What Michael Jackson, Laura Nyro & Donna Summer had in common: DAVID GEFFEN

Reader luv4hutch has sent us the summary of his debate with a friend about Michael Jackson and asked for a comment or post about it. And though our waiting list is already long, let it be another unexpected post that precedes everything else.

The person who goes as a “Producer” in the debate is a producer working in the entertainment industry. His views about Jackson are standard for the people of his trade – they were formed by very many years of listening to rumor and innuendo from the so-called reliable people in Hollywood, generating inflated stories and feeding on them too, and also some scraps of insider’s information which may be occasionally true. All of it has long cemented into their rock solid confidence that no one can possibly know more about Jackson and that everything to know about him is already there.And since these people see no need in learning anything new or fact-checking the earlier stories we can safely say that they got stuck in the past, in a sort of Stone Age with regard to Michael Jackson.

“Reader” is the initiator of the debate who is apparently sitting on the fence and is torn between his friend who seems to be so knowledgeable about Jackson and his own doubts in the veracity of claims about him.  His views are more or less typical of the present of Michael Jackson – which is still controversial and unclear for the majority of people.

And we here represent Michael Jackson’s future. After more than 10 years of research of every pro and con argument we are one hundred per cent certain that Michael Jackson was innocent and consider it only a matter of time when it becomes obvious to everyone else. This confidence arose from examining every story about Jackson and after finding nothing incriminating there we have moved on to explore the unchartered waters and the subjects of our interest now are somewhat bewildering to the uninitiated – like the role of a certain Victor Gutierrez or David Geffen in Michael Jackson’s fate, for example.

So the main difference between us is that we know everything they know, while they don’t have even a fraction of our knowledge. They think they possess some precious insiders’ information and do not understand that we have already dissected their knowledge into a million pieces and have discarded it all after examining it several times over, and are far ahead of these people now. So far ahead that it is actually a bore to go over it again and again.

However I will still make a comment on an issue that needs clarification and further research and is actually what our Friend started with.

Producer: Geffen came on to Michael and got turned down? Well, that’s funny, considering before Michael had a taste for more dubious activities, he had a taste for men. I know of several men who can be reliably stated to have dated Michael, Jehovah Witness-ism to the contrary.

VMJ: Several men reliably stated it? If Scott Thorson is one of those highly reliable people here is a post about this character. As regards the opinion of Hollywood at large, our Friend should know better than others that there are no reliable sources in Hollywood – everyone lies there and everyone repeats someone else’s false story.

And this isn’t just my opinion – it is a statement of the Los Angeles Magazine that presented it as an indisputable fact in its March 2004 issue:

Blanca Francia’s Testimony Revisited: STRANGE CONNECTIONS

The previous post about Blanca Francia introduced you to psychologist Mike Craft, who started working with Blanca and her son Jason within a state-run program for molested children even before Jason was first interviewed by the police and recalled the three alleged tickling episodes. You also learned about attorney Terry Cannon, who reached a settlement with Michael Jackson’s lawyers on behalf of the Francia family.

Both Mike Craft and Terry Cannon surprised me by the time they appeared in Blanca Francia’s orbit.

Diane Dimond writes that the state-sponsored therapy program run by Mike Craft was arranged for Jason after his mother’s interview with the police (September 1993) and this means that the program had begun even before Jason complained about anything at all (in March ’94) and even before he first met with the police (on November 3, 1993).

Mike Craft is a marriage and family counselor. He set up his office in 1992. The number of staff is 1 (one).

If Jason Francia’s so-called therapy by Mike Craft indeed started before he recalled any tickling by MJ, it changes our perception of the situation around Michael Jackson in the most dramatic way.

As to attorney Terry Cannon he stunned me by entering the picture already at Jason Francia’s second police interview on March 24, 1994. This date didn’t jibe with the official version either as we were told that the negotiations over a settlement began only in late ’94/early ’95 after all dust in the Chandler case had settled.

