On December 20, 2003, friends and relatives of Michael Jackson descended on his Neverland Ranch to show their support for the entertainer. The private gathering behind the sprawling estate was aptly titled “You Are Not Alone” as hundreds of well-wishers (myself included) let the embattled singer know that there are people who believe he is innocent of the barrage of child molestation charges recently lodged against him. Although my family and I have had a long-standing, close friendship with Jackie, Michael’s oldest brother, for over 13 years, and have been to the Jackson mansion in Encino on several occasions, this was my first visit to Neverland. For my nephew Donny, this would be his third.

The proceedings had already begun when we arrived at Neverland. Victoria, Jackie’s wife, led Donny, his girlfriend and me to a wonderful spot near the family. I sat on the grass at Michael’s feet and sent an encouraging smile to the singer, whom I had not met before. He in turn smiled warmly and nodded acknowledgement. However, what really impacted me, more than the engaging smile, was the fact that sitting in a prominent position next to Michael, occupying the best and most coveted seat in the house, was a child, about three feet tall, who appeared to be suffering from Progeria (premature aging). I was touched and pleased to see the care and attention that Michael directed toward his diminutive friend. They clearly appreciated each other’s company, enjoying the music of Andrae Crouch, the prayers of Pastor Paula White, and the wit of Tommy Davidson.

Since the arrest of Michael Jackson in November 2003 and his arraignment in April 2004 on grand jury charges in the child molestation case, I have been livid. The tabloid feeding frenzy and mainstream media circus have all but tried the case and convicted the singer in the court of public opinion. Michael Jackson has been charged, but has not been convicted of a crime. An indictment is merely a formal accusation, and from all accounts, the defense did not participate, nor put forth any evidence during the grand jury deliberations. Michael Jackson hasn't yet had his day in court.

I am not in Michael Jackson’s inner circle, and I certainly do not speak on behalf of the King of Pop or any member of his family. I am just a fair, straightforward person who does not blindly subscribe to popular opinion on any issue. I never have been afraid to stand up for what I believe, and that includes taking a public stand on a sensitive and controversial matter.

For the record, whether you agree with me or not, I absolutely do not believe that Michael Jackson is guilty, for the following three reasons: I have looked at the facts available to me; I have met the alleged victim and his siblings; and finally, my friend, Jackie Jackson and his family believe in the absolute innocence of their brother, and my family and I support that belief.

I met G****, the young man at the center of the allegations, in June 2002, a few months before the airing of the Martin Bashir interview. He, his brother, and sister had all attended a performance of my nephew's, Donny. Donny had met the alleged victim at Neverland in 2000 when Michael had been gracious enough to allow him (Donny) to take his then girlfriend to the ranch as a surprise birthday present. G****, a cancer patient was visiting with his father at the time and apparently stayed at Neverland sometimes. I remember my nephew coming back from Neverland talking incessantly about the young man and how impressed he was by him. Donny and G**** kept in touch and established a bond where he often visited the young man and his family, offering a listening ear to the mother who was at the time perturbed about her marital problems, and who would also sometimes vent to Donny over the phone.

When I met G**** and his two siblings, I found them to be fun and loving. G****'s sister immediately bonded with me, hardly leaving my side, prompting me to promise that I would consider mentoring her. I, too, was impressed by G****.  I remember how energetic the young man was -- effervescent, inquisitive (in a good way), no-nonsense and strong-willed. I liked him. He was the type of person who would leave a lasting impression on you -- he would walk into a room and command it. No one would have thought that he had just battled a debilitating disease and survived. Donny mentioned that he had gained weight and his health had improved since they first met at Neverland. He was alive in every sense of the word.

G**** did not strike me as someone who would allow anyone to do anything inappropriate to his person, much less allow someone to even attempt to sexually molest him. In fact, when one of my nephew’s friends playfully made a disparaging comment about Michael over dinner, the young man put up his dukes and wanted to fight him in defense of Michael. Brett Ratner, director of “Rush Hour 2,” who met the young accuser, was quoted in Roger Friedman’s February 22, 2004 piece for Fox News as saying, “He’s more street smart than I was at that age. If someone tried to fondle him, he’d punch them in the face.” That’s exactly the kind of spunk, energy, and no-nonsense characteristics I observed in G**** when I met him. Being a spunky, energetic, no-nonsense person myself, I naturally liked that about him.

