If the Lifetime movie and subsequent CBS/Gayle King interview left you soured on singer R. Kelly, then the HBO docudrama LEAVING NEVERLAND must have you musically suicidal over the late King of Pop, Michael Jackson.
Entertainment
In case you’re unfamiliar, LEAVING NEVERLAND is the very new film from HBO telling the very old story of Michael Jackson and his alleged affinity for young boys. This time, the story is told by Wade Robson and James Safechuck — 2 former young friends who were once in Jackson’s orbit but are now in their late 30’s and early 40’s and coming forward with information that he allegedly engaged in a sexual relationship with each of them while they were kids.
Although LEAVING NEVERLAND is emotionally gripping and was extremely well done, here is the problem with the movie and with the story from the men: WHY NOW AND NOT THEN??
When Michael Jackson was alive and stood trial for alleged pedophilia, both Robson and Safechuck each testified that although their friendship with the adult Jackson may have appeared strange on the surface, it was pure and NEVER sexual. In fact, Robson was the star witness for the defense and is credited to this day with providing the testimony that acquitted the King of Pop of any wrongdoing.
So, why now? Why did these men testify under oath with one story nearly 15 years ago, then admit perjury and make a total and complete change to their claims all these years later??
Michael Jackson was acquitted in 2005 and later died in 2009. Since then, his legacy has been celebrated as the G.O.A.T. (Greatest of All Time) and his music sales have soared into the stratosphere — until now.
With this very “new” take from LEAVING NEVERLAND regarding very “old” claims, the sensitivity of the general public has suddenly soured. People have actually started throwing their MJ music in the trash. Radio stations have instantly stopped playing his music. The Michael Jackson Cirque de Soleil show in Las Vegas has been bombarded with ticket cancellations and calls for the show to shut down.
These extremely intense reactions are all because a very old story has been revisited. Oh, and because 2 men who told one story then but are telling another story now that they’ve been given a new platform to speak.
“‘Leaving Neverland’ isn’t a documentary, it is the kind of tabloid character assassination Michael Jackson endured in life, and now in death,” the Jackson estate said in a statement.
Their words couldn’t be truer.
Michael Jackson was tried in a court of law and ACQUITTED. If he were alive today, US laws against “double jeopardy” would prevent him from being tried again for the same charge. However, that is exactly what is happening to him now in death.
Michael Jackson is no longer alive to defend himself against these charges. So, in theory, it’s as if he is being charged “double jeopardy” now for a case that has long since been decided and closed. Is that really fair?
“People are being asked to grapple with trauma, actual harm, inflicted on living human beings by a dead man who is not merely beloved. He was unparalleled. It is, for many people a heavy, heavy lift to even consider muting Michael Jackson or changing the way we think about him to include predator. Unlike an R. Kelly, Michael was an iconic global figure. There is no one like him.” – Mark Anthony Neal, professor of African and African-American studies, Duke University
The court of public opinion has allowed the film LEAVING NEVERLAND to present an uncontested one-sided case since Michael Jackson is no longer able to present any defense. Except, the court of public opinion has decided that even though a verdict was already rendered in this case 15 years ago and that we’ve all been dancing to and enjoying his music ever since, this same old case deserves a new verdict based solely on the tales of 2 men who admitted they lied then but want us all to believe them now.
If this isn’t the assassination of an already deceased man, then it’s a money/attention grab from someone who can no longer defend themselves in death.
Since individual lawsuits from Robson and Safechuck against the (now very lucrative) Michael Jackson estate were each thrown out of court, does anyone see why this movie with these men at this time could be setting the stage for an appeal?
The R. Kelly case is about someone who is still alive and (allegedly) continuing to engage in unlawful acts with minors in new cases that have yet to make it to a courtroom. However, the Michael Jackson case is over, decided and done — yet here we are still trying it in public.
If we are truly a society of the mindset to throw away the music of a deceased legend and actively participate in the tainting of a legacy, then it’s time to start publicly treating Jerry Lee Lewis (who married his 13-year-old cousin) and Elvis Presley (who met 14-year old Priscilla Beaulieu, moved her into his home, then married her) the same.
Are we still outraged?
.
The R. Kelly case is about someone who is still alive and (allegedly) continuing to engage in unlawful acts with minors in new cases that have yet to make it to a courtroom. However, the Michael Jackson case is over, decided and done — yet here we are still trying it in public. […] -DJ
Well I have to be very careful here NOT to allow my own childhood history to render my opinion biased and therefore meaningless. I pray, always, “Lord please guide me to SEE and ACCEPT the truth, though painful it may sometimes be.”
My beloved grandmother (now deceased) used to say: “The truth is The Truth anyhow.” “No lie can live forever.”