These inexplicable shifts in the timeline were a curious twist to the story and demanded attention. What I found was a sensation that was lying almost on the surface.

Blanca Francia’s Testimony Revisited: THE TIMELINE

The promise to cover the remaining parts of ‘Leaving Neverland’ horror movie will be certainly kept, but before that we need to finish with the Blanca and Jason Francia’s story which is also a very big subject that has secrets of its own.

And I am not only talking about Blanca’s so-called evidence regarding Wade Robson that was handled in one of the previous posts – there are a lot of other interesting details that will open up to you if you really look.

Blanca Francia

This post will be about some of those secrets, but first here is a short reminder of what we found earlier about Blanca’s tale regarding Wade Robson.

Some excerpts from her 1993/94 deposition, posted on the internet only recently, made it clear that the story of ‘the former maid seeing Michael in a shower with little Wade Robson’ is a myth dispelled by her own depositions which took place just three years after the alleged event.

It turned out that she had seen only one figure in Michael Jackson’s shower – that of Michael himself. She only assumed that someone else could be there because his figure was blurred and half seen through the fogged glass, and she heard him give a little he-he-he giggle which made her think that he was talking to someone, though there were no other voices heard.

She also assumed that Wade Robson was in the shower as the boy was not in MJ’s room and she saw him and Michael Jackson together later in the day. But nothing was seen or heard in that bathroom – all of it was just a play of her vivid imagination.

Great as this discovery was, more awaited us when we learned that the alleged event  took place in December 1989 which dotted the i’s and crossed the t’s – by that time the Robsons had not even arrived in the US yet as their first visit to Neverland was only in February 1990.

So regardless of Robson’s claims, the described scene has nothing to do with him and we can forget about Robson for now.

A little more research brought us the name of the boy who really stayed at Neverland at the time specified by Blanca Francia – that of Ryan White, an AIDS victim whose condition was already so bad that he died just four months later, in April 1990.

Ryan White, aged 18 meets Ronald and Nancy Reagan. This is his last public appearance [March 1990]

Though being already 18 years old Ryan White looked very young, small and no older than 12, and could be easily taken by Blanca Francia for a ‘little’ friend of Michael Jackson.

And if she made her assumptions about that boy, any ideas about a joint shower with him will be completely crazy considering his disease, because at that time people were afraid of even sitting beside an AIDS victim, not to mention going to a shower or a bathtub with an infected person.

However another astonishing fact we know about Michael Jackson is that he wanted to go to a Jacuzzi with Ryan White.

When speaking to Larry King, Michael’s dermatologist Arnold Klein said that Michael asked him if going in a Jacuzzi with Ryan would be safe and didn’t pose a threat to him. He asked Dr. Hoefflin too, and Hoefflin strongly advised him against it, while Klein said it was okay.

But why did Michael want to do it for Ryan White?

He wanted to show the boy that he wasn’t a pariah and that at least Michael wasn’t afraid of him. Michael’s heart always went out to the weak and he wanted Ryan to feel normal and no different from others. He wanted to set him at his ease and acted like there was nothing extraordinary in taking a Jacuzzi with an infected person though everyone around shunned him like the plague.

In case Michael Jackson managed to realize his big plan and did take Ryan to a Jacuzzi during that visit, Blanca Francia could indeed see their wet swimming trunks on the floor (as she said she did) and Michael could indeed take a shower after that, right in the middle of the day.

As to Ryan White, after the Jacuzzi he would certainly go back to his guest unit to have a nap there – he was so frail that he regularly took a nap in the daytime to regain his strength.

For details of what Blanca Francia said during those 1993/94 depositions please go to this post. And if you want to learn more about Ryan White’s five-day stay at Neverland (in a guest unit by the way) in December ‘89 and see how he got acquainted with MJ at all, you can go to a separate page of this blog that will tell you about the two visits to Neverland described by Ryan White himself. He doesn’t mention the Jacuzzi, but if it did happen it could be only during his second visit to Neverland at Christmas 1989.