G****’s love for and loyalty to Michael Jackson was evident and permeated through every fiber of his being. He openly credited Michael, almost exclusively, with his “miracle” of life and was proud to let you know that he was in Michael’s inner circle. I like G****, but I just do not believe he was molested by Michael Jackson. I do, however, believe that this is about money and anger at the singer for distancing himself. (Michael had apparently started distancing himself from the family and that reportedly did not sit well with mother and son.) I believe that, in childish naiveté, G**** did not think or expect his accusations would escalate to the level that they have. I believe he is a child being manipulated and coached.

I must admit that when I first heard about the allegations against Michael, I had a sinking feeling in my heart. I remember saying casually to my nephew, “I hope it’s not G**** making those claims.” A call to Jackie later confirmed that indeed it was G****.

I have a low tolerance for criminals getting away with transgressions perpetrated against children, women, and old people … especially against children. I would not be supporting Michael Jackson if I thought there were even the remotest possibility that the singer had hurt a child.

According to initial court documents, the alleged victim previously claimed that the incidents occurred between February 7 and March 10, 2003. (The dates have since been changed in a revised filing to “between February 20 and March 12, 2003.”) The child had maintained, and the timeline contained in the initial charges against Michael indicate, that at no time, since he made the acquaintance of the superstar several years ago, was Michael inappropriate with him.…that is, until February 7, 2003, the day after the world broadcast of the Martin Bashir documentary.

The infamous documentary, in which the child was seen cuddling up to Jackson, aired on February 6, 2003. The broadcast resulted in an immediate and resounding public backlash of titanic proportions against Jackson. If one were to take the initial alleged dates into consideration, one would have to believe that Michael Jackson is incredibly stupid and/or incredibly bold to choose to start molesting the boy for the very first time in their two or three year friendship, one day after the controversial program aired. If one were to take the revised dates into consideration, one would have to believe that, based on the time frame provided by the accuser, Michael continued molesting him at the same time he (Jackson) was being investigated by child welfare authorities for possible child molestation, and during which time the boy and his family were also vehemently denying the charges to authorities. It just does not seem plausible.

According to an internal government memo obtained by The Smoking Gun website, a Los Angeles School District official who was perturbed by the Bashir documentary initiated the investigation.  This resulted in a joint probe  by the Los Angeles Police Department and the Sensitive Case Unit of L.A.'s Department of Children & Family Services (DCFS).  However, the confidential investigation, which ran from February 14-27, 2003, concluded earlier this year that allegations Michael Jackson sexually abused a cancer-stricken boy (G****) were "unfounded." According to the memo, a matter is branded "unfounded" when officials determine there is no merit to the allegations.” Here are some excerpts from memo, as published by The Smoking Gun. “The probe's findings were based, in large part, on interviews with the alleged victim, his two siblings, and the boy's mother.” According to the memo, when the child and his brother were questioned in February by a social worker assigned to the DCFS, they "denied any form of sexual abuse” by Jackson and said that he "never slept in the same bed as the entertainer." The memo notes that the brothers "expressed a fondness for the entertainer and stated they enjoyed visiting his home where they would often ride in the park, play video games, and watch movies." The pair's sister told a social worker that she “accompanied the boys on sleepovers at the entertainer’s home, but had never seen anything sexually inappropriate between her brothers and the entertainer.” The Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office chose to ignore the findings.

Additionally, the child’s father, granted he is also an estranged husband, has publicly questioned his wife’s allegations and has said that he does not believe the pop superstar victimized his son.

According to Celebrity Justice, in 1999, when the family filed a $3 million lawsuit against J.C Penney, in an alleged shoplifting incident at the store, the case documents hinted at the possibility that the mother had rehearsed her children, so they would corroborate her story of alleged sexual abuse by the store security. The mother is purported to have charged that during the incident, security had fondled her inappropriately. Rather than go to trial, J.C. Penney eventually opted to settle the case, reportedly awarding the family more than $100,000.

