Sure, the judicial system has its fair share of problems corrupt cops and judges, biased juries, and prejudice against people without money (not to mention people of colour) but this system however flawed is what we have and we’re supposed to wait for it to determine guilt (after the presenting of evidence) before we label someone a criminal.
Leaving neverland debunked free#
In any democratic, free society, we have to let the police investigators and the court system deal with accusations, we have to allow the law to take its course.
There shouldn’t even be the concept of a “trial by media” but these days that’s exactly what we have and we let it overpower and subdue the rule of law. On the basis of “there’s no smoke without fire” the rumour or claim tarnishes the accused as soon as an accuser appears on the scene, without even a shred of evidence, the mainstream media then sync their opinions and broadcast it to the masses knowing full-well that their viewpoint is generally accepted. In contemporary society the media has slowly created certain crimes (terrorism, paedophila, and more recently male to female sexual assault) which automatically assumes guilt.
When it comes to any allegation, we aren’t supposed to react to it emotionally without listening to the evidence, judging someone based solely on the severity of the accusation. Watching an overly-long documentary preceded by a slew of celebrities and media pundits feeding the public a pre-decided response isn’t how we go about dealing with accusations, especially ones this serious. Most people’s reaction to the documentary Leaving Neverland was swayed by mass peer pressure. The Jackson family has filed a lawsuit against HBO and are considering suing Robson and Safeschuck.By What Went Wrong Or Right With.? on Ma tabloid The Mirror.įiddes, who now heads up a multi-million dollar global fitness company, called the allegations against Jackson “nonsense.” Jackson’s former personal bodyguard Matt Fiddes, who worked for Jackson for ten years until his 2009 death said in an interview with the BBC that the documentary left out that Safechuck and co-accuser Wade Robson have launched lawsuits against Jackson’s estate - which potentially could see them cashing in on their claims, according to the U.K. Smallcombe is not the only one questioning the accuracy of Leaving Neverland. This is what happens when you don’t investigate properly. Just hold your hands up, don’t change the story. So is now saying because the story has been debunked, suddenly the end of Safechuck’s abuse was when he was 16/17 rather than 14. READ MORE: ‘Leaving Neverland’ director outraged by stars defending Michael Jackson: ‘It’s horrific’ But in interviews and in his lawsuit against the Jackson estate, Safechuck claimed that he was abused for four years until the age of 14 – which would fall between 19. This week, Smallcombe even tweeted an image of the construction permit issued by Santa Barbara County in September 2, 1993, which states Neverland station was not opened until 1994. However, Jackson biographer, Mike Smallcombe, has now come forward to point out the abuse couldn’t have taken place in that location because the station wasn’t even built until two years after Safechuck says the the abuse ended.
READ MORE: Diana Ross defends Michael Jackson despite ‘Leaving Neverland’ fallout The director of the controversial Leaving Neverland documentary is now conceding that one claim made by one of Michael Jackson’s alleged victims may be inaccurate.Īccording to the Daily Mail, in the polarizing HBO special that premiered last month, James Safechuck - who is widely considered the most credible and damaging accuser against the pop icon - described in detail how he was sexually assaulted in Jackson’s Neverland train station.
0 kommentar(er)