And we proceed to Blanca Francia’s numerous depositions that span the incredible period of nearly 25 years – this is how long every speck of dust around Michael was dissected by law enforcement, the media and his detractors.

Our goal is to see 1) what Blanca and Jason Francia testified to and what is true and false in their story 2) how their narrative progressed as time went by and 3) why and how Blanca reached a $2 mln. settlement agreement with MJ in connection with her son’s claims that he was tickled on three occasions within the five years they knew him.

A See-Through-Lies Manual on Orietta Murdock, Victor Gutierrez and Joy Robson

UPDATED

In the comments for one of this blog posts there are two short texts about little Wade Robson in Michael Jackson’s recording studio – one is Orietta Murdock’s statement from the Prosecution ‘Prior Bad Acts’ Motion for the 2005 trial and the other comes from Victor Gutierrez’s literary opus about Michael published in 1996.

For those who don’t know the above characters here is a reminder:  Orietta Murdock was Michael Jackson’s administrative assistant in September 1989–January 1991 and Victor Gutierrez is a pedophilia advocate who dogged Jackson since the late 80s, spread innumerable lies about him and who by Diane Dimond’s own admission, was the latter’s best source.

The stories by Murdock and Gutierrez are the usual kind – they are blatant lies about Michael Jackson and the only peculiar thing about them is that they are identical, though told by different people and at different times. My conclusion was that in the job of smearing Michael Jackson these two personas worked in close cooperation with each other, and Gutierrez was most probably the one with whom the false text originated.

The story proper was not analyzed as I thought that the proof of Murdock’s cooperation with a scumbag like Gutierrez was reason enough to immediately flash it down the toilet, but a reader left a comment to the effect that who told whom is a secondary matter as the basis of the story is true.

Indeed, who told whom doesn’t matter that much, but I am highly resentful of the idea that the basis of the story is true.  It is absolutely not true, though I understand why people fall into the fallacy of thinking that it is – if some elements sound familiar people get the impression that they know the general idea, and if a couple of details are real, they imagine that the whole of it is basically correct.

But clean and dirty waters are also basically the same as they share the same molecular structure, only one is safe to drink while the other will cause you sickness and even death. And the same goes for stories and information at large – though looking similar some of it is downright poisonous.

So it’s high time we realized that it is absolutely not enough to know the story ‘in general’ – this is only the illusion of knowledge and if you don’t know the story in full you may as well consider yourself ignorant of the matter.

HARD FACTS

Before we deal with the Gutierrez and Murdock lies the first thing to start with is establishing the hard facts of the story. And there can’t be a better source for the episodes described than Joy Robson, mother of Wade Robson. She testified to all that at the 2005 trial and her account can be trusted as even after her son’s U-turn against Jackson she hasn’t changed it and it is only her perception of some details that may be different now.

Blanca Francia’s Deposition BLASTS the Wade Robson Story

The name of Blanca Francia is now firmly associated with Wade Robson. She used to be the personal maid of Michael Jackson who later made controversial statements about him, while Robson insisted on Michael’s innocence for the first 30 years of his life, but since making his U-turn in 2013 is telling 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’s stories – Blanca Francia thinks that 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 that 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 latest deposition is available to us only in the bits and pieces put online by someone who (thankfully) bought those pages from the court reporter, but when you start reading the little we have, you will realize that even Robson’s graphic content is not as impressive as those few bits and pieces, as it fades in comparison with the discovery we make from Blanca’s latest contribution.

10 years of vindicating Michael Jackson

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 10^th 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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

How the TRUTH of “Chernobyl” Dumped the “Leaving Neverland” FAKE

“This is not a film about Michael Jackson. It’s about the Robsons and Safechucks and their encounters with Jackson,” said Dan Reed about his “Leaving Neverland” creation.

