Skip to content

Blanca Francia’s Deposition Blasts the Wade Robson Story

December 4, 2019

The name of Blanca Francia is now firmly associated with Wade Robson. She used to be a personal maid to Michael Jackson, who later made controversial statements about him, and Robson insisted on Michael’s innocence for the first 30 years of his life, but since making his U-turn in 2013 has told most horrible things about his former friend.

So previously Francia and Robson were on the opposite sides of the barrier, and now they are allies whose case against Jackson is based on each other stories – Blanca Francia thinks she saw the shadow of Robson in Michael Jackson’s shower at Neverland, and Robson, though recalling none of it himself, goes much further and claims she saw Michael Jackson “rubbing the Plaintiff” and “the Plaintiff’s head was pressed against Michael Jackson’s stomach area.”

The above Robson’s statements come from his Motion to amend his third amended complaint filed on September 9, 2016 (for its screenshot see the collage below).

The collage, combining an excerpt from the 2016 Motion and Robson’s milder version of the same from an earlier court document, was made by Hammer whose Twitter account also introduced me to the recent 2016 deposition of Blanca Francia.

Why is the description of the shower episode different in Robson’s two court documents and why is the amended 2016 version so gross in its content?

Whenever Robson’s story is found inconsistent his standard reply is that his memory “evolved”. But given that the new amendment was made three days after Blanca Francia’s deposition on September 6, 2016, it would be logical to assume that Robson took all those salacious details from her new testimony – however the problem here is that Blanca Francia said nothing of the kind there, so Robson must have drawn inspiration from another source.

Of course Blanca Francia’s deposition is available to us only in the bits and pieces put online by the one who bought those pages from the court reporter, but when you start reading the little we have, you will realize that even the above graphic content is not that important as it fades in comparison with the discovery we make there.

The thing is that Blanca Francia’s deposition discloses to us a new, big and really fundamental problem the two allies are facing now. It is fundamental because it overturns the foundations of their story, so all those details no longer matter and the new discovery is a disaster to their alliance as a whole.

Blanca Francia’s recent deposition reveals that she could not see Wade Robson in that shower because by the time of the alleged episode Robson had not even arrived in the US.

The proof that Robson was not there is irrefutable and the only real shock to me is that no one has yet noticed it. The reason for that is probably because very few people had access to Blanca Francia’s depositions  –  I myself found them only recently, after seeing some of those pieces on Hammer’s twitter account.

This link will take you to an 82-page selection from Blanca Francia’s two latest depositions. Yes, she was deposed twice as the dates on the papers show it – first on September 6, 2016 and then a month later, on October 3. The text format of those depositions is different, so when you see the pages you will easily differentiate between the two.

Wade Robson was present at least at the first deposition because its cover page mentions his attendance.

The cover pages of the second deposition are missing, so we don’t know if he was present, but there is every reason to believe that he was.

During Blanca Francia’s testimony Robson’s side was represented by Mr. Manly and Mr. Finaldi. The side of MJJ Productions was represented by Ms. MacIsaac.

Both sides also read out some excerpts from Blanca Francia’s earlier deposition in 1994 when she was deposed within the framework of the Chandler civil case against Jackson by the attorneys in that case – Johnny Cochran (for MJ) and Larry Feldman (for the Chandlers).

With so many documents interloping with each other the first impression is that this collection of papers is a bit of a mess, and this is evidently why the person who uploaded them underlined some of Blanca Francia’s statements to immediately navigate the reader to the worst in her testimony.

In fact, this most “damning” part of Blanca Francia’s testimony is in the excerpt below, and we see that though this is indeed the worst Blanca Francia ever claimed about Jackson, none of it contains those salacious details described by Robson in his fabricated complaint.

Blanca Francia’s deposition on September 6, 2016. Pages 129-130.

BLANCA FRANCIA ANSWERS MR. MANLY’S QUESTIONS:

deposition 129Q. So, did there ever come a time when you came into Michael’s roam and you heard him in the shower with a boy?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you describe that.

A. I came with clothes, that I remember, and went into his room, and I hear loud music, and I hear  laughing and giggling and, you know, screaming, you know, and as I was walking to the bathroom, to the shower, I hear little voice of a boy and Michael’s  voice, and I — as I was walking, I looked down and I  saw a pair of underwear which was little underwears and Michael’s underwear, and I stopped, and I saw them in the shower.

Q. Was it kind of fogged –

A. Yes.

Q. — the glass? So you saw an outline of Michael’s body?

A. Yes. And I hear a little — the giggling.

Q. Okay.

A. The little boy’s.

Q. Whose voice did the little voice sound like?

A. Wade.

Q. Wade was staying at the property at the time; correct?

deposition 130A. Yea. And I know they were his little underwears because I washed them before.

Q. Were they green?

A. Green. Neon green.

Q. Did you stay there watching?

A. No. I watched him, and that’s when I – when I — when I — when I start to realize what’s going on.

Q. Tell me about that.

A. I see him taking baths, taking — staying at the Jacuzzi from — from Havenhurst, but at that time  when I saw him with the little underwears there and — and his underwear, that’s when I started to realize maybe something’s going on here.

Q. Did you start to think that maybe it wasn’t just innocent play?

A. Yeah.

Q. Were you worried for the boys when you started to think about this when you saw them in the shower?

A. I feel so guilty about little Wade. I felt like I didn’t do anything. I didn’t say anything. I could have said something to the mother, and then I didn’t say anything, and — and that was burning me all  the time, and I didn’t say anything, and I still  continued working there.

So in her September 2016 deposition Blanca Francia claimed that she had seen “an outline of MJ’s body and heard him giggling”, and that she also” heard the little boy’s voice.” The boy was “Wade” who was “staying at the property at the time” and somewhere there “there was the little underwears.”

