so since you like documentaries so much here's one you would really like.....have you seen the documentary of a superhero with an iron suit and got together with the most biggest superhero team in the planet? OMG...have you seen it? I believe that 100% it's crazy..oh, what about the boy who got bit by a spider and became a superhero and also joined the superhero team?
Yeah right , Wade was in love with Mike when he was a kid. Actually he was dating Brandi Jackson at that time. But seriously , this Dan Reed guy looks creepy. Almost voldemortish.
The film isnt about Micheal (name of the film "Leaving Neverland") no one would care if it wasnt about MICHAEL. For him to pretend that it isnt about Michael is crazy. He says they included his defense, the glaring issue is those defenses dont speak to their claims making them moot. He says he didnt speak to the family because they werent there yet the parent werent there when the "rape" happened so why include them? For emotional value. This dude is strange and uses double speak. He himself was not there, so if thats his basis why is he speaking on it while feeling the FAMILY of the accused has no place? This man is a fraud.
@Marquessa du Bois Im not disagreeing with that, the issue, that you didn't address is why not just tackle that topic of pedophilia? Why center it around Michael and conflate and flat out lie to do so? Why make the claim it (this film) isn't about what it clearly is about. Michael, who (these men claim) is a pedophile. You don't get to make a film on someone claim you didn't and then smear them under the guise of being informative to the topic in general. Double speak and non-sense. They could've made the same point without making it about Michael which it was.
Oh please, they were too scared to do it when he was alive so when he died they grabbed the opportunity to make some $ because they know they could easily get away with it and "describe" horrific details that people would believe and feel bad for them.
5:36 OWNED. Thank you for this question, brings to light Dan Reeds willful ignorance in creating this documentary. Glad they kept pushing the point. CBS is getting better each interview.
100% agree! he stuttered and said he believes that the Jackson family has no knowledge, but how does he know they have no knowledge of that? its because he only did 3 weeks research and didn't bother contacting them about information allowing them to speak from their point of view.
@John Whirling A LOT of evidence was found, but a jury didn't think he was guilty. That does NOT prove that he was innocent, it proves that the jury didn't find the evidence substantial enough.
The real truth is out there for all : please do your home work research if you haven't already before you judge Michael : films are made to make the maker and his cast look and sound CONVINCING !!! I'm a mother of 3 against child abuse then am a fan of MJ I believe is innocence 100% .
Describing yourself as a fan means that you really aren't willing or able to be objective about these or other allegations. You have to completely divorce and disassociate any admiration, pride or personal feelings about Jackson and approach this as if he were a man you've never heard of before.
@@inkyguy being a fan doesn't mean you won't do a research or you can't think logically. It seems it's MJ NON-fans are the ones, who are incapable of research and think logically and without biase.
@@richardkovacs2006 When you have affection for someone, you don't look at them objectively. It's scientifically proven. And you're even less objective when you have affection for and defend someone you have never, ever met in real life. He was a stranger to you.
@@whiteheart9218 did you read Michael Jackson's autopsy report? He was balding, had a tattooed hairline, and he was wearing a wig. I guess you don't know MJ as well as you think you do.
Why were parents leaving their kids (keyword “their”) with Michael Jackson??? Was he a certified/qualified nanny, carer or babysitter??? Being famous is not enough validity. To be honest they left their kids with a stranger. If this really happened they should be charged with neglect!!!
Have you seen the documentary? When you watch it, I realized the reasons that must have been going through those mother's heads. We need to put ourselves in other people's shoes.
@@brokenbutterfly3178 If I knew a famous entertainer I might want to be friends with him, but if he as an adult finds my children more interesting than me and wants to sleep in the same bed as them, no, there's no way. That's a red flag if there ever was one. There's somethings money can't buy.
"The FBI, likewise, conducted a thorough investigation. Its 300-page file on the pop star, released under the Freedom of Information Act, found no evidence of wrongdoing."