Following Reed’s example I will also say that this post is not about Michael Jackson – it is about the two filmmakers whose films are the complete opposites and the only common feature and drawback they share is that both were produced by HBO.

This common production platform is indeed a drawback because the superb accuracy of Craig Mazin’s  “Chernobyl” may lead people to believe that “Leaving Neverland” made by Dan Reed is up to the same standard of factual accuracy. And the glorious effect of one film may reflect on the other though these two films are actually like poles apart – Reed’s so-called documentary is a blatant fake while Craig Mazin’s dramatization movie, which even has some fictional characters, is still breathtakingly authentic and true to life.

Craig Mazin

And this is not to mention the fact that Craig Mazin’s work is up to the highest standards of journalistic and human ethics, while Dan Reed is even unaware of these words.

If you put these films side by side you will also suddenly realize that the tragic but simple truth is much more harrowing than even the most sophisticated and horrible lies.

„Leaving Neverland“ – after the dust has settled: Fiction and propaganda

Meanwhile Dan Reed’s „Leaving Neverland“ has aired in many countries and the dust has settled, presenting a clearer picture of the so-called documentary. The discrepancies and obvious lies in the fiction film have become visible, though not spread everywhere in the media, especially in the US. Apparently it is still not admissible for the mainstream media to talk about the contradictions and implausibilities in the film and explain why not all accusers of sexual abuse have to be believed.

Recently Helena and I have written on a post at the same time, and interestingly we found out that we have included the same topics in it without talking to each other. It showed us that we clearly have the same things on our mind and blindly can complement each other. Helena’s latest post is so important that I decided to add a few things which will corroborate her post and support her statements, especially regarding the propaganda and consensual love issues.
And I do it today on Michael’s acquittal day because in this trial in 2005 his innocence was proven, and Wade Robson had testified for this acquittal.

The ‘Leaving Neverland’ Fabrication Is Breeding A New Ideology

“Nothing binds you except your thoughts; nothing limits you except your fear;

and nothing controls you except your beliefs.”

Marianne Williamson

This post took much, much longer than expected (very sorry for that). When every new day uncovered more and more of Robson’s and Safechuck’s lies, but it still didn’t change anything, I will admit that it was somewhat disheartening to look for the truth.

In circumstances like these it felt like true facts are irrelevant, the feeling all too well known to me from other spheres of life, and it once again raised the question that constantly bothers me – what’s the point of telling people the truth if they prefer lies anyway? Is there a need for facts if all that matters is “who says what” and the impression it produces?

SAFECHUCK’S TRAIN STATION

Safechuck, for example, said that when he was a boy he allegedly “had sex” with MJ at many places at Neverland, including the second floor of the train station where it “happened every day”. The impression produced by his monotonous description of the alleged offense, his detached manner and a weird smile was indescribable:

SAFECHUCK: “At the train station, there’s a room upstairs, and we would have sex up there, too. It would happen every day. It sounds sick, but it’s kind of like when you’re first dating somebody, right, and you do a lot of it. (Chuckles.) So it was very much like that.

Now we know that every word in this story is fiction as the train station was built two years after the alleged relationship stopped, but when you say it to Oprah Winfrey she will answer you that the two years discrepancy is no problem – it doesn’t matter if “it was Wednesday or Thursday” as victims can simply forget.

“Leaving Neverland” transcript. The 2nd half hour of LIES AND DISTORTION

The next half hour of the film contains even worse distortions of the timeline than the first one, and this makes it even clearer that Dan Reed is part and parcel of the Robson/ Safechuck scam project.

The problem is that in addition to the two guys’ lies Dan Reed deliberately paints the picture of “grooming” which was absolutely not the case if you know the real timeline. So in order to fill the void Dan Reed builds the suspense artificially – by editing the footage and manipulating the dates. The goal is to present Michael Jackson’s normal interaction with the families as something utterly calculating and sinister.