But in her second deposition on October 3, 2016 where Blanca Francia was mostly deposed by Ms. MacIsaac, she told a completely different story – about one shadow and one voice heard from behind that foggy glass. And Michael Jackson was not laughing out loud, but just gave a little hee-hee-hee laugh. And a moment later she left.

In the excerpt below Ms. MacIsaac reads out to Francia her earlier deposition taken on January 1994 (Exhibit 11), and it is this earlier deposition that tells Blanca Francia’s real story and opens up its big secret to us.

The earlier deposition is put in italics for easier differentiation.

Blanca Francia’s deposition on October 3, 2016. Pages 263-273.

BLANCA FRANCIA ANSWERS Ms. MACISAAC’S QUESTIONS:

deposition2 263Q. …when you entered Michael Jackson’s room on this day in December of 1989, the door was locked and you had to use your key?

A. Yes.

Q. And if you turn to page 393, and this is again Exhibit 11, 393. And if you look at lines 5 to 9 on that page, 393.

A. Yes.

Q. You further testified under oath that when you approached the bathroom that day and heard the water running, you knew someone was there?

A. Page 393?

Q. Yeah. From 5 to 9. Do you see that you testified that when you approached the bathroom on that day, you heard the water running and you knew somebody was in the bathroom. Do you see that?

A. Yes. Yes.

Q. Okay. And if you look at the same page, 393, and you focus on lines 8 to 9, do you see that you further testified that despite hearing the water run and believing someone was in the bathroom, you did not turn around but you entered the bathroom anyway?

A. Yes.

deposition2 264Q. Let’s turn to page 395. And I want to focus you on lines 4 to 7. Do you see that you again confirmed under oath in this deposition in 1994 that once you heard the shower running, you knew that somebody was in the bathroom. Do you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. And let’s focus on the same page of Exhibit 11, page 395, lines 18 to 20 now. Lines 18 to 20. Do you see that you testified under oath that you had never previously been in the bathroom when Michael Jackson was showering and that this was the first time that you had approached the shower while Mr. Jackson was showering?

A. Yes.

Q. Let’s go to page 396. And look at lines 13 to 15. Do you see that you testified under oath that the reason you didn’t turn around was because you wanted to get a peek of Michael Jackson without his clothes on?

A. That was the question.

Q. So at page 396 —

A. 15.

Q. — line 13, the question was: “You wanted to peek and see this man with no clothes on, right, ma’am?” “Answer: Yeah.” Do you see that?

deposition2 265A. Yes.

Q. I’ve accurately read your testimony from 1994?

A. Yes.

Q. And then you talked about what you actually saw when you took this peek.

A. Yes.

Q. And we’re going to go over that. And I’m going to read it into the record. And I’m going to start and I want you to follow along with me.

A. Okay.

Q. I’m going to start at page 397, line 14. And I’m going to read into the record until 399, line 23. This is Exhibit 11. We’re starting at 397,line 14: 

Question: When you looked around the corner, what did you see at that point?

“Answer: What do you mean? I see him. I saw Michael.

“Question: What did you see? You saw Mr. Jackson?

“Answer: Uh-huh.                             

“Question: Did he have any clothes on?        

“Answer: I didn’t see that.

deposition2 266“Question: What did you see?

“Answer: I just saw the shadow.

“Question: You saw the shadow of what you believe was Michael Jackson?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: You never saw him, did you?        

“Answer: No.

“Question: You saw the shadow of what you thought was a man, right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: Did you see any other shadow at that point?  

“Answer: No.

“Question: Was the glass foggy?

“Answer: Yeah.

“Question: So you couldn’t really see clearly the glass, right? You just saw a figure; is that right? 

“Answer: Uhhuh.

“Question: You saw only one figure at that point?        

“Answer: Yes.

deposition2 267“Question: Okay. And as you saw this one figure, did you at that point continue on or did you turn around and go back?

“Answer: I went back.

“Question:   So you now — you have seen your peek. You have taken your peek as you said, right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: And your peek was looking for just a very short time like that?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question:   Was it very quick?

“Answer: Yeah.

“Question:   And you saw what appeared to be a man, right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question:   You only saw one figure, right?    

“Answer:  Yeah.

“Question:   And then you then turned around and went back out, correct?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: Is that right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question:   And that’s all you saw?

“Answer: Yes.

deposition2 268“Question: Is that right?

MANLY: Counsel, could you slow down?

BY MS. MACISAAC:

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: You never saw any other person in there when you were inside there, did you?

“Answer: No. But once I got close to it, I hear laughing.

“Question: But you never saw anybody else in the shower, right?

“Answer:  No.”

Q. Did I correctly read your deposition testimony from January of 1994?

A. Yes.

Q. So I counted up that during just this portion of your testimony that I just read into the record, that you said under oath at least six times that you only saw one figure in the shower —

A. Yes.

Q. — on that day in December 1989, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. So let’s talk about what you heard, what you actually heard during the shower incident in December of 1989.

A. Yes.

deposition2 269Q. So still on Exhibit 11, starting at page 399, lines 24 through page 417, I’m going to read that into the record.

FINALDI: You’re reading 399 to 417?

BY MS. MACISAAC:

Q. No. 399, lines 24 through page 400, line 17. Sorry. Are you with me?

A. Yes.

Q. So again, on Exhibit 11, page 399, line 24.

A. Okay.

“Question: You heard some laughing?

“Answer: Yeah.

“Question: When was it you heard the laughing?

“Answer: When I got real close. When I saw and hear the laugh.

“Question: What kind of laughing did you hear?

“Answer: You know, just laughing. Not real loud but laughing like hee hee hee, like that.

“Question: You heard hee hee hee laughing?

“Answer: Yeah, like that.

deposition2 270“Question: Did you recognize any voices you heard?

“Answer: It was Michael.

“Question: You heard Michael laughing?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: Did you hear anything else other than Michael laughing?

“Answer: No.

“Question: That’s all you heard?”

“Answer: Uh-huh.”

Q. Do you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. Did I accurately read your testimony, your under oath testimony from January of 1994?

