Why is Everyone Ignoring Michael Jackson’s FBI report?
I’m a lifelong fan of Michael Jackson. Have been for years. I love MJ so much, I even introduced him to my son, who’s still trying to grasp why he looked one way in one year (Thriller) but completely different in another year (This Is It). I’ll explain it to him when he’s old enough.
Never mind my parenting duties, as much of a fan I am of MJ’s, I also followed the numerous child molestation allegations against him over the years. Admittedly, I can say once the 2004 allegations came up, I began thinking just like many people, ‘Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.’
Let’s face it; it’s natural to think that when someone is accused of something several times, they’ve probably done said action. Bill Cosby and R. Kelly come to mind. However, unlike the aforementioned entertainers, Michael Jackson was never convicted of any crime nor was there any evidence that could directly link him to any crime, say like a sex tape.
Of course, I have to mention the two multimillion dollar settlements his insurance company paid to two families on allegations. I repeat, Michael Jackson’s insurance company paid those settlements, not Jackson himself.
Yet, the thought of the world’s most famous and recognizable entertainer was capable of doing such henious acts against children has haunted Michael in his shortened life and now in his death.
MJ was acquitted in 2005 and unexpectedly died in 2009. On the ten-year anniversary of his death, a damning documentary came out from two men who claimed MJ molested them for years.
As I refused to watch the documentary because I know a cash grab when I see one, I couldn’t help but wonder — why is everyone ignoring the FBI report on MJ that cleared him?
When Jackson was accused of molesting Jordan Chandler back in 1993, the FBI was immediately called to assist with the investigation. They searched Neverland, took pictures of Jackson’s genitalia, interviewed former and then-current employees of Neverland, spoke to friends, colleagues, and even Jackson’s nephews, who the National Enquirer famously (and erroneously) wrote they were molested by their uncle.
The FBI’s conclusion? No evidence of wrongdoing.
So, let’s fast-forward to 2004, when Jackson is accused yet again, and the FBI is once again called to assist the investigators. And once again, they found no evidence of wrongdoing.
This is where it gets interesting: Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon received a copy of said FBI report and still pursued criminal charges against Jackson. The question why he did remains a mystery.
After a lengthy trial, Jackson is acquitted. Several jurors were recently interviewed and they said they would acquit him again.
Now, the FBI report has been made public and has been public for the past 10 years. Yet, only Jackson fans seem to know of its existence. The media and several famous who have blindly come to the support of the two accusers, either don’t know of its existence or are choosing to ignore it.
I am convinced that the media plays a role in shaping what type of news gets filtered to the consumer. I’ve known this for a long time prior to the documentary, but now I’m certain of it. Not one media outlet has mentioned the report. Not even those celebrities who have spoken out in defense of Jackson have mentioned it.
Yet, the FBI report goes against any claims of child molestation Jackson could have done. If the FBI monitored this man and investigated every claim against him, why are people still insistent he was guilty?
If there’s smoke, where’s the fire?
One has to reason, if the FBI was closely watching this man for a long time, one has to think a lot of surveillance had to have taken place — tapped phones, bugged hotel rooms, Jackson’s daily schedule, who he met with, who he hung out with, etc.
I’m sure those who have closely worked with Michael Jackson when the alleged abuse took place could say what he was doing at certain times. If he was recording, touring, rehearsing, and traveling, all of that should be logged somewhere.
If we were to believe the claims of the Leaving Neverland participants, well, the question remains — why didn’t the FBI catch any of that? The FBI back then isn’t the FBI now.
The FBI’s history with famous black people is a rather storied one. Black people who are famous or are activists have been known to have dossiers and surveillance opened on them. It is still an ongoing issue.
When a black celebrity is accused of a crime, the media paints them in a very different picture than a white celebrity. When Ryan Lochte lied about being robbed during the 2016 Olympics, the U.S. media painted him a kid, despite being over 30 years old at that point. When Jussie Smollett is accused of lying about his hate crime, the media slammed him.
I mention these cases to show how obsessive the media can be in destroying one life, while giving the, ‘Awe shucks! He didn’t mean it!’ to another. Sometimes, race does matter.
Furthermore, the participants of Leaving Neverland have been caught in a multitude of lies and even one lie should make everyone question the integrity of their allegations. It seems people love to give due process to everyone else but are rather certain Michael Jackson is guilty.
I have my own biased opinion of why Leaving Neverland is so popular — in the wake of the #metoo movement, the media wants to hear about victims and villanize anyone accused/alleged of wrongdoing. While the #metoo movement has given an ear to those who were victims, it has also paved the way for liars and opportunists to ruin someone’s life.
Each time there’s a sex scandal, the media is focused more on the person accusing than wanting to hear what the accused has to say. The media is built where one would automatically think if someone is accusing someone of a heinous crime, well, there’s no way they’re lying. Why would anyone be so graphic about a lie?
It reminds me of a most recent scandal involving Chris Brown. For the record, I’m not excusing his behavior nor am I a Chris Brown fan. A woman accused him of rape and he was arrested for it. The woman even went into detail as to what happened and had a pretty disturbing recount about it.
Media proclaimed he was guilty because of his past issues with women. Social media instantly turned on him.
I’m a fiction writer and I can say firsthand, I lie for a living. It’s very easy to create a world with characters, scenes, and dialogue. I can create what someone looks like, what they’re wearing, even down to the type of manicure and cologne they have. It’s why a lot of fiction books are so popular because people can get lost into reading them.
I have to mention that because I want to show how easy it is to create an entire lie, scenarios, and conversations. The terms “revisionist history” and “alternative facts” come to mind.
So, the natural question is: Why would anyone lie about being molested by the most famous superstar in the world?
The obvious answer is money. Jackson’s estate is worth nearly a billion dollars, if not over.
Not to mention another undeniable interest: there are people who want Michael Jackson to be guilty of child molestation. They want Brett Barnes to come forward. They’re anxiously awaiting Macaulay Culkin to reveal his trauma. They think Corey Feldman, who has previously said he was molested by those who are more powerful, well-known, and most importantly, are still alive, is lying.
I’m not putting Jackson on some sort of throne. The fact he had sleepovers was not good look, no matter how innocent they were or how much the parents were involved at the time. I understand he wanted to be as accessible to children as possible because he didn’t have a childhood. I also understand Michael didn’t realize how bad the sleepovers looked to the outside looking in.
Nevertheless, Jackson’s tunnel-vision of what he thought was innocent does not indicate he was doing illegal and heinous acts with children.
I implore everyone to read the FBI files. They’re about 400 pages long and some of is redacted and repeated, so you might be skipping quite a bit. And then decide for yourself:
Did the FBI get it wrong on the most famous black superstar in the world? Or did people go after Jackson for more sinister reasons?