In reality Safechuck had very little communication with Michael Jackson – after their brief meeting during the December 1986 Pepsi commercial he saw him again only 8 months later, and that was only because he kept bombarding MJ with letters and the polite Michael finally invited them to dinner at Nevenhurst in early November 1987 (during a break between the two legs of his Bad tour).

And Robson didn’t see MJ for two years which passed between their first meet and greet in Australia and the family’s arrival in the US when they spent a whole week seeking out Michael Jackson and struggling to find his telephone number. Their further interaction was not that intense either – in 2005 Joy Robson testified that in 14 years she recalled only 4 occasions when Wade and Michael Jackson were together at Neverland. At all other times the Robsons were there without him.

So not only Dan Reed didn’t check the facts, but he also aggravated the two guys’ lies by artificially “intensifying” their friendship with MJ and creating a continuous story out of the few bits and pieces the two guys had.

“Leaving Neverland” transcript. The 1st half hour of LIES AND DISTORTION

If you are attentive enough when watching this film and if you compare it with the two guys’ lawsuits, you will realize that it is not only Robson, Safechuck and their relatives who lie there, but also director Dan Reed who is complicit, because he makes their lies sound even more sinister than they actually are.

You can’t help making this conclusion when you see the free and willful way he edits the footage and changes the timeline of the events to the point of no recognition.

Of course these lies could be initially presented to Dan Reed in their wrong succession, but a real documentary filmmaker should still do proper research, at least as regards the timeline of the events he wants to present in his story.

So what you will see in this series of posts is not only the analysis of the two guys’ lies, but also the role of the film director in making their story even worse than his two main characters actually tell it.

Below is the partial transcript of the first half hour of the film with some of its segments compared with the court documents and thus setting the timeline straight. In my opinion even if the events are falsely described they should still come in the right order, and not turn into a separate weird fantasy of the film director.

John Ziegler’s Podcast and True Journalism about ‘Leaving Neverland’

Here is another review of the social media on the ever-shrinking ‘Leaving Neverland’ movie by Dan Reed.

Why it is shrinking is because as soon as Michael Jackson fans spot another inconsistency and easily disproven lie Dan Reed cuts out the respective episode and the movie gets shorter and shorter, so what was originally 4 hours in the US is already 3 hours 15 min or less in other countries.

Jonathan Moffett (and Razorfist) say the following about it:

Here is an example how manipulative “Leaving Neverland” was in how it was presented & edited, leaving real FACTS out with only distorted truths presented out of context. This is UNETHICAL Dan Reed! #MichaelJackson  Full video here: https://youtu.be/zYx0vLfpRYY 

To know the latest news about the Leaving Neverland movie you need to follow Twitter where it is reported at a cosmic speed, so my intention to make a review about Twitter reactions to it had to be given up as the torrent of news there is too quick to grasp it all.

Fortunately, on March 17th John Ziegler made an amazing podcast called Fraud and Fakes with a review of the most significant events for the past week and a diagnosis of the deplorable condition of the mainstream news media that failed to notice blatant Robson/Safechuck’s lies and director Dan Reed’s open propaganda.

Below you will find the rough transcript of the ‘Leaving Neverland’ part of his podcast which will explain a couple of things to those people who still think that they can get their facts off a movie.

It will also contain an occasional tweet from MJ fans here and there.

So here is John Ziegler, the host of Free Speech podcast, speaking on March 17, 2019:

Insight-Oriented Therapy and Wade Robson’s Doctor Larry Shaw

Initially this post was titled “What you should know about insight-oriented therapy before you watch Leaving Neverland” and was to preempt that documentary movie airing on TV. However the first reviews after the Sundance film festival became a distraction and the post had to be put aside.

Now I wish it hadn’t been postponed as it deals with what seems to be the main problem in handling Robson and Safechuck’s stories – the fact that they look credible to some people and questions “how can they be so credible if they are not telling the truth?”