A. Yes.

Q. So here again, asked more than once what you heard, and you said more than once that you only heard one voice laughing?

FINALDI: Asked and answered.

BY MS. MACISAAC:

Q. Is that yes?

A. That’s what I, that’s what I say.

Q. And after this, Mr. Cochran asked you a series of follow-up questions to really make sure that he had gotten your testimony correct regarding this alleged 1989 shower incident –

deposition2 271FINALDI: Assumes facts not in evidence.

BY MS. MACISAAC:

— and to make sure that you were telling the truth. Do you remember that?

FINALDI: Assumes facts not in evidence as to Mr. Cochran’s state of mind.

BY MS. MACISAAC:

Well, let’s look at what Mr. Cochran asked you. And this is Exhibit 11 starting at page 400. And I’m going to read into the record lines 18 through page 402, line 3. So let’s start. Exhibit 11, page 400, line 18.

“Question: So let me see if I understand it. You came in there. This is December of 1989. You were curious and you wanted to take a peek at Mr. Jackson while he was showering once you got in there, right?

“Answer: Uh-huh.

“Question: You went around and you took a peek. Through a foggy shower glass you saw the figure of what you thought was a man, what you think was Mr. Jackson?

“Answer: Yes.

deposition2 272“Question: And you heard a giggle or a laugh that appeared like Mr. Jackson’s laugh, right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: And you turned around and you left?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: You never saw anybody else in that shower right? At that point?

“Answer: Well, no.

“Question: Then you then left the room; is that right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: And you have now told me everything that occurred on that particular occasion regarding the shower; isn’t that right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: And again, you are under oath today, right?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: And you are telling the truth to the best of your ability?

“Answer: Yes.

deposition2 273“Question: You are not lying to us, are you?

“Answer: No.

“Question: You are being honest?

MANLY: Counsel, could you slow down, please?

BY MS. MACISAAC:

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: And you have told us everything, right?

“Answer: Yes.”

Q. Ms. Francia, did I read that testimony that you gave under oath in 1994 accurately?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall testifying in Michael Jackson’s criminal trial in 2005 regarding this alleged shower incident?

A. Did I came over?

Q. Do you recall testifying in —

A. Yes.

Q. — Michael Jackson’s criminal trial —

A. Yes.

Q. — in 2005 regarding this alleged shower incident from ’89?

(end of excerpt)

Remember that Blanca Francia’s deposition in January 1994 came after she had spoken to Diane Dimond on her Hard Copy TV program and presented there a much dirtier story for the $20,000 they paid her. This means that later, when speaking under oath Blanca Francia went back on what she claimed in that program and was now giving an honest and truthful account of what she really saw in December 1989.

And now her story was very much different – she entered Michael Jackson’s room, heard the water running in the bathroom and was so curious to see Michael naked (which points to her personal interest in him) that she took a peek inside. She saw a shadow of a man and no one else there, heard only Michael’s voice and no one else’s, and also Michael’s little hee hee hee laugh (the way people laugh to themselves when they think of something funny). A moment later she turned around and left. And that was all.

So there was no other figure in the shower and there was no other voice – all of it is just Blanca Francia’s imagination, some of which she even dared present at the 2005 trial.  

And there was certainly no “rubbing” or “pressing on MJ’s stomach area” which are blatant lies never traced in her depositions or trial testimony.

The same collection of papers points to the reason why Blanca Francia thinks that Wade could be in that shower – she says that at that time little Wade was staying at the property and an hour after the bathroom episode she saw Michael Jackson and Wade together, and this gave her reason enough to assume that Wade had also been in that shower.

Yes, all of it was simply her assumption.

We learn about it from the 2016 deposition pages referring to Larry Feldman this time. He deposed Blanca Francia in December 1993, and it was with Larry Feldman that she shared her impressions of that episode. When Johnny Cochran continued to depose her in January 1994, Larry Feldman heard her contradict herself and asked questions to clarify the discrepancy.

And now Ms. MacIsaac is just reminding Blanca Francia of that drama.

Blanca Francia’s deposition on October 3, 2016. Pages 426-431     

deposition2 426

[…]

Q. And just read from page 423, line 10,through 428, line 14. Just read that to yourself.

FINALDI:   Which page?

MACISAAC: 423, line 10, through 428, line 14.

MS.MACISAAC [to the witness]:

Q. Just take your time and read it over.

Okay. So is it fair to say that at this point during your testimony, Mr. Feldman was following up on the inconsistency we just talked about between what you had testified to on December 15th, 1993, and what you told Mr. Cochran earlier that day?

FINALDI: Calls for speculation.

THE WITNESS: Yes.

deposition2 427BY MS. MACISAAC:

Q. And do you see that Mr. — this is page 423. Mr. Feldman specifically read to you testimony where you had said that you had — exactly what Mr. Manly had read, the testimony where you said that you saw Mr. Jackson and Wade Robson in the shower together. This is the top of page 423. And he asked you, was that true? And your answer then was, well, I supposed that it was him because he was with him that day.

A. Because he what?

Q. Because he was with him that day.

A. Yes.

Q. So you did not say when Mr. Feldman showed you the prior testimony that Mr. Manly just showed you, you didn’t say, oh, that’s true, I did see him. You said that you had supposed that you saw Wade Robson based on the fact that he was there at the ranch with Michael Jackson, correct?

A. Yes.

FINALDI: Misstates testimony.

BY MS. MACISAAC:

deposition2 428Q. And then if you turn – [… ] If you look at page 423, starting at line 23, Mr. Feldman again showed you your prior testimony.

“Question: How many times?

“Answer: Besides him in the tub, I saw him once.

“Question: Is that true?

“Answer: Yes.

“Question: One time in the shower?

Q. And your answer to that was yes. And then Mr. Feldman said, was that true? And then your answer at line 6 on page 424 was: “Well, like I said, I suppose it was him.”  