Despite the many factors that cast doubt on these allegations, the mass media has continued its “open season” assault on the entertainer. The vituperative, nasty, biased, opinionated, purposefully distorted reporting and blatant disregard for neutrality have left little demarcation between tabloid and mainstream coverage. The quest for huge ratings at the expense of the singer has defied the rules of responsible journalism, where every headline has a salacious connotation, and every story is laced with wanton innuendo. The media’s insatiable appetite for Michael Jackson has resulted in a feeding frenzy, with Michael-bashing being served up as the main course. It is ironic that as much as the media wants the public to believe that Michael is a washed-up pop star, gallons of ink and hours of airtime continue to be devoted to the entertainer. Michael Jackson has become a ratings bonanza. However, the negative tone of the media coverage is disconcerting, considering the man has not had his day in court, nor has he been convicted of a crime. Unsubstantiated stories and thinly-veiled accusations by commentators and so-called investigative reporters, who are not parties to the suit, methodically and boldly crucify Jackson. Self-proclaimed pundits seem to be trying to further their careers at his expense, constantly trying to spin the case in the “court of public opinion,” offering, other than regurgitated sound bites, not one iota of supporting evidence. Some female reporters and attorneys seem to have made it their mission in life to use Michael’s travails as therapeutic fodder for their own apparent personal issues, oblivious to the fact that most people just want truth…facts…not innuendo or hidden agendas.

Many in the media seem to derive pleasure from deriding Jackson. “Self-proclaimed King of Pop,” “Ex-King of Pop,” “Wacko Jacko,” “weird,” “faded pop star,” “pedophile,” and other derogatory labels are often used in an apparent effort to embarrass and belittle the superstar. “Eccentric” is also a term usually attributed to Jackson in an unflattering manner, while the same term has been used to describe some legendary music and movie producers, also accused of crimes, in a flattering way. None of these labels, however, take away from the sheer genius of Jackson’s talents or accomplishments. Jackson’s title, “King of Pop” has been widely, albeit erroneously, described by mass media as exclusively “self-proclaimed.” Having established unprecedented world record sales for Thriller and Bad, and bearing in mind that no other entertainer has come remotely close to duplicating, replacing, or superseding the global mega success and stratospheric level of fame attained by the superstar…Michael Jackson is the King of Pop. Whether pop icon or tabloid caricature, Jackson has continued to maintain a bigger than life persona and remains one of the planet’s best-known figures. To question what Michael Jackson has accomplished lately for him to still earn the “King of Pop” designation is ridiculous and petty. I am a huge Elvis Presley fan, but no-one asks the same question about Elvis, who has not had a hit in years, but whom the media has labeled, and still widely refers to as, the “King of Rock n’ Roll.”

Although Michael Jackson may not achieve the record-setting and record-breaking sales of his heyday, I would venture that the sales and “staying power” of a majority of today’s successful artists would pale significantly by comparison. What is perceived as poor record sales for Michael Jackson is for most recording artists today, the introduction to “living large” or to sustaining a rich lifestyle. I am not privy to Michael Jackson’s finances, so I cannot speculate on them. However, the media’s unrelenting obsession with his so-called “money troubles,” most often reported with unmasked glee, does come across, so far, as wishful thinking -- “wishing and hoping” does not translate into fact. Additionally, while it seems that Jackson’s ownership of the coveted music catalogs of the Beatles and Elvis Presley is a hard pill for some to swallow, waiting with bated breath for Jackson to lose ownership of the lucrative asset can quite conceivably result in suffocation.

---

Michael Jackson is not a 45 year old adult having slumber parties and sleeping in the same room with 13-year-old children, he is a 45-year-old body with a 12-year-old child inside, having slumber parties with children his own age -- Deborah Dannelly, President of the world’s largest Michael Jackson fan club, in a recently published interview

---

Friends tell me all the time they do not like the fact that Michael sleeps in the same bed as his young (male) guests. I, too, do not agree with the sleepovers because I think that no matter how innocent the slumber parties are, in view of the suspicious climate, Jackson has left himself vulnerable and susceptible to charges like those he now faces and the ones he faced in 1993. However, Michael sees it differently. He maintains that his sleepovers, replete with water balloon fights, cookies, and bedtime stories, are innocent and not sexual in any way. Michael has maintained that most of the time he has slept on the floor while offering his bed to his guests. The accuser himself (as well as his siblings) maintained in the same documentary that served as a catalyst for the onslaught of Michael’s legal woes that the singer slept on the floor and never shared a bed with them. Michael has further stated that in the past when he has slept in the same bed with children there has been nothing sexual or perverted involved and has even admitted to sleeping in the same bed with “Home Alone” star Macaulay Culkin and Culkin’s sister. For those who, understandably, have difficulty grasping the concept that all of this is innocent fun, Deborah Dannelly, president of the world’s largest Michael Jackson fan club, summed it up and put it in perspective in a recent interview, when she said “Michael Jackson is not a 45 year old adult having slumber parties and sleeping in the same room with 13-year-old children, he is a 45-year-old body with a 12-year-old child inside, having slumber parties with children his own age.” Steven Spielberg once said of Jackson, "If E.T. hadn't come to Eliot, he would have come to Michael Jackson's house." At  "Michael Jackson's house," Neverland, Jackson has clearly created a childhood that the 12-year-old kid in him has long craved for.