Well, the paradox is that they may look credible even if they are telling complete lies, and it isn’t only due to good acting, but for other reasons too.

As to their acting, it is actually not that good when seen by a professional and expert eye. In a recent video by a body analysis expert from Toronto Jiovanni Maccarrone who commented on Robson’s and Safechuck’s TV answers to the first uncomfortable question (about changing their testimony) after their debut on TV, the expert made a negative conclusion about both.

However irrespective of what you or anyone think of the two guys’ performance the focus of this post will be on a different matter – the fact that even when people tell outright lies like Robson and Safechuck do, there are psychological techniques commonly known as ‘insight therapy’ that help them believe their own lies and thus make them look much more credible in what they say.

Moreover, in the process of this ‘therapy’ the false accounts of some events may grow so detailed, elaborate and colorful, that the end result will impress the viewers even more.  Salvador Dali once famously said about it:

First Reviews of Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland: IT STARTS WITH A BIG LIE

The first week of March this year was packed with so many crucial events around the so-called documentary  “Leaving Neverland” that each of them demanded a post. However covering them all was impossible in principle, so I settled on a review of the main episodes in the battle between truth and lies suddenly imposed on the public by Michael Jackson haters.

Some important pieces of the battle may have been omitted and I apologize for it in advance – if something substantial was overlooked it may be added later, in the comments or as an update to the post.

What you will see here are mostly tweets and messages from various people who have seen the film. I myself saw about an hour of Dan Reed’s four-hour product and to my surprise was so unimpressed that even despite its graphic content managed to have a meal in the process. My comment will be minimal as the impression is not full, however my short review of the first part will also be here.

For a start this is what genuine survivors of child sexual abuse say about the film. 

Michael Jackson Fans Are Tenacious. ‘Leaving Neverland’ Has Them Poised for Battle, by THE NEW YORK TIMES – VMJ interviews

Recently Joe Coscarelli, the music reporter at the NY Times contacted the admins of this blog to say that he was interested in getting the perspective of MJ’s “most loyal fans, supporters and historians” on the documentary which none of us had yet seen by that moment.

Today, the day after the documentary has gone on air on HBO, Joe Coscarelli’s article has been published, quoting us together with other Michael Jackson’s advocates with whom the correspondent has evidently been in touch.

Since most of these bloggers are Americans I presume that their interviews must have been done over the phone, while we (Susanne and I) are foreigners who are absolutely not sure of our English speaking skills and this is why we submitted our replies in writing.

We certainly never expected the NY Times to give a full coverage of our ideas on the present situation around Michael Jackson, so for the readers of this blog to really know what “truthers” like us think about it,  here is both Joe Coscarelli’s piece and our written answers to him sent several days ago. 

WHAT THE MAID SAW. Adrian McManus tells her full story about Michael Jackson in its four variations

On February 24th the Australian 60 min TV program aired an interview with Adrian McManus who reemerged again on the wave of a new craze over the revised stories of Robson and Safechuck.

Following the latest fashion each time a certain detractor from Michael’s past reappears, it is usually with a much graver story than before and Ms. McManus is no exception here.

You can watch the Australian video and read its transcript at the end of this post, but before you hear the latest from McManus, it is an absolute must to know her previous saga and see her memory in its evolvement during the past two and a half decades.

The saga is huge, so prepare yourself for a long read. However I feel that it isn’t only Dan Reed who is entitled to a four-hour narration, especially since his story is solely about fake emotions, while mine is solely about facts and it isn’t my fault that McManus changed her story four times.  

The New Lynching of Michael Jackson: Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland, by Linda-Raven Woods

Linda-Raven Woods has published an excellent article about the recent highly questionable product by Dan Reed. Besides being a comprehensive overview of the situation around the film, the author also makes some very important points which I would also like to bring to people’s attention.

