With the controversy and uproar that Leaving Neverland caused, it was only a matter of time until fans of Jackson fought back, and released their own so-called documentaries to rebuff claims that Michael Jackson was a serial child molester.
One of the first to appear on YouTube was a 30 minute documentary called: “Neverland Firsthand: Investigating the Michael Jackson Documentary”, which is directed by a guy called Eli Pedraza, who bizarrely bears a strong resemblance to children’s character, Where’s Wally.
Despite all the criticism aimed at Leaving Neverland, specifically for not interviewing any third-party sources outside of James and Wade’s family, this pro-Jackson documentary does exactly the same, and only interviews those who want to paint a very positive picture of Jackson.
Outside of the fan community, the documentary wasn’t particularly met with positive reviews, with the Telegraph calling it a “ludicrous rebuttal strictly for the truthers” and gave it 1 star out of 5.
The documentary sets the tone that Jackson was a victim of extortion by regurgitating the spliced Anthony Pellicano audiotape of Evan Chandler and Dave Schwartz, while making no mention that the recording was part of a much larger conversation, of which money nor extortion was ever mentioned.
Just before the three-minute mark, the documentary tries to tackle the issue of the huge multi-million dollar settlement that Jordan Chandler received in 1994, after he accused Michael Jackson of molesting him. Why would an “innocent” man pay such a large sum of money is the question? That’s simple, Michael Jackson didn’t pay it, it was his insurance company, claims private investigator Scott Ross, who was part of Michael Jackson’s 2005 defence team.
His exact words are: "the money that was paid out to Jordan Chandler didn't come from Michael Jackson, it came from his insurance company. Have you ever had a car accident, and you say… but it wasn't my fault? The insurance company doesn't give a shit. They make a decision, and they do what they want to do. Everybody's going, but if he didn't do this… why is he paying this family $20 million? He didn't do it, the insurance company did."
We even see a screenshot within the documentary:
The myth that a mystery insurance company paid the multi-million dollar settlement, rather than Jackson himself, is a bit of a strange one, because during negotiations in 93/94, neither side ever claimed this, nor was there any indication that Jackson had been prevented from defending himself. In fact, Jackson’s signature is on the confession of judgment where he agrees to pay Jordan Chandler $15.3 million.
The insurance settlement claim started just before the 2005 trial, and was perpetuated by long-term Jackson family lawyer, Brian Oxman, who ironically was disbarred for “dishonest and unethical conduct” in 2012.
Rather than repeat what’s already out there, MJFacts.con has a great article concerning this, including how Thomas Mesereau, the very man that Scott Ross worked for, agrees no insurance company was involved in the 1994 settlement.
Link: mjfacts.com/insurance/
Anyway, let’s move on to Brandi Jackson who features in the documentary and boldly claims that she had an alleged relationship with Wade Robson for over 7 years, after meeting in 1991 when she was roughly 9 or 10 years old.
This alleged relationship has been heavily used by herself, and her cousin Taj Jackson to discredit Wade Robson’s allegations in both his civil complaint and Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland.
Exactly why the alleged relationship would discredit Wade’s allegations doesn’t add up, as firstly, Wade, nor any other boy alleged that Jackson molested them in front of others, and secondly Wade, Brandi and Jackson probably never spent more than one night together in the same room (more on that later).
According to Brandi Jackson Wade had developed a crush on her, and asked her uncle if he would arrange a situation so they could get to know each other. Jackson did this and they both met together at Neverland Ranch along with Wade’s family where after a week, Wade asked her to be his girlfriend. She said yes.
Brandi Jackson certainly impresses in the documentary that her and Wade were very close, the relationship was genuine, especially when both of them hit their teens, and the whole family got along.
"We were always at each other's houses, our mothers were friends and this went on for years, and everything was fine until he became about 17 or 18 years old, and I started to see his behaviour change. He started to cheat on me and when confronted, he would deny it and claim he was working on a project or doing something else".
The biggest criticism by both Brandi and Taj Jackson and something that has been fully weaponised, is that none of this is mentioned in Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland, which somehow proves Wade is lying about being sexually molested by Michael Jackson from the age of 7 to 14.
Brandi Jackson reiterates this on her Twitter account (@BJackson82):
However, with Wade being listed as a potential victim by the prosecution in the 2005 molestation trial, and repeatedly asked by both the prosecution and defence whether Jackson sexually abused him, it’s baffling why Brandi as a fully grown woman, the same age as Wade Robson didn’t provide an alibi for her former alleged boyfriend.
Whether or not their alleged relationship had allegedly gone sour after Wade allegedly cheated is irrelevant. This was the chance not just to protect her uncle, but also to ensure the truth was served. That alleged truth remained a secret right up until the release of Leaving Neverland and when the Jackson family cash cow was threatened. Suspicious or what?
