Michael Jackson: Leaving Neverland

The controversial documentary on Michael Jackson airs tonight in the UK. It aired earlier this week in the USA on HBO.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. Like with the Jimmy Savile case, you can't defame the dead. However, unlike the Jimmy Savile case what we haven't seen is a flurry of accusers all coming forward, and with Jackson having been deceased for nearly a decade one has to believe that any victims would have broken their silence by this point.

Public opinion seems to be on the side of the late singer. Radio stations that have opted to ban his music have come under fire from listeners for being very hasty in their decision, especially as he was found not guilty of such conduct by a court of law in life (again, something that didn't happen with Savile; he was questioned by police but never put on actual trial.)

In terms of public opinion, I think it's more the case that Jackson fans are louder than the rest.

Said fans are presently protesting outside Channel 4's HQ ahead of tonight's screening. The documentary is a co-production between HBO and Channel 4, rather than C4 just buying the UK rights.

His nephew was on ITV News yesterday and mentioned that one of the accusers was a defence witness in Jackson's trial. It certainly raised my eyebrow.

That is a well known fact, although it's irrelevant when considering the situation. The documentary apparently details a considerable process of grooming, both of the children but also the parents. Such grooming should not be underestimated.

Of course, Jackson always denied the accusations - and I'm not sure this is the place to debate whether he's guilty or innocent, but to defend your abuser is not unusual.

Of course, he can't answer for the accusations for the same reason he can't be defamed - he's dead.

I haven't watched it yet, but will tonight. The thing is, after the Savile scandal, which was kept virtually completely hush-hush until 11 months after his death, you can't help but wonder if there's more going on under the surface. On the other hand, it's been nearly a decade. Why now?

I think this will be one where anyone who was reasonably convinced he was guilty by all the accusations and trial undertaken while he was alive will believe these while those who didn't believe them are unlikely to change their mind no matter what further evidence emerges.

For once I absolutely agree with you.

The director was on Good Morning Britain this morning, in what was quite a long interview, and that fact is something that Piers mentioned on several occasions (both of the accusers in tonight's programme were actually defence witnesses during the trial).

It could simply be that there was much more money to be made squeezing the last bit out of Jackson's back catalogue, so more incentive to keep accusers quiet. Let's face it, there wasn't much chance of the BBC making millions out of old Jim'll Fix It episodes.

Just watching it, and I feel sick. The boys were obviously heavily groomed and there was some strong Stockholm syndrome going on - both with the lads and their parents. They were clearly hooked in. To a point I think they still are.

I can only draw two conclusions. Either, like JS, Jacko hid in plain sight. Alternatively, did he even know what he was doing was child abuse? MJ was - at absolute best - a very peculiar character. Did he genuinely think this sort of thing was normal ?

But... What normal man shares a bed with young boys? What normal man teaches young boys how to masturbate? Yes, the FBI weren't able to lay a finger on him despite all their efforts but Jacko had levels of money and power that makes Savile look like a cakewalk.

It doesn't do to be eccentric these days, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/nov/29/christopher-jefferies-tv-joanna-yeates-murder and it should take more than a documentary to explain the facts.

Trial by TV of dead people - no thank you.

A more recent example is that couple from Crawley who were arrested for the (alleged) drone activity at Gatwick in December, I imagine their lives are possibly now in ruins, thanks to the media (broadcasters included) applying a complete lack of scrutiny regarding Sussex police's investigation and statements. It's not even clear whether there was unauthorised drone flying taking place.