I found Neverland to be a place of beauty, a place of peace, a place of life.  While there are some who would like to believe, and have promoted the concept that it is "pedophile heaven," that was not my perception of the place. Neverland speaks of  innocence and love. Although I arrived at Neverland late on December 20, 2003, I still got a sense of the essence of the place: the theatre with the hospital beds lined against the back wall, where children too ill to walk can watch movies at their leisure, or the IV stands and machines one would only usually see in a hospital, or the rides, or the petting zoo with its menagerie of exotic animals.  The caring that Michael Jackson has displayed to children, boys and girls alike, around the world cannot be faked. I met many young people at Neverland who were only too eager to let me know that they had spent many a day and night at the ranch, had slept over as kids, and had never had anything but respect and love from the entertainer. They simply loved Neverland and had clearly had some memorable times there. Neverland Ranch and its halcyon-like ambiance has served as a retreat for burn victims and cancer patients where they can find utopia for a while. Many a time Jackson is out of town when the hordes of children visit, but his staff has strict orders to give them the best care and the time of their lives during their stay. However, Jackson’s eagerness to help and open his home to children, even when he is out of the country, has been a double-edged sword. For years I worried that the very thing he cherishes most, children, would be used to vilify him, and unfortunately, that nightmare has come true. Additionally, the magnanimous star’s innumerable humanitarian acts, for which he is also well-known all over the world, may sadly be overshadowed by these allegations.

There was a big hoopla about a secret room filled with dolls and pictures of kids adorning the walls. My question is why would a so-called pedophile, who has been portrayed as having a predilection for young boys, have dolls (and not action figures or trucks) in a room portrayed by the media as a chamber for sexual misconduct with young boys. Can young boys be enticed into a room to play with dolls?

On the other hand, one would also argue, why would Jackson settle for reported millions in the first case 10 years ago if he were not guilty? I don’t know. I do not think Jackson settled because of guilt. I heard, like everyone else, his attorneys advised him not to tie up his life for years, advised him to pay what they perceived to be “extortion money,” and to move on with his life. Randy Taraborrelli, the author of “Michael Jackson: The Magic and the Madness” and by all accounts a thorough author/researcher, has reportedly said he felt Jackson was innocent of the 1993 charges. I remember being at home in December of 1994, packing my suitcases to go on a trip to the Caribbean, when I heard on the news that the grand jury that had convened to hear evidence in that case had disbanded because the alleged victim would not cooperate, but a grand juror had indicated that the grand jury was close to determining there was not enough evidence to indict. I heard it once during the daytime news and have never heard it reported again. 

Bearing in mind that the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office has made a public plea for other “victims” to come forward, to no avail from what I’ve been told, and bearing in mind that Jackson’s ill-advised sleepovers can be described as a tempting magnet for money-hungry parents, one would have to question the fact that out of the thousands and thousands of children who have visited Neverland over the years, only two so far (the previous accuser in 1993 and G****), have cried “molestation.” Both are questionable and the ratio is not compelling.

In today’s world where (child) sexual abuse seems rampant, Americans, in particular, have zero tolerance for such horrific acts perpetrated against children -- and rightly so. However, it is disturbing that some are not prepared to wait to hear the facts and are quick to convict. It is equally baffling that some people charge that anyone who defends Michael Jackson is not thinking of the alleged victim. What if the child is not a victim? Let’s not forget the McMartin child molestation case in California a few years back, or the more recent case in the news where some young girls accused a homeless man of raping them. The man was convicted and sent to prison until one of the young girls recanted because her conscience would not allow her to continue to perpetuate the lie. A guilty conscience can be a force with which to reckon. G****’s previous good health has reportedly been deteriorating. The media has presented it as if the alleged crimes by Jackson are to be blamed for the boy’s setback. On the other hand, could it just be possible that, if the child is harboring a lie, the heavy burden of a guilty conscience can also be responsible?