"I did look throughout making the film, I looked for anything that could cast out or undermind Wade and Jame's story and I found nothing at all". I serched for 60 minutes and found more things than you did in 2 years. Let me help you: - Wade dated Brandi Jackson (MJ's niece) for over 7 years, during the period of accusations. Did you mention her in the documentary? I guess you just forgot. Or didn't know about this. How can you say you found nothing at all? If she was a part of Wade's life DURING the molestation, how come you don't even meet her and make some questions, even if you didn't include her testimony on the documentary? - Wade claims that he didn't knew he was molested until 2013. I wonder how many psychologists/psychiatrists did you look for in order to see if this allegation is even possible or common? Did you speek with James and Wade's psychiatrist? Did you asked them if what they say makes any sense at all and fits in a molested person's behavior? - In 2005 Wade asked Michael Jackson if he could get married in Neverland. Does it make any sense that a molested person asks his molester if he can get married in the place where all those terrible sex stuff happened? Is it mentioned in the documentary? No. Either you didn't know (so you didn't look hard enough) or you didn't care. Both options are bad. - In the documentary Wade's wife claims she doesn't know anything about child abuse, and she was very naive about all that. Did you know that Wade and his wife have a website for support abused child (it would be interesting to show how they actually do that) where she claims that she is ALSO a victim of abuse when she was a child. How come you didn't know that? Either you didn't know (so you didn't look hard enough) or you didn't care. Both options are bad. After the documentary aired, they changed the original text, and now seems like only Wade is a survivor of sexual abuse. I could go on forever, but now that you know there is a lot more, do the research you should have done before believing the story of two persons you don't even know
Carlos Silva you should read betrayal trauma theory to understand how children who are abused don’t identify it as abuse until much, much older. It’s a really great book from a woman who is both a survivor and an expert in the field.
@@robynthomason949 I understand that Wade, as a child, couldn't understand it. I get it. BUT... As an adult, being asked clear and specific questions on the 2005 trial, does he really expect us to believe that he didn't know that what he went through was abuse? He heard other children accusing MJ of the exactly same things! How can he not put the pieces together? And other thing came to my mind: when you are a victim of sexual abuse, it ends up turning you in a very insecure person, especialy about sexuality. Well, if you look into Wade's life you know that he is very confident of himself, specially in his sexual life (Britney spears, cheating multiple times on Brandi Jackson). So he expects us to believe that these awful stuff that he (supposedly) went through left no emotional scar at all?? Come on. Don't let him take you for a fool, 'cause thats what Leaving Neverland tries to do. I felt very stupid watching some ridiculous allegations, because I already knew Wade's past.
Carlos Silva actually the common pattern is for kids who are abuse victims to be promiscuous as teens and adults. If that’s what you learn you are for early on that’s what sticks. So that only indicates he’s credible. Read the book, really if you have the ability to be open to learning read it.
@@robynthomason949 Well I have to admit that I always heard that the lack of confidence was one of the long term effects of sexual abuse. But I don't know, knowing everything Wade did in the past... He called MJ a friend, he asked to have the wedding ceremony on Neverland (where all the abuse took place!!!), he is asking for a 1,5 billion dollar on court. His behavior completly changed after he knew he wouldn't be directing the Cirque du Soleil show about MJ in 2013... Wade is in near Bankruptcy and if he wins the appeal, he will no longer have to worry about money. And he does this only after MJ is dead? I just think he has no credibility at all. His behavior and story is always changing, and this unexpected revelation.
Carlos Silva having been a survivor and worked with child and adult survivors, promiscuity is a common result. You’ve heard wrong. Try the book, be open to learning.
“Did my research.” Obviously he didn’t do any research when the two men he’s working with have literally been proven liars. This is so sad. To bring this back into the headlines and to talk of Michael as if he was some monster when he was proven innocent multiple times. He’s not here with us to defend himself and that’s what’s heartbreaking about all this. These allegations will always haunt Michaels name and there will always be someone ready to use it for a quick buck.
