Brandi Jackson Remembers Wade Robson’s “Bad” Antics

Aug 2, 2019

The controversy and uproar surrounding Leaving Neverland made it inevitable that Michael Jackson’s fans would respond with their own “documentaries” to challenge the accusations that he was a serial child molester.

One of the earliest responses on YouTube was a 30-minute documentary titled Neverland Firsthand: Investigating the Michael Jackson Documentary, directed by Eli Pedraza, who, incidentally, bears a striking resemblance to the children’s character Where’s Wally.

You can view the documentary on YouTube.

Despite the criticism Leaving Neverland received for not including interviews with third-party sources beyond James and Wade’s families, this pro-Jackson documentary follows the same pattern by exclusively featuring individuals who present a favourable image of Jackson.

Outside of the fan community, the documentary was largely met with negative reviews. The Telegraph labelled it a “ludicrous rebuttal strictly for the truthers,” awarding it a mere 1 out of 5 stars.

The documentary attempts to portray Jackson as a victim of extortion, replaying a spliced audiotape of Evan Chandler and Dave Schwartz from Anthony Pellicano—yet failing to acknowledge that the recording was part of a larger conversation in which money or extortion were not mentioned.

At around the three-minute mark, the documentary addresses the multimillion-dollar settlement paid to Jordan Chandler in 1994 after he accused Michael Jackson of molestation. It questions why an “innocent” man would pay such a significant sum. The response provided is that it wasn’t Jackson himself who made the payment, but rather his insurance company, according to private investigator Scott Ross, who was part of Jackson’s 2005 defence team.

Ross states:

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.

The documentary even includes a screenshot of the alleged document.

However, the idea that a mystery insurance company covered the multimillion-dollar settlement instead of Jackson himself is highly questionable. There was no mention of this during the negotiations in 1993–94, nor was there any indication that Jackson was prevented from defending himself. His signature can be found on the confession of judgment, in which he agrees to pay Jordan Chandler $15.3 million.

The claim that the settlement was paid by an insurance company surfaced shortly before the 2005 trial and was widely promoted by Brian Oxman, a longtime Jackson family lawyer. Ironically, Oxman was disbarred in 2012 for "dishonest and unethical conduct."

For a more detailed analysis, MJ Facts has an excellent article on this topic, including Thomas Mesereau’s agreement that no insurance company was involved in the 1994 settlement.

Moving on to Brandi Jackson, who is featured in the documentary and boldly asserts that she was in a relationship with Wade Robson for over seven years, having met in 1991 when she was around 9 or 10 years old.

Both Brandi Jackson and her cousin Taj Jackson have used this alleged relationship as a tool to discredit Wade Robson’s claims in his civil complaint and in Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland.

However, the idea that the alleged relationship undermines Wade’s allegations does not hold up. Firstly, Wade—nor any other boy—has ever claimed that Jackson molested them in front of others. Secondly, it is unlikely that Wade, Brandi, and Jackson ever spent more than a single night together in the same room (more on that later).

According to Brandi Jackson, Wade developed a crush on her and asked her uncle to arrange a meeting so they could get to know each other. This led to a gathering at Neverland Ranch with Wade’s family, where after a week, Wade asked her to be his girlfriend—an offer she accepted

In the documentary, Brandi Jackson emphasises the closeness of their relationship, particularly as they entered their teenage years, and the positive dynamic between their families.

She states:

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.

Both Brandi and Taj Jackson have heavily criticised Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland for omitting these details, arguing that Wade’s exclusion of their relationship suggests he is not truthful about being sexually abused by Michael Jackson between the ages of 7 and 14.

Brandi Jackson reinforces this viewpoint on her Twitter account (@BJackson82).

Tea time

Wade and I were together for over