So here is just an excerpt from the article – for the full story please go to this source. 

The New Lynching of Michael Jackson: Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland May, In Fact, Leave Blood on Many Hands

By: Linda-Raven Woods

… The utter hypocrisy and witch hunt mentality with which the mainstream media has greeted this film is, ultimately, the most disturbing aspect of all. “Hit pieces” on public figures will come and go, and this has certainly been the case with Michael Jackson. But in this case, Leaving Neverland is a travesty that should never have been made.

Dan Reed claims that his movie is not about Michael Jackson, yet by his own admission the film would not have been made had it not been about Michael Jackson. Dan Reed owed it to the subject of his film to go beyond the surface of these allegations and to vet his sources. He owed it to the public legacy of Michael Jackson, to his orphaned children and elderly mother, to fully investigate the stories of Wade Robson and James Safechuck before committing them to film, and moreover, to examine and analyze all exculpatory evidence (of actual, inculpatory evidence, the film offers surprisingly none).

But just because the film was made does not mean we have to be obligated to embrace or enable it. That so many prominent journalists and media talking heads have displayed the willingness to accept this film blindly at face value, without raising the much needed questions that need to be asked about its veracity, is a bigger unforgiveable travesty than the film itself. But this is exactly what Dan Reed, HBO and Channel 4 are counting on, that the current zeitgeist of MeToo and its “don’t question victims” mentality will create the tunnel vision needed to willfully blind viewers.

Dan Reed and Richard Plepler, as well as the executives of Channel 4, are certainly not naïve. They knew that this was the kind of smear campaign that would result from their film. It has been a carefully orchestrated strategy from the outset, with the clear end goal of diminishing the lucrative power of Michael Jackson’s brand. The logic and obvious modus operandi remains the same as it has been for Robson and Safechuck from the outset: To force a shakedown for the Michael Jackson Estate.

The very nature of Dan Reed’s hypocrisy can be seen first hand. In a recent interview with Independent, Reed claims to have been “disgusted” by the letter from the Michael Jackson Estate to HBO that clearly broke down the many, varied reasons why Robson’s and Safechuck’s litigations did not hold up in court, claiming, “What would the Jackson estate have to say about what happened in a hotel room in Paris, in 1988, between James and Jackson? Nothing. They weren’t there.”

Yet, by that same logic, Dan Reed proceeds within the same interview to state unequivocally of Jackson, He hurt a lot of people. He was cruel. He was vicious.” But Dan Reed, like the Michael Jackson Estate, was not there! Dan Reed was not in those hotel rooms in Paris, either. Dan Reed did not know Michael Jackson. He never met him, and never met Robson or Safechuck until 2017. Yet he has proceeded to weave a one-sided hit piece based on the reality he wishes to sell.

Read more on medium.com

 

WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW before watching ‘Leaving Neverland’

When you hear reviews of the “Leaving Neverland” film all they tell you is that the two guys are “incredibly credible”, the film is “powerful”, and their only reply to your questions about its objectivity is “watch the film first.” This makes you realize that this movie relies solely on people’s emotions meant to outweigh the voice of reason and inconvenient questions like “Where is the evidence?” and “Why should we believe their current and not previous opposite version?”

Indeed, when emotions are involved it doesn’t really matter that it is a one-sided story and the film is no real journalism. It doesn’t matter that the filmmaker Dan Reed didn’t attempt to hear the other side or do even minimal research, and that it is the twelveth version of their story that you currently hear. When you see someone’s tears and emotions what other evidence do you need? The struggles of those guys look so real, that it will not even occur to viewers to doubt them.

No one will recall that Michael Jackson was also friends with an AIDS victim Ryan White for whom Michael bought a car and with whom he purposefully took a jacuzzi in order to boost the boy’s self-esteem and reassure him that at least Michael Jackson didn’t consider him a pariah.