1. He didn't say they weren't liars. 2. MJ wasn't "proven innocent multiple times" , 1st time there was financial settlement , 2nd time there wasn't enough evidence for the jury to prove him guilty, which basically means: "we don't know" 3. And trust me, to make a documentary you definately need to do a research, certainly more than you did by 15 minutes of searching on the Internet, kid
@@robertolecki7492 ummm no. those are YOUR words “there wasn’t enough evidence to prove him guilty.” Michael was charged with 14 different charges, some of them misdemeanors with much lower thresholds for burden of proof and he wasn’t convicted of a single thing after 4 months of trial. If he was never found guilty of anything, then he is an innocent man. Also, a financial settlement isn’t proof of anything, especially guilt. The settlement agreement was for “negligence” NOT child molestation. It was specifically written into the settlement that the agreement was only reached as long as Michael admitted to no wrong doing. The family ONLY pursued a civil trial and refused to cooperate in a criminal trial. 2 grand juries declined to indict him based on a lack of evidence and they listened to over 400 witnesses called by the prosecution. 400 witnesses and STILL not enough evidence to even CHARGE him? that means zero evidence. zero evidence equal INNOCENT
@@CousinPeaches I'll give him one accusation or even 2. But if he was accused so many times, there is clearly a pattern. I mean, would you honestly leave your child under his care? If it walks like a duck...
Thank you. Of course, CSA is an extremely serious and severe issue, and victims need to be listened. But, sadly, even if they are a minority, there can be people that lie in order to take advantage of the situation. Of course, the day I believe MJ is guilty I will have to stop supporting him and rectify my words. But, right now, knowing the facts and the documentation, the most logical thing to think is that Michael Jackson never molested anyone. #MJInnocent indeed.
If you realize correctly ... "Nobody was in the room" and you come by as Dan Reed and assumes 100% abuse! Then there is always the possibility of a 100% lie, too!
If it were some other man who walked hand in hand with little boys and slept in the same bed with them and had a house in the middle of nowhere full of things that attract children, you could guess what he wants ... but because it is Michael Jackson no one wants to believe it. Still.
Felipe Rodrigues it’s because idiots like you believe a scripted documentary that had no real evidence. Michael was found not guilty and they even searched his home and found nothing. But you believe to liars that have changed their story multiple times
@@Kellster45 Regarding what you said - people/everyone is presumed **innocent** until proven guilty. 2005 proved Jackson wasn't guilty - in other words he was innocent... But then we have people like Missy/Felipe who want to argue because of propaganda.
@@ferodrigues1211 According to the news - these accusers lied and got caught: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-L1dUeE-c7S0.html ...& Dan Reed's lied and got caught: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JPakhp24pN4.html ...Chandler clearly wasn't telling the truth: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JPakhp24pN4.html ...Arvizo **proved** Jackson to be innocent. Everything you said is pure propaganda. Demonstrable propaganda.
They already testified under oath as adults as far as I'm concerned they had there chance to speak up and they voluntarily denied all of it. Now that Mike is dead and the money probably ended they wanna say something? Nah I'm good I'm not watching this
That's how this works. Publishing companies have already contacted people involved in the college scam ordeal for a book. The people involved in the scam didn't go to the publishers, the publishers went to them.
@@Blichens I totally agree, they were young children and young children don't lie about being abused. They came up with this after being adults. The longer you're in this world the more fk'd up you become if you don't watch your mind. They said nothing happened as children. I will always believe a child.
Charles Charlemagne No the „documentary“ has already been debunked several times and is fake. There is absolutely no proof and many things are left out like for example that Wade had a 9 year long relationship with one of MJs nephews which was only possible thanks to MJ. It’s so surprising and funny to see how people don’t believe the FBI which had MJ under surveillance for 10 years but believe some nonsense film, where two opportunistic liars tell a proven false story. I know that it’s weird to imagine a 34 year old man having a sleepover with a 10 year old, but Michael had the Peter Pan syndrome and simply didn’t behave like a 34 year old. Since the age of 6, Michael has been performing. Always when he saw other kids play outside, he was jealous. But he just couldn’t do that, because he had to go to the studio and record often until 11 or 12pm in the night. Besides he had a very aggressive father who was very strict and often beat him and his brothers. Let the man rest in peace! Michael Jackson saved the lives of thousands of children and was an innocent and caring person. It’s so disgusting to see how these people coincidentally make accusations against MJ, when they have financial problems. And why do these accusations 10 years after his death? More rumors like that he bleached his skin were proven wrong. So just let MJ rest in peace man.