Even more bizarre is that, Scott Ross, whose job was essentially to uncover any evidence that would insure Jackson remained a free and innocent man, was unaware that his “star” defence witness had the perfect alibi in Brandi Jackson, who would be able to comfortably rebuff claims by the prosecution that Jackson sexually abused her alleged boyfriend.
Let’s move on to the 2005 trial transcripts, and see whether Brandi Jackson was integral part of Wade’s life or not. During cross-examination Wade is asked whether any girls stayed in Jackson’s bed:
Q. Were there ever any girls, other than your sister, at age seven, who actually spent the night in Mr. Jackson’s room with you during the years that you knew him and spent the night in his room? A. Yes. Q. Who? A. There was Brandy Jackson. Q. I’m sorry? A. Brandy Jackson, who is Michael’s niece. Q. And she spent the night on how many occasions with you? A. Only one that I can remember. Q. One night? A. Yeah. Q. All right. So we’re talking about a period of about five years; is that right? A. Yeah. Q. In the five years, you can remember Brandy. Who else do you recall? A. As far as females? Q. Yes. A. My sister. Brandy. That’s all I remember. Q. Now, your sister actually never went back into that room and spent the night with you after that first week when you were seven; is that correct? A. Yeah, not that I can remember.
Now, if I take a leaf out of Jackson truthers book and quote that Wade was under oath, we have to face the fact that he was telling the truth in that Brandi Jackson only ever spent one single night in the same room with him and Jackson. Despite Brandi’s claims that they were a couple, and one big happy family for a 7 plus year period there is no mention whatsoever of this in the courtroom. Not even Jackson himself attempted to whisper into his lawyers ear to reveal the big revelation.
Wade is asked more questions about the sleepovers and Brandi Jackson:
Q. Now, you said your sister would sometimes stay in Mr. Jackson’s room, correct? A. Yes. Q. And how often do you recall that happening? A. I remember it just within that first trip we were there. So it was -- it was, you know, three or four nights or something like that. Q. And you mentioned Brandy. Is that who you mentioned? A. Yes. Q. Who was Brandy again? A. She was Michael Jackson’s niece. Q. You saw Brandy staying in his room? A. Yeah. Q. What’s the largest number of kids you ever saw stay in Mr. Jackson’s room, if you remember? A. Yeah, probably four to five.
Transcript: mjfacts.com
Again, no mention of Brandi Jackson being Wade’s former long-term girlfriend. In fact, the prosecution nor the defence seem to know who Brandi Jackson is. During the questioning of his mother, Joy Robson and sister, Chantal Robson, Brandi Jackson isn’t mentioned once, despite her now claims that her mother and Joy were close friends.
I would also question why Brandi is so confident in claiming Wade’s behaviour change dramatically in his late teens and led to him cheating on her left, right and centre, followed by lies and deception.
As the below tweet shows, Brandy Jackson is 100% positive that Wade Robson can’t be trusted:
What we have to note here, is that Brandi is describing Wade pre-2005. Any alleged relationship they had was done and dusted by his late teens, as Wade started dating Amanda Rodriquez, his now wife. Brandy has no knowledge of the type of man Wade was or wasn’t after this period. Despite this, she and her entire large family, who must’ve known about Wade’s bad antics, had no qualms whatsoever about him being called up as a star witness to bolster Michael Jackson’s defence. The man that she now describes as a cheat, opportunist and somebody who lived a life of lies and deception, was the foundation of her uncle’s “innocence”, just a few years later.
You can’t make this shit up!
I have no problem in accepting that Brandi and Wade had a on and off childhood relationship. Even Dan Reed spoke to Wade’s mother, Joy, where she as good as confirms that there was one, though the 7+ year claim is a bit ambitious. It’s the fact that Brandi is now trying to manipulate an audience into believing her and Wade were inseparable, and she would have known as a teen and preteen if any abuse was happening, despite the 2005 transcripts, revealing she was barely present when Jackson and Wade were together.
By Brandi Jackson’s own admission, any relationship with Wade was so irrelevant that it wasn’t even worth mentioning in her own uncles 2005 criminal trial. By her own admission she never raised any concerns that Wade Robson had allegedly been cheating, lying and exploiting any opportunity he laid his eyes by his late teens. By her own admission, a 22-year-old Wade Robson was morally integral enough to defend her precious uncle.
Perhaps the biggest irony, if there is any truth to her claims, is that she validates that Wade’s behaviour dramatically changed in his late teens to the point that he had become the master of deception, which, if anything would backup his claims that Jackson taught him how to lie.
MJ Not Innocent 