Do you see that?

A. Yes.

FINALDI: Asked and answered.

BY MS. MACISAAC:

Q. And I read that accurately?

A. Yes.

Q. Was that true?

A. That’s what I’m saying. It was just Michael and Wade at that time.

deposition2 429Q. Right. But you didn’t say you saw Wade. You said that you just —

A. But nobody else —

Q. — assumed it was Wade?

A. Nobody else will be in the shower but Michael and Wade because they were there that day. Nobody else. Not the gardeners, not security got here and take a shower. Just them.

Q. It was a big ranch, wasn’t it?

A. Yeah. But nobody ever would come and take a shower in Michael’s shower.

Q. Right, because you only saw one figure. This is asking you. Mr. Feldman is following up and saying, did you see Wade and you’re saying no, I just supposed he was in there.

FINALDI: All right. Asked and answered. You’re just arguing with her.

THE WITNESS: Still, thinking that it was him because he was the only person who take a shower in the shower.

BY MS. MACISAAC:

deposition2 430Q. Okay. And then — and then he asked you, if you turn to page 426, Mr. Feldman, he asked you if you heard two people giggling in that shower, and  this is line 3 to 4. “Did you hear two people giggling in the shower?”

And your answer in 1994 was, at line 5: 

“Well, I didn’t really — see, it was, it was noisy and it was — I knew that I wasn’t doing, you know, something appropriate, you know, just to walk in and want to peek.

“Question: But could you tell whether two people were in the shower? In other words, did you hear two different voices, two different giggles?

“Answer: I only hear Mr. Jackson, but I didn’t see Wade in the room. So once they came out of the room, that’s what I supposed, that they were in there together in the shower.”  

Q. Do you see that? Did I read that accurately?

A. Yes.

Q. And then on page 427, at lines 22 to 24, up through page 428, line 14 – let me start this way. Why don’t you go to page 428, lines 9 to 14.

deposition2 431“Question: “And how long after you saw Wade’s underwear and Mr. Jackson’s underwear at the shower, Mr. Jackson giggling, did you see then Wade and Mr. Jackson together?

“Answer: How long?

“Question: How much time elapsed?

Answer: Maybe an hour later.” 

Q. Did I read that accurately?

A. Yes.

Q. Was that truthful?

A. Yes.

Q. […]

The above shows Blanca Francia to be a universal kind of a witness whose story will suit just anyone.

In December 1993 she testified that she had seen MJ and Wade in the shower, and in January 1994 she testified that she hadn’t seen them and it was only an assumption. And 20+ years later both sides quote the respective pieces from her depositions and to a certain extent each of them is right.

With so much vagueness about this marvellous witness let us single out only the hard facts from her story.

  • She never spoke about any “rubbing” and “pressing the boy’s head against MJ’s stomach area”.
  • On one occasion she saw MJ and this boy in the bath tub (Jacuzzi) together.
  • In the shower she saw only one shadow and heard one voice – and that was Michael’s shadow and Michael’s voice. During the brief moment she peeked into the bathroom she also heard Michael make a little hee-hee-hee laugh.
  • She did not see Wade or any other boy in that shower.
  • But she assumed that Wade was there because the boy was “at the property” at that time.
  • She also saw the neon green underwear lying somewhere, and an hour later she saw Wade and Michael together.
  • She said that no one else but MJ and Wade had access to that bathroom – no gardener, no security people. The simple thought that Michael Jackson was in the shower alone didn’t even occur to her and the fact that she saw only one shadow and heard only one voice didn’t convince her either.
  • Her reasoning was simple – if Wade wasn’t in that room he must have been in the shower, especially since she allegedly saw some underwear lying around. It never occurred to her that the boy could take a shower by himself or could leave his underwear after the Jacuzzi, and could go back to his mother, or could be playing a game elsewhere, or could be having a meal, watching a movie or even sleeping in the second floor bedroom. In her opinion if she didn’t see him in that room the only place he could be was the shower, with no other options ever considered.

So the only facts her testimony is based upon is that little Wade was staying at the property at that time and that the little boy’s underwear was allegedly found somewhere around. All the rest was an assumption on her part.

But was Wade Robson staying at the property at that time?

The crucial detail you have surely noticed is that Blanca Francia described this event as taking place in December 1989 and by that time Robson had not even arrived in the US.

A short reminder about what she said in the 1990s:

Q. Well, let’s look at what Mr. Cochran asked you. And this is Exhibit 11 starting at page 400.
“Question: So let me see if I understand it. You came in there. This is December of 1989. You were curious and you wanted to take a peek at Mr. Jackson while he was showering once you got in there, right?
“Answer: Uh-huh.

Could Blanca Francia misremember the date?

Well, the December 1989 period was fixed in her earlier depositions from 1993 and 1994 when her memory was still fresh, so it wasn’t a recent development when her memory could indeed fail her.

And the exact time was surely defined by the two attorneys who deposed Blanca Francia on two different occasions  – Johnny Cochran and Larry Feldman, so if one of them overlooked to clarify the point, the other would have corrected him.

And it wasn’t just some random period which Blanca Francia named. December 1989 was Christmas time, and if she spoke about Christmas it means that it was really Christmas, with all its fun, festivities and decorations – a memorable event if not for Michael Jackson, but at least for her.

And that particular Christmas is special to us because the Robsons were not even on the horizon yet. Their first visit to the US was to celebrate the January 26 Australia day at Disneyland and they went to Neverland almost ten days later, on February 3, 1990, when they finally managed to contact Michael Jackson.

So irrespective of what Blanca Francia saw or assumed about the shower event, none of it has anything to do with Wade Robson, to say the very least.

The matter could be closed at this point if it were not for Robson’s supporters who will certainly venture a theory that Blanca Francia misremembered the year and was speaking, say, about December 1990.

But even this will not help Robson because in December 1990 he wasn’t in the US either.