It takes (in many times) years/decades to come out and face the situation what happened to you when you are sexuell abused. You think it is your fault what happened to you and it doesn't help when people don't believe you. I hope that this will not end in a bigger tragedy as it already is, even if M J was a Pedophile the truth must be told.
They were in their 20s in 2005. Capable and educated adults. Just so happens in 2019 that MJ is dead and they are trying to get hundreds of millions of dollars from MJ's estate.
@@creedbratton1267 So according to your logic you can never attack anyone because they are rich and then your motive is to get money and also everybody in their 20s faces their childhood trauma? That is absolute hogwash, there are seniors who haven't faced what they went through as a kid, and if MJ was concerned about being sued over money, why have children over time and time again?
If you'll do little bit research you'll know he was innocent I first stopped his music and researched about him and now I am convinced all the accusers were liers this was all planned many factors were involved some were after money and some were after revenge because some of them he fired from job and some were after his business he was powerful and owned 50%in American music industry.there are too many irrefutable proof against his all accusers that they were lying and after money the whole media were working against him there were a lot of pressure on judiciary but he acquitted ,according to their planned he broken financially but still they couldn't purchase his shares and in 2009 after his death he was free from all his debts because peoples loves him and now again 2019 he was not alive and can't defend himself they repeated the same thing just for money and try to destroyed him completely but look at the situation still peoples are defending him because they are not fool the try to searched the truth, and his accusers again failed and have been ruined they couldn't get what they wanted they couldn't get millions of dollars money by sueing his company and same happened to Martin Bashir and Same happened to Jordan Chandler's father he killed himself no one attended his funeral and now this man will also face the humiliation sooner or later.
How could the settlement be "hush money" when the 1993 case was admitted into the 2005 Criminal trial with the Chandler mother testifying? You do realize settling a civil lawsuit does not stop you from participating in a criminal trial? And you should be asking is why didn't Evan Chandler appear in that 1993 case? Because his actions in this entire scam are problematic because there is evidence from his own mouth that he drugged Jordy with Sodium Amytal, which is a mind control drug. Evan said under this drug the allegations came out. That's the reason he DID not appear in the 2005 Criminal trial. In addition, you can't DRUG someone to make an accusation as that's called "under duress." But the question I like to ask good ole Dan is why did he come to the U.S. for these 2 fake liars but didn't do a video in his own country on Jimmy Savile?
In both cases its a devastating outcome.. if it is true its devastating for all involved and if its lies its devastating.. I wasn't going to watch it given the fact Micheal is no longer here to defend himself but I caved and watched it yesterday and I have to say I believe them (if they were lying they were Oscar winning performances) .. I don't know if we will ever know the actually truth but I was left with a lot of questions
Honestly without a photo actually showing molestation or a video showing it we will never know without a shadow of a doubt if it['s true or not. My feeling on MJ is this, if he was not a pedophile he seemed like one not only because of the allegations but because he was with little boys all the time. which doesn't mean he was a pedophile, but like I said. seems like one. I feel bad for MJs kids that they have to go through this horror again.
Agree totally. No one wants to be gay except in some cases and no one would explain they were molested by a man without being totally honest or they would have to be the best actors in the world. They are very honest in this documentary whether you love michaels music or not.
The FBI was not involved in investigating MJ. The FBI merely assisted local law enforcement with resources when requested. So they helped interview people outside local law enforcement’s jurisdiction, or analyze a video or computer for local law enforcement as they had proper technology available. There was never an “FBI investigation”, it was always the FBI helping local police departments on specific tasks requested of them. Even on the FBI website they say: The “FBI didn’t investigate Jackson, the files now available show the FBI working with other agencies.” The FBI DID NOT follow MJ, ever; DID NOT tap his phone; DID NOT put surveillance on MJ; DID NOT search his residence (neither Hayvenhurst, Century City, the Hideout nor Neverland); DID NOT open an investigation into molestation against him; and DID NOT do anything that they would normally do in a federal case.
