im actually torn tf up over mj and his life story he was done so dirty by everyone i hope he’s finally at peace 😣😣😣😣

im actually torn tf up over mj and his life story he was done so dirty by everyone i hope he’s finally at peace 😣😣😣😣

This poor fucking man went through too much shit. He is the purest man to ever walk the earth 🤍

This poor fucking man went through too much shit. He is the purest man to ever walk the earth 🤍

Although I have seen this documentary floating around for years, and I am already very familiar with everything it discusses, it was still good to finally sit down and watch it for myself. Despite its low production value, I think this is well put together - it’s a rarity to watch something about Jackson that isn’t dripping with sensationalism. Instead, every talking point about the Chandler case is corroborated with evidence. Articles, transcripts, photographs, (a recording of Evan Chandler admitting to planning extortion months before he drugged his son with sodium amytal). It is truly refreshing to see things portrayed in a transparent manner.

It is also incredible to see that MANY headlines that resurfaced with the release of Leaving Neverland are demonstrably false, such as:

- Jordy Chandler’s description of Michael Jackson’s genitalia did NOT match the strip search conducted by the LAPD in 1993, despite press claiming it did
- NO C.P material was found physically at Neverland, NOR on ANY of the 15 computers seized and forensically searched, despite press claiming there was
- Settling a civil case does NOT indicate guilt, as a criminal case can still be pursued (though the Chandlers refused to testify for a criminal case, and investigations found absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing), despite the press claiming it does

Are you sensing a pattern here?

One thing I did learn was that the state of California was forced to change their laws after the 1993 case, banning civil cases from preceding criminal cases. As the Chandlers pushed for a civil case and not a criminal one, Jackson was forced to settle to avoid stripping him of his defence rights (thus violating his constitutional rights to a fair trial). Had this already been in effect at the time, Jackson’s reputation may have come out a whole lot better.

To sum it up, these allegations all fall apart when you do even the smallest amount of reading. I think one of the reasons this myth prevails is because Jackson is eccentric, but it is not a crime to be “weird”. The ruling in 2005 sought to that.

Although I have seen this documentary floating around for years, and I am already very familiar with everything it discusses, it was still good to finally sit down and watch it for myself. Despite its low production value, I think this is well put together - it’s a rarity to watch something about Jackson that isn’t dripping with sensationalism. Instead, every talking point about the Chandler case is corroborated with evidence. Articles, transcripts, photographs, (a recording of Evan Chandler admitting to planning extortion months before he drugged his son with sodium amytal). It is truly refreshing to see things portrayed in a transparent manner.

It is also incredible to see that MANY headlines that resurfaced with the release of Leaving Neverland are demonstrably false, such as:

- Jordy Chandler’s description of Michael Jackson’s genitalia did NOT match the strip search conducted by the LAPD in 1993, despite press claiming it did
- NO C.P material was found physically at Neverland, NOR on ANY of the 15 computers seized and forensically searched, despite press claiming there was
- Settling a civil case does NOT indicate guilt, as a criminal case can still be pursued (though the Chandlers refused to testify for a criminal case, and investigations found absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing), despite the press claiming it does

Are you sensing a pattern here?

One thing I did learn was that the state of California was forced to change their laws after the 1993 case, banning civil cases from preceding criminal cases. As the Chandlers pushed for a civil case and not a criminal one, Jackson was forced to settle to avoid stripping him of his defence rights (thus violating his constitutional rights to a fair trial). Had this already been in effect at the time, Jackson’s reputation may have come out a whole lot better.

To sum it up, these allegations all fall apart when you do even the smallest amount of reading. I think one of the reasons this myth prevails is because Jackson is eccentric, but it is not a crime to be “weird”. The ruling in 2005 sought to that.