His first visit there was in Jan/February 1990, his second in May 1990, his third in February 1991 and in September 1991 Joy, Chantal and Wade Robson already arrived in the US on a permanent stay.

These dates were clarified by Joy Robson in her testimony in 2005:

By Mr. Sneddon:

Q. You came back in May of 1990, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And you were here for six weeks, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And then you came back again in February of 1991, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. For about seven days?

A. Yes.

Q. And during the time that you were here in 1991, you spent time on the ranch, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. When you visited in September of 1991, you came permanently, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And then from that point, from September of 1991 up till, let’s just say, September 1993 -okay? – the time frame involved, you and your son spent a great deal of time with Michael Jackson, you were around him a lot, correct?

A. I don’t think so.

Q. You were not at the ranch on a number of occasions during 1991?

A. My memory is in the entire time we’ve lived here since 1991, we’ve only been at the ranch with Michael on four occasions in 14 years.

Q. Four occasions?

A. Every other time we’ve been here without him.

Q. You testified that you’ve been out at the ranch on an average of about four times?

A. Four times a year, but Michael was never there.

Q. Was that all the way through today?

A. Yes.

Q. He’s never there when you go there?

A. Very rarely. I can only remember four times in 14 years that we’ve been there with him since we have lived here.

Incidentally, now we also understand why Joy Robson emphasized that Wade and MJ had been together at Neverland only 4 times in 14 years since their arrival in the US – obviously this was a sore point with her, and this is why she remembered Wade’s rare occasions with MJ so clearly.

But at the moment our main concern is the time frame of that unfortunate episode of MJ taking a shower, and we see that neither December 1989 nor December 1990 fit the Wade Robson timeline.

Of course we can also fantasize like Blanca Francia and assume that she misremembered not only the year, but the month, season and even took one boy for another, but what will be the good of her so-called testimony then? The value of such testimony will be zero.

All of us can assume anything we like, but if the assumption is not proven by facts, none of it will have any value whatsoever.

For example, we can assume that the boy she called “Wade from a different country” was Brett Barnes instead. The fun fact is that the Barnes family visited Neverland in December too, only it was December 1991 – when Blanca Francia had not worked at the ranch for half a year already (she left in June 1991).

We learn this date from Brett’s mother Lisbeth Marie Barnes who testified in 2005 about their first visit to Neverland:

Q. And what is your son’s name?

A. Brett.

Q. When did you first meet him? [Michael Jackson]

A. 19 — December 1991.

Q. And how did you meet him?

A. Well, actually, when I met him personally was in December of 1991, but I had spoken to him for several years prior to that. I — he invited us to his home in December 1991, and that’s when I met him for the first time.

Q. Okay. And your first visit to Neverland was when, what year, if you know?

A. December 1991.

Q. Okay. And who did you visit Neverland with?

A. Our family. My husband, my two children.

Q. Okay. And how long did you stay there?

A. About three weeks. Well, we stayed with Michael for that three weeks. He took us to Disneyland, to Las Vegas, and, yes, we were together for three weeks.

Since the Neverland winter guests seemed to arrive mostly in December, now the reason why Blanca Francia also spoke about December becomes clearer. Being a Jehovah Witness Michael himself did not celebrate Christmas, at least not until mid 1990s, but for others this period was really the most convenient time for a long visit to Neverland and other places Michael invited them to.

For most people and especially children this was holiday time, but not for Jackson.

Mike Smallcombe, MJ’s biographer gives us the idea what Michael Jackson was really busy with in the winter of 1989/1990 and the complex personal and business issues he handled in the period after it (and Mike Smallcombe does not yet know about that fake Project M and only briefly mentions the huge power grab of Michael’s business by Geffen’s team!).

In early November [1989] Michael received a visit at the studio from a long-time friend, Buz Kohan, who was trying to persuade him to perform at an allstar tribute to Sammy Davis Jr’s 60 years in show business. Kohan was co-producing and writing the show, which was being taped for broadcast on November 13 at the Shrine Auditorium in Los Angeles.

At the time, Michael was in extreme pain from the Pepsi commercial accident when his hair caught on fire.”Kohan and Schlatter hadn’t realised just how much distress Michael was in. “He took us into a back bathroom at the studio and asked us to feel his head,” Kohan recalls. “He told me he was in constant pain and on painkillers. Because of this, he truly didn’t know whether he would be able to perform at all.”

Between November 1989 and January 1990, Michael and the crew switched from Westlake to the Record One studio complex, located in Sherman Oaks in the San Fernando Valley. They had exclusive 24-hour access to the studio, costing an estimated $4,000 a day. Matt Forger said they required two studio rooms full time for a year, as Michael was entertaining the idea of recording a full album of new material rather than releasing Decade.

Michael was also going through personal difficulties. In April [1990] a close friend of his, Ryan White, died from AIDS complications at the age of 18. His grandmother Martha Bridges also died a month later, as did one of his idols, Sammy Davis Jr.

By 1989 and 1990, Michael was becoming increasingly influenced by his close friend and business confidant, entertainment mogul David Geffen. After the Bad Tour he fired his accountant in favour of one who was working for Geffen, as well as his manager, Frank DiLeo.  Michael finally hired a replacement for DiLeo in the summer of 1990. The new man, Sandy Gallin, who was brought in along with his management partner Jim Morey, was also a Geffen associate.

Advising Michael to replace DiLeo with Gallin was said to be part of Geffen’s wider agenda of avenging his enemy Walter Yetnikoff, the CBS president. Michael told CBS he wouldn’t be delivering his new album until his contract was improved, and felt the solution was to fire Branca and hire a new attorney to secure a better deal. Convinced it was the right decision, Michael dismissed Branca in the summer of 1990 after ten hugely successful years of working together.