Instead of the spotlight on a guy who is deceased, let’s go after the guys who are still alive. Cory Feldman has repeated emphatically that he has a list of names of sexual abusers who are still alive yet nobody seems interested. What’s gives? 🤷🏻♂️
Karn Hall He said it’s in his book I believe and he just said last week that after watching leaving neverland, that he could no longer defend MJ, after he’s defending him all these years!
Hillary Modem and the reason is because he himself is a victim and is doing a documentary himself..he still maintains MJ did nothing to him and that wasn’t his experience
missgigi I agree with u, I never said he did abuse Corey, but has been seen in court and all the times in interviews, that he didn’t believe MJ hurt any children and was completely innocent! Now after watching the documentary , he said he could no longer defend somebody that could do those disrespectful things to children
Eliesteth Rodriguez there is a literally a documentary from years ago where MJ says that he has slept with a young child. Those who keep saying that he is innocent are just bullshitting themselves
This was a fantastic and very moving documentary. I see no reason to doubt Wade and James. I hope they find peace in their life and with their families.
I think that man's head not just lost his hair but also his brain..oh god!!😒😑...profesional huh?? Garbage!😷...so damn disrespectable😬 Shame on everyone who made that 'documentary'... Yesss...moonwalker here😏
how is the family of Jackson's not relevant when you are talking about Jackson? I would understand if Jackson did not grow up with the family and the family was not involved in this life?
@@RPMcM09 If a DOCUMENTARIST is not afraid of showing BOTH sides of a story, that would be NATURAL to ask those DOZENS of people, who were there and who defend MJ. For some mysterious reason you can only hear Robson$Safechuck version, NOTHING ELSE. That's not even a "documentary"....
Just finished watching this thing - made me sick to my stomach. For many reasons. Mostly because of having to listen to explicit sexual misconduct towards children. And then to put Michael's face to it... I am trying to understand their reasoning behind going so public with this. I doubt they will ever get any money worth this kind of drama. I mean, Wade really made it in the entertainment business. They ruined their lives, personal and professional as well, it seems to me. This is my biggest question. I still believe in innocence until proven guilty, and I have seen no proof. What bothers me about Dan is that he doesn't sound professional. I mean, this is his "masterpiece" yet he isn't very well prepared to defend why he has done it. First he says the allegations(?seem like outright statements) are about Michael Jackson, not his family. Then he says, this doc is not about Michael Jackson but two little boys and their 2 decade long struggle...The "documentary" absolutely is one-sided and since it is, I think the director could have prepared better arguments for why he did it in that way. It just seems like he isn't professional. Side note: experiencing molestation myself in childhood, I can understand not wanting to say anything when you're 11. I can't understand going back to testify FOR the person when you're already an adult. I understand we all handle things differently but Wade was well aware while in his 20s that this behavior was NOT ok, and he still went to perjure himself...I can't know what I would do in this situation, but I believe if I had to do this in my case, I would never do it.
Watch Leaving Neverland, if you haven't already. In it Wade explains the many reasons why he testified for his molester. He's not alone, other CSA victims have done the same when they've been groomed in this way. Yes, as adults. You ask some good questions, which is one of the reasons why I believe them both. Why would they torpedo not only their own lives, but those of their parents, and brothers, sisters, wives, not to mention putting their small children's lives in the way of danger, for the slim chance that they'd win their cases? Knowing the statutes of limitations had run out? Even if they did win, it's a guarantee that the attorneys would appeal it as long as they possibly could and drag it out for years, and even then courts can't force payment. I respectfully disagree with you that Dan Reed doesn't sound professional. I don't understand why you object to those two statements of his. Both Wade and James' statements are allegations. They can't be called anything else but unless this goes to court and is proven there. The allegations ARE about MJ, not his family, and the entire focus of LN is how these two were groomed and abused by MJ for years, and the impact it's had on their and their families' lives. That's why no one else was interviewed, only Wade and James, and their families.
they are trying to get 1.5 billion dollers. wade tried to do this on the quiet at first and he failed after 2 attempts to sue the estate. then he got together with j. safechuck and they decide to sue together, to help their case, they, with the help of dan reed come up with leaving neverland. it is not going in their favour though because their stories dont match and are easily ruled out. even their own mothers stories have actually hurt their case becasuse they dont add up and which i have heard were cut out when LN was played on channel 4 . having such holes in his story is also why wade was not sucessful in his atempts on the quiet. this has all been researched and there are plenty of ppl to watch who have done there research and shows these guys up to be lying. its only fair to look at the two sides. being a victim myself i dont believe them. i watched the oprah interview. they speak so carefully and without any insight, they rely on the accusations which are over the top compared to the other persons who were found out to be lying back in 93. also how can they go on show after show and just repeat the accusations and michaels name over and over without hesitation or evidence of the impact such accusations can have on a person. how many abuse victims can do that so easily. they told oprah that michael was so loving that they didnt see anything wrong. yet later they would say they dissasociated from the abuse. to dissasociate you have to have felt trauma. dissasociation can still be triggered in adulthood and then it becomes scary because all of a sudden its like your here but things are not real and the feeling can then last days, weeks, sometimes longer and can lead to thoughts of ending your life unless it goes away. they mention repression in other statements. repression can happen too in cases of serious sexual trauma, yet they say that it was so loving they didnt think it was wrong, so no trauma. wade defended michael j. in 2005 he was around 23, he knew by then what child sexual abuse is. wouldn't he have been educated by the trials at least and he was the strongest defence witness for the case and has defended m.j. the whole way through up until 2013. he decided to say that he didnt know he was abused untill 2013, which because of 2005 trial cannot be the case. first it was loving, then they say they disasociated and threw in represssion. they said that it was good. even oprah chimed in and and said yes it feels good. WHAT!!!! after she was an abuse victim and she done over 200 shows on this disturbing subject, she helps the men sum abuse up with It Feels Good. That finished it for me, what were they playing at. how dare she do that.... Abuse does NOT FEEL GOOD. how could she do that. the audience was also full of victims. there was not a bit of empathy on show between anyone on the stage, it was more to reel off these gross accusations. grooming has the effect of making the target feel special but once the abuser starts taking what they want thats a whole lot of betrayel, intrusion, pain and future tormoil to place on a child. safechuck said that a lot of his abuse took place at the train station at neverland which was not built until he was 17. both men say the abuse finished when they were 14. there is so much that takes away from their claims. i started looking in to this after the oprah interview. there was something not right about it. ppl do lie about being abused as children because it is the worst crime to be associated with and will hurt the innocent individual for whatever their motives. all mjs accusers wanted money, not justice, money. if he were truley an abuser then they would have fought to put him behind bars so he couldnt hurt anyone else they did not they took money and ran. lies breeds inaccuracy. wade and james look like sexual abuse enablers now too. i would never let an abuser known to me be free to harm other children. luckly mj was not an abuser. his children are fine and love him dearly. no one else has come forward and others who were around him as kids are defending mj. paeds cant help themselves, they will even target their children. look at jimmy saville 100s have come forward. he was an extream opportunist to have his needs catered for. poor unasuming souls lining up outside his dressing room for autographs where he could take his pick. he targeted hospitals where he ran charities for not because he cared but because he saw an opportunity to supply his needs, disgusting. all the kids and ppl all over the world that came into contact with m.j. and not one person has come forward from all over the world! the mans been dead for 10yrs and nothing until these three opportunist men do this badly themselves. get the money and run campaign and smeer m.j. who was so good to them while he was alive while there at it. the man is not here to defend himself. there actions point to opportunity. michael jacksons music and kindness is ledgendary. " heal the world make it a better place for u and for me and the entire human race" are they words from a preditor? i dont think so!