Basically, this all comes down to
one person’s word against another’s.

Basically, this all comes down to one person’s word against another’s. Michael Jackson has maintained and vehemently proclaimed his innocence. I believe him. From all accounts he understands the seriousness of the charges leveled against him and has vowed to vigorously defend himself in court. I think everyone would like to know that if they were to be accused of a crime, especially a heinous crime, of which they have proclaimed their innocence, someone would have the courage to stand up and say, “I don’t believe it,” -- either because they know the accused or the circumstances surrounding the accusation. Although the media has downplayed the outpouring of support for Jackson, fans and supporters are alive and well. The singer’s fans from all over the world have stood steadfast, communicating support for their idol via email, or traveling sometimes thousands of miles to California to make a personal statement. Over the years Michael has maintained friendships with many high-profile child celebrities including Corey Feldman and Emmanuel Lewis of Webster fame. Since the latest allegations, Feldman, who no longer has a friendship with Jackson, has publicly come forward to defend the star, saying that nothing untoward ever happened during his sleepovers at Neverland. After the 1993 allegations, both acclaimed director John Landis and legendary Beatle, Sir Paul McCartney (whose relationship with Jackson reportedly soured after the singer bought the Beatles music catalog in 1985) openly admitted that they would feel comfortable leaving their children alone with Michael Jackson. The outspoken real estate mogul and reality television star, Donald Trump, who says in no way would he allow his children to sleep in the same bed as Jackson, or any other adult for that matter, recently went on record on CNN’s Larry King Live to say he categorically does not believe the allegations against Jackson. Trump has known the entertainer for years. Geraldo Rivera, acclaimed and straightforward investigative reporter who is known to shoot from the hip, at first denounced Jackson, but now publicly defends him...and of course, let’s not forget Elizabeth Taylor’s unflinching devotion and loyalty to the star. You can count me in there, as well as my family, particularly my sister Allison, who has a deep bond with Jackie and Victoria Jackson, and who has just as strong feelings on the subject, as I do.

The Jackson family has rallied around Michael, and that should prove to be an invaluable source of comfort and support for the King of Pop. Katherine Jackson is a strong woman who raised her children well and will fiercely protect them. (Janet recently said in an interview, she has finally developed her mother’s strength in the face of all the brouhaha and backlash from her Super Bowl performance). Joe Jackson is an equally strong ally in the face of adversity. Their children are cut from the same cloth.

The Jackson family has vowed to vigorously defend their son and brother and has put publicity-seeking detractors, who campaign to take Jackson’s children away from him, on notice that they will not sit idly by and let that happen. Even in the most heinous of all heinous crimes against a child -- the brutal rape and murder of Jon Benet Ramsey, where her parents were vilified and all but convicted in the media (although never charged), not once was there an outcry to remove the other minor child from that household. There have also been other situations where high-profile names have literally dangled their children before crocodiles, or introduced and indulged in illegal drug use with their children, or been accused of murder, and there was no outcry to remove minor children from any of those households.

No doubt widely circulated stories about Jackson’s so-called idiosyncrasies or eccentric behavior, plastic surgeries, and skin transformation, will persist in giving his detractors fodder to continue in their campaign to try him in the court of public opinion, but the matter will eventually have to be decided in a court of law.

Michael Jackson pleaded not guilty to the grand jury indictment on Friday, April 30, 2004. Michael’s new attorney, Thomas Mesereau says this case is about, “the dignity, the integrity, the decency, the honor, the charity, the innocence, and the complete vindication of a wonderful human being named Michael Jackson.” I concur as I simply reject the notion that Michael would commit such a heinous act against a child. The only thing I believe Michael Jackson is guilty of is, at worse, poor judgment.

… And that’s my opinion.

news@hgenonline.com

 AFTERWORD: I feel compelled to share a short story with you. I was in the mall sometime ago. A little boy was crying as he was evidently lost. His parents were nowhere to be seen. It was interesting to see the indecision and confusion on the faces of passersby. No one quite knew what to do. Everyone seemed afraid. Being near a crying child didn’t seem like a good idea … everyone moved on. Before I could think of going to get Security, the mother arrived. Is this the society in which we want to live, where showing affection, concern and caring for children can conceivably be perceived as something else … something more sinister?