Yetnikoff believes it was Geffen who influenced Michael to fire DiLeo and Branca, two of Yetnikoff’s close allies, and replace them with his own associates. One of Michael’s new attorneys, Bert Fields, admits it was Geffen who brought him and Michael together. Perhaps tellingly, Branca’s law partner Kenneth Ziffren also severed his ties with Geffen and his company in the wake of Branca’s dismissal. 

Getting back to December 1989 we now know that Michael was in the process of moving from one studio to another, which would cost him $4,000 a day, so a few days at Christmas were probably the only time he could spare for his Neverland guests.

Is there any chance that at the time described by Blanca Francia at least some boy was visiting Neverland?

You will be surprised, but there was a boy who was Michael’s guest in December 1989.

His name was Ryan White. 

Ryan White was an AIDS victim, a hemophiliac diagnosed with the disease at age 13 in 1983. Five years later he was already in poor shape, and in an effort to boost his spirits and ease his life, in the summer of 1989 Michael Jackson sent him a Mustang car as a gift.

In December 1989 Ryan celebrated his 18th birthday, and this is when Michael called him again and invited him to Neverland. This wasn’t the boy’s first visit to Neverland, but it was his last – his health was deteriorating rapidly and in April 1990 the boy died.

Ryan White gravestone with tributes from E.John and MJ [from ‘A Quiet Hero – a life of Ryan White’]

The book “The Quiet Hero – a Life of Ryan White” by Nelson Price describes Ryan’s holiday at Neverland in December 1989:

“During the break for the holidays, Ryan received another invitation from Michael Jackson to visit Neverland Ranch.

So in late December, after Ryan celebrated Christmas with his family in Cicero, he flew to Los Angeles. He brought an electrical heater and wore a leather coat even in the California sun.

At the Los Angeles airport, he was met by Jackson’s security guards and a limousine. During the three-hour ride to Neverland Ranch, Ryan suffered from cramps and a stomach ache. He continued to feel ill even after he settled into his bungalow at the ranch. From his cottage, Ryan phoned Jeanne and wondered whether he should have made the trip.

But he perked up after savoring a hearty dinner with Jackson. According to Ryan’s autobiography, the two then enjoyed a movie marathon in the private theater at Neverland. They watched a series of movies featuring the Three Stooges slapstick comedy team.

The next morning, Ryan joined Jackson on a shopping spree for toys that the pop singer intended to donate to children. During a later shopping trip, one of Jackson’s staff thought his friends needed a heavier coat. Jackson also gave him a new stereo system before Ryan returned to Indiana on New Year’s Day.”

Ryan White’s last public appearance was in March 1990 when he met President Ronald Reagan and Nancy Reagan.

The picture of them together shows Ryan to be a frail boy with a swollen stomach who looked much younger than his real age. Sadly, soon thereafter he would go into a coma and die without regaining his consciousness.

There is absolutely no reason to assume that Michael Jackson went to a shower with Ryan White, but we know it for a fact that to a Jacuzzi they did go together as Michael’s big idea was to take Ryan to Neverland and bring him in the Jacuzzi.

At that time no one yet knew how the HIV infection spread and people were afraid to even breathe the same air with Ryan White, so Michael’s intention was to show Ryan that he wasn’t a pariah to be shunned and feared. Michael was even warned about the possible danger, but it didn’t stop him from taking the risk.

Michael’s doctor Arnold Klein spoke about it in his interview with Larry King.

KING: “You wanted to tell me something about Michael and Ryan White, the young boy dying of AIDS.

KLEIN: That’s very important, yes. Michael wanted to bring Ryan White to Neverland. And his plastic surgeon, a brilliant surgeon, said you can’t bring him in the Jacuzzi because you may catch AIDS.

KING: You’re kidding?

KLEIN: No, he said that. Honestly, honest to God. So Michael called me, and he said, “Will I catch AIDS if I go in the Jacuzzi with Ryan White?” I said, no way. And he was very good friends with Ryan White until he died. And that’s what people don’t know.

KING: Did he go in the Jacuzzi with him?

KLEIN: Absolutely, because, you know what? He really cared. I want to tell you, this is a person who really cared about other people. He’s unlike anyone I ever met.”

Michael Jackson really cared and was unlike anyone we ever met.

And that’s the point all these Robsons and Francias will never understand.

~

Related articles:

10 years of vindicating Michael Jackson

November 21, 2019

Sometimes there are dates or anniversaries of which you don’t know whether to celebrate them or to mourn them. After Michael Jackson’s 10th death anniversary this year, we now have the 10th anniversary of the foundation of our Vindicate MJ blog. Exactly today 10 years ago, on November 21 in 2009, Helena sent this blog online into the world with these first words:

“Father, Forgive Them; They Don’t Know What They Are Doing…”, with Johann Sebastian Bach’s famous Orchestral Suite No. 3 in D Major called “Air” and with her explanation why she started this work.

Well, in view of the fact that nothing has changed since November 2009 and that we still have to fight for the truth, it’s hard to celebrate this 10 year anniversary. And meanwhile I believe it is fair to say that some things cannot be forgiven anymore – at least it is up to God to forgive the liars, our human souls are not able to do this.10 years

When faced with the “Leaving Neverland” spectacle this year, it felt like we were thrown back to the beginning of our journey and have to start with educating people all over again.

However, what happened within these 10 years made us stronger and helped us to counter these new allegations with much more knowledge. There was so much research done by Jackson’s fans and supporters in this decade that we now can reply to every new claim and allegation with an enormous amount of facts like nobody else. This was harder in the beginning after Michael’s death than it is now.

Of course, the media didn’t learn much during this time, they ignore most of the facts now as they did it in earlier years. This is a systematic approach! We cannot rely on their objective treatment of Michael Jackson and all the stories spread about him. When it comes to MJ, they are still not interested in doing the task assigned to them: detailed fact-checking and objective assessment and reporting of stories and allegations.

But with all the research that was done by Michael Jackson “truthers” in an almost scientific manner since Michael’s death, we today can be very sure and convinced that we are right! That we are not mistaken! Because with every new fact we found out, our convictions were corroborated. And this is the joint work of international groups of bloggers, advocates and researchers, of which Helena is one of the most important.

On this day I want to highlight particularly the work done by Helena in the course of these 10 years, with so much passion that sometimes her health suffered severely from it. I remember the several public trials she covered arduously, writing posts every day and night, hardly sleeping during these weeks. I remember the attacks from MJ haters by impersonating the blog with lies and fake news. I remember her falling in a hurry and breaking her wrists which required her to stay in hospital for a while and leaving the blog to others, when she couldn’t write herself. The several times of absence from the blog always made the readers miss her very much – because she could not and never can be replaced. Her quick perception and excellent judgment and assessment of things are unparalleled and so much needed in difficult situations when false stories on Michael become overwhelming and people don’t know what to believe. In these times we need somebody with a clear view, with a wealth of knowledge and a good memory, leading us through the waves of rumors, untruths and biased reporting.

Certainly, nobody can do this amount of work on a daily basis for years. We need to stay healthy, we have families and have to care for other things and family members. So the temporal intervals between writing posts became longer over time, and it also didn’t seem necessary to repeat all facts any time new claims and lies on Michael came up. Principally, all was said on the allegations, and the facts speak for themselves.

But this year was different. Leaving Neverland and the two liars and their director made us nearly vomit considering the filthiness and the impertinence of their lies. And also nauseating was the fact that the media and the entertainment industry embraced the film despite the transparency of the lies, as well as the fact that pedophilia doesn’t seem any longer a subject of disgust, but of entertainment and a new ideology (“children can enjoy sex with adults”). Moreover, the agenda to bring down Jackson’s legacy became so obvious.

Seeing Robson and Safechuck going so far as to present themselves with their lies as movie stars (with even photo sessions showing them as the popstars they always wanted to be) was a shock – not a shock about the lies they told, because we already knew them – but a shock about how low some people can sink to make headlines and to take revenge.

The good thing that happened after the initial shock was the unity and the collective reaction of the fanbase and MJ advocates. And especially that many younger “MJ truthers” took over and stroke back on Twitter, YouTube and other social media, even in form of a great documentary, with joint forces and vast knowledge. This gives us a lot of hope. Helena and I are over 60 now, and we need the younger ones to take over and continue the work. It is necessary that younger fans carry forward the vindication work with the same passion and with new instruments and skills, and we are glad that we can rely on them.

Now I would particularly like to say a big Thank you to Helena for her tireless work and commitment. She is one of the pioneers in the MJ blogger community that emerged after Michael’s death, and did a lot of the essential research we needed for today. And we hope that she will be here as long as possible and give us the light we need.

I think we can be thankful that we could keep the blog alive for 10 years now and that nobody could break us. Considering the new law controlling the internet in Helena’s home country, this cannot be taken for granted for the future. And now that a new Californian legislation enables Robson and Safechuck to return their cases to the trial court, there is possibly a lot more work to do and we are far from reaching our goal. But we hope for the best that we will be able to go on TOGETHER!

The VMJ blog is an academic Chair for studying Michael Jackson, and it hopefully will exist another 10 years and longer, beyond our own lives, to educate next generations. This is our wish and we will take care that it remains safe. Thanks to all our readers who keep us going!

May God bless you, Helena!

WHAT WE KNOW about Mark Quindoy’s Diary and Wade Robson. Part 3

November 16, 2019

If somebody tells you that he kept a diary when travelling to an exotic place, and when you start reading it you find that the the names and locations are all wrong, the dates are messed up and the museum described was closed in that particular season, you will suspect that the writer is pulling your leg and just fabricated the whole thing, probably never going on that trip at all.

The same with Mariano “Mark” Quindoy.

Mark Quindoy reads out from his diary, 1993

Quindoy claimed that he kept a diary since his first day of employment at Neverland, but it has so many inaccuracies in the dates, names and descriptions that at some point you start realizing that it is a fabrication.

Michael Jackson’s detractors will excuse Quindoy’s blunders by saying that “it was long ago and he simply misremembered it”, however this excuse cannot be applied to a diary which is kept then and there and if something worthy of attention happens in the morning you make a note of it in the evening. Or the next day. Or the same week at the very latest.

A diary cannot have any discrepancies and if not true to life in its every detail, it is actually an imitation based on outside sources and the author’s fantasy. It is either this or that,  with no shades of gray in between.

Therefore it is no use sorting through the mess of Mariano Quindoy’s diary trying to filter the “correct” facts from its lies and inaccuracies – if some pieces of his diary are messed up it means that the whole of it was fabricated.

WHAT THE ‘DIARY’ SAYS ABOUT SAFECHUCK

Mariano Quindoy’s diary has reached us in its several versions. First it was reported by the media as Quindoy presented it at his 1993 press conference in Manila. Then Quindoy’s ideas were stated in the prosecution “Prior Bad Acts” Motion of December 10, 2004. And then it was retold in several books (Diane Dimond’s is the example).

Let us go over Quindoy’s most striking statements that went into the Prosecution “Prior Bad Acts” Motion. Read more…

What Do We Know About Mariano “Mark” Quindoy? Part 2

November 5, 2019

By September 1993, when Mariano “Mark” and Ofelia “Faye” Quindoy arranged a press conference in Manila, their legal battle with Michael Jackson had been going for three years – since they left Neverland in August 1990. The disputed sum was $283,000 they thought Michael Jackson owed them in unpaid overtime wages.

For a while all seemed quiet, but in late 1991– early 1992 they started seeking contact with the media. We’ve seen their two big TV interviews with Hard Copy (Feb.1992) and Geraldo (July 1992), and an earlier contract with the “Sun” for $25,000 to tell a frank and full story about their work for Michael Jackson – however then they didn’t say a single bad word about their former employer.