Ryan White and Michael Jackson

No one will recall his other friend, a heavily scarred boy Dave Dave burnt be kerosene by his own father and whose face was so painful a sight that only Michael was capable of kissing and hugging the boy.

Michael Jackson and Dave Dave, a burn victim

The problem is that when you watch a four-hour fantasy saga, say The Star Wars or The Lord of the Rings, you forget everything else. The powerful story takes you away into its imaginary world, after which its scenes and characters imprint in your memory so hard that they look almost real. Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson will be forever remembered as Harry Potter and Hermione though some may forget their real names and some will think they never had any.

The movies hypnotic ability to grip your mind greatly assisted Robson and Safechuck in playing their role of “victims” which was also enhanced by the film non-conventional presentation at the Sundance festival. I hear there was a violin playing when the two characters came on stage… A violin, guys, which accompanied their story from a so-called documentary though even the name of this genre suggests that it should be based solely on document and fact.

However it is exactly fact which this documentary lacks. What it presents is the tales of two guys who changed their stories into their opposites and who are now shedding tears worth a hundred million each (the sums wanted by them from the MJ Estate) as well as complex emotions of their relatives who initially believed their first version and now no longer know what to believe.

In 2011 Wade Robson was still imploring Cirque du Soleil to give him the job of directing the Michael Jackson tribute show, saying: ”I am passionate to do this show. I want to make it amazing for me, for you, for Cirque and of course, for Michael”. 

The Michael Jackson Estate Slams HBO and Radar Online for Breach of Journalistic Ethics

These days something new regarding the “Leaving Neverland” mockumentary arrives by the hour, so Howard Weitzman’s superb letter to HBO made on February 7, 2019 is already ‘old news.’

HBO in the US, same as Channel 4 in the UK refused to make any changes in their programme, but there are no surprises here – what else could you expect from those who ordered the show and paid for it in the first place?

The very least their reply did was opening the eyes of many to the true worth of these channels.

But our job is to collect facts and from this point of view Howard Weitzman’s letter is another big step towards getting the real picture. It provides details that were previously unknown or were overlooked by us, so before we examine them let me just reprint the letter in its entirety with an addition of a couple of Brett Barnes’ tweets.

For the sake of history, so to say.

The only comment I will allow myself at the moment is drawing your attention to a point in Mr. Weiztman’s letter where he says that both guys were seeking hundreds of millions of dollars against the Estate, at least at the initial stage of their lawsuits.

Hundreds of millions each.

• “Given that they were both seeking hundreds of millions of dollars against the Estate, they had hundreds of millions of reasons for aligning their stories.”

These figures are not in the claimants’ civil lawsuits and are not to be found there at all as the sum is usually pronounced by the lawyers for the Plaintiffs. This is just information for those who are wondering why the lawsuits don’t name the sum of $1,5 billion, earlier reported by some media.

The lawsuits don’t mention the hundreds of millions demanded by each guy either.

Please don’t overlook this important point while you are reading the letter from Howard Weitzman, Michael Jackson’s Estate laywer.

Sundance Festival Co-founder Admits to Child Molestation in Early 90s

His name is Sterling Van Wagenen, and in the avalanche of information snowballing since the Sudance festival announced a fake documentary about Michael Jackson, we are amazed to learn that back in the 90s the co-founder of the Sundance festival admitted to the police and his religious leader that he had molested a 10-year old boy.

The boy, now a grown-up, comes from a family belonging to the Mormon community in Utah where Sterling Van Wagenen is still playing a prominent role. Currently he is a professor and lecturer at Utah University and is a film producer who also makes videos for the LDS endowment ceremony (LDS is the short for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons).

The amazing news comes from Ryan McKnight, who just several days ago (on February 4, 2019) published his story on The Truth & Transparency Foundation, a website authored by two ex-Mormons who also founded Mormon Leaks.

A short summary of Ryan McKnight’s research is reported by kutv.com. Here are some excerpts from it: