'Leaving Neverland' documentary is a hoax.

So when it comes to those 'child sex abuse' and 'pedophilia' charges against the late Michael Jackson, I thought that we were more or less done with them. I thought that the matter had been settled and that we wouldn't have to hear from these cases anymore.

Unfortunately, even though Jackson was found not guilty against these charges in the 2005 'Arvizo' trial, that hasn't stopped the media from going after him. They still think that he was a terrible person and that his reputation needs to be buried at any cost.

Not surprisingly, when it comes to this latest hit piece, in 'Leaving Neverland', the filmmakers aren't even pretending to be fair anymore. They don't care whether the accusations (by Wade Robson & James Safechuck) are even remotely true or have merit.

So below I managed to compile the biggest lies, omissions and contradictions that have to do with 'Leaving Neverland'. I picked them up from the 4 hour documentary, the 1 hour Oprah interview and other interviews with the 'cast' and the director.

Claims vs. Reality (The Director)

*In an interview promoting the documentary, the director of the film (Dan Reed) claims the neither Wade Robson or James Safechuck have anything to gain from this documentary. Since neither got paid from starring in the film, they have no reason to lie.

In reality though, the duo Robson & Safechuck has a 1.5 billion dollar civil lawsuit against Michael Jackson's estate. They have tried unsuccessfully to sue the estate since 2013 (two cases have been thrown out, third one is on appeal currently). 

*The director also claims that Robson and Safechuck didn't talk with each other before or during the making of the film (so that they could coordinate their stories). The first time they met was during the film's premiere at Sundance festival.

In reality though, even Wade Robson admits that he spent time with Safechuck (an undisclosed amount of time) between 2013-2014. Both of them are represented by the same law firm, which makes it obvious that they're working as a team.

Claims vs. Reality (Wade Robson)

*In the film Robson claims that he was raped by Jackson hundreds of times over the course of several years (circa 1989 to 1995). The sexual assaults allegedly started the very first day that he to managed get in touch with him.

In reality though, Wade Robson's mother says they met Jackson at Neverland ranch only 4 times over the years. Robson also has no recollection of these early meetings with Jackson (revealed in the court ordered emails that he sent to his mother).

*Robson, (like Safechuck) claims that when they hit their puberty as kids, they both were replaced by Macaulay Culkin and Brett Barnes as sex slaves. Jackson simply dumped them (R & S) and found new victims that he would start abusing.

In reality though, both Culkin and Barnes are adamant that nothing improper ever happened to them. Even though they both slept in the same bed with Jackson dozens of times, Jackson never abused them (Culkin's 2005 trial testimony, Barnes' twitter feed 2019).

In the Oprah interview, Robson has two obvious 'tells' when it comes to his body language. The moment he says he's telling the truth, he covers his mouth (a sign of lying) and when asked whether it's all about money, he touches his nose (another sign of lying).

Let's not forget that Robson publicly denied these allegations at least a half a of dozen times since 1993 (including the Jimmy Kimmel interview). He testified in the 2005 trial on behalf of Jackson, which included a cross-examination by the prosecution.

Furthermore, it needs to be mentioned that Robson filed a lawsuit in 2012 almost right away after he ran into financial troubles and had a mental breakdown. (in his court ordered diary he writes that 'he's a master of deception')

Claims vs. Reality (James Safechuck & family)

*In the film, James Safechuck claims that from late 1988 to early 1992, Jackson raped him dozens of times, starting during the Bad tour in France. He includes a specific claim about being raped after the 1989 Grammy awards where Jackson performed.

However, 1) during the Chandler investigation in 1993 James Safechuck (at age 15) gave a declaration under oath that he had never been sexually abused by Jackson. 2) Contrary to what Safechuck claims, Jackson didn't even go to the Grammy's in 1989.

*In the documentary film, Safechuck's mother tells how she celebrated Jackson's death in  2009. When she saw the news after waking up, she jumped in joy and danced knowing that Jackson wouldn't be able to sexually abuse her son anymore.

However, in the same documentary James Safechuck tells that he didn't tell anyone that he was sexually abused until 2013. Unless Safechuck's mother used a time machine, she's clearly lying and is part of a conspiracy).

*In the documentary, James Safechuck makes the claim that during the late stages of the 'Arvizo' trial (in 2005), Jackson called him and demanded him to testify in the trial. Safechuck would have to testify or else he would be in trouble and go to jail.

In reality though, the reason that this claim is impossible because the judge in the trial had already decided that Safechuck would not testify. He was declared 'a non entity', so Jackson had no reason to call him since it would have made no difference.

*It also needs to be said that like in the case with Robson, the accusations started immediately after the Safechuck family ran into financial troubles in 2013. (They were sued for conspiracy, which led to them losing their business in 2016).

Conclusions about the case

In the end, when it all is said and done, if you're one those who watched 'Leaving Neverland' and thought that the documentary was compelling, I can't really blame you. If you didn't know about the case before, you're almost bound to think that it's based on facts.

After all, especially when it comes to the film's gruelingly long length (4 hours or so), the graphic descriptions of these alleged acts and the fact that the accusers' wives make Robson & Safechuck seem relatable and believable, you might get fooled.

At the same time, when it comes to the actual truth in the case, for someone who has researched these allegations over the years, it's clear that the film is not truthful. It's clear that those involved with the documentary are lying and trying to pull off a hoax here.

In that sense, we can only hope that in the near future the surviving Jackson family members will come up with their own documentary. We can only hope that they have the energy, the will power and the means to challenge this film.

After all, even though Michael Jackson wasn't a perfect person, he clearly deserves better than this. He deserves better than a film that doesn't care about the truth and that lets every lie, omission and contradiction go completely unchecked and unchallenged in it.