The Quindoys and Michael Jackson

But knowing that when doing those interviews the Quindoys were also litigating Michael Jackson, it was easy to assume that their public appearances were actually a warning sent to Michael via TV – if their payment demands were not met, the very same story about him would acquire a different coloring.

Indeed, their earlier interviews had all the makings of future allegations – the comment that Michael used to throw around his clothes and underwear was a signal that it could turn into “boy’s underwear” lying by his bedside, the bed on the second floor of his bedroom where his guests “usually stayed” could turn into a “never slept in” bed, and the innocent fact that for their 6 months there they didn’t see any MJ’s girlfriends would later turn into the idea that he was gay.

The supposition that the interviews were a veiled threat was confirmed by an unexpected source – Victor Gutierrez, who claims that the Quindoys “made demands of” Jackson and threatened him. Gutierrez says that he was also planning to interview them. Read more…

What Do We Know About Mariano “Mark” Quindoy? Part 1

October 31, 2019

Recently I came across an interview of Mariano “Mark” Quindoy, a former housekeeper at Neverland and his wife Ofelia “Faye” Quindoy who worked at Neverland as chef. The video claims that the Quindoys were employed at the ranch for two years and shows Mariano “Mark” Quindoy saying that during his time at the ranch he eye-witnessed a scene in the pool area where Michael Jackson allegedly kissed a boy and put his hand into the boy’s pants. The name of the boy was not specified.

Mariano “Mark” Quindoy on Current Affair, Jan.17, 1994

This previously unknown video is a clip from the Current Affair program dated January 17, 1994, but it surfaced only recently sparking off numerous exclamations from its viewers like “Shocking”, “Never seen this before. I can’t believe some people think he’s innocent”, “Why the hell did they stay silent?” etc.

It just happened that right at that time I was also rereading the Prosecution Motion of December 10, 2004 introducing the so-called “Prior Bad Acts” into the forthcoming Michael Jackson trial (also known as #1108 Motion), and the details and wording of the statement of the same Mariano “Mark” Quindoy in that paper made it clear that Robson’s and Safechuck’s stories in the “Leaving Neverland” film are for the most part based on Quindoy’s claims – up to the description of some scenes repeated by these two characters almost verbatim.

This suddenly made Mariano “Mark” Quindoy big news again, so we need to closely look into this character and his story, especially into that striking episode near the pool area which Quindoy allegedly observed at Neverland and which, according to #1108 Motion, supposedly involved Jimmy Safechuck. It is the same episode as the one in the video, only described in the prosecution paper in much more detail. Read more…

Danny Wu’s documentary SQUARE ONE about Michael Jackson is a MUST-SEE

October 9, 2019

Danny Wu did a remarkable job.

His SQUARE ONE documentary does away with the allegations against Michael Jackson in a very concise and clear way, and what amazes me most is that despite the documentary being only 1 hour and 20 minutes long he manages to cover it all and not miss a thing. Out of the vast exculpatory materials accumulated since Michael Jackson’s passing, Danny Wu managed to select only the most essential facts and documents that tell the truth about those allegations in their most condensed form.

From what I hear about the author he more or less believed Michael Jackson’s accusers after watching the “Leaving Neverland” fake but since it didn’t feel right for him to just blindly accept it, it triggered off his own research and after an obviously very deep dive into the MJ story he made his rebuttal documentary just in two months – a miraculous phenomenon in and of itself, especially considering how impressive the result is.

Even from this point of view it is totally unlike Dan Reed’s tedious shooting and reshooting of his “Leaving Neverland” scenes intended to present its characters in their most favorable light and give them some semblance of credibility through their endless repetitive lies, which are meant to pass off as “research” that actually never took place there.

It is also funny how Danny Wu manages to be slightly ironic about Dan Reed’s crooked job by imitating his signature aerial views and piano music which adds to this documentary at lot as you can’t help occasionally laughing even despite the seriousness of the subject.

In short the quality, accuracy and standard of research of SQUARE ONE are phenomenal, which make it a must-see for those who never heard MJ’s real story and are ready to leave the nasty media matrix to discover the sensational truth that Michael Jackson was an innocent man.

And even long-time researchers like us can also find in the documentary some new facts to carry on with. Read more…

LIES OF “LEAVING NEVERLAND” and the matter of JOY ROBSON’S HAIRSTYLE

August 29, 2019

Honest people to whom the truth matters are doing so splendid a job of debunking  the lies of Dan Reed’s ‘Leaving Neverland’ film that I can only watch in awe the speed at which they are doing it. Great new videos have been released lately and more are still to come – the ‘Leaving Neverland‘ fakes are indeed an endless source for research and analysis for those who value the truth and reveal it to others.

The thorough shredding of ‘Leaving Neverland’ into pieces seems to have come as a surprise to its authors as well as the mainstream media – none of them expected Michael Jackson’s fans to watch the film in the first place, not to mention the fans’ determination to dissect it.  Of course all those involved in making this fabrication continue to play the old tune, but now they are definitely on the defense and sound more and more like a broken record. Their fake documentary is in rags now because of the numerous holes poked in it, but the liars in and around the film continue to pretend they don’t see anything wrong with it and don’t mind the stench. And this is what backfires most – the more they pretend and censor the voices of reason, the clearer Michael’s innocence is.

Out of the many latest videos debunking Robson’s and Safechuck’s lies the only one available to me is the one called ‘Lies of Leaving Neverland’, released in mid-August, almost on the eve of Michael Jackson’s birthday.

The video is a marvel. It takes only 32 minutes to show the enormity of falsifications in Dan Reed’s film – its numerous contradictions, provable lies, fakes scenes, restaged shoots, reconstructed memories, omission of critical information, manipulation of news clips, use of discredited source materials, key motives ignored and whatnot.

But to me the most stunning discovery of all were the fragments of Robson’s and his mother’s depositions videotaped in 2016 and released only now. Let me tell you – it is one thing to read the tapescripts and it is a totally different thing to see them saying it. Read more…

%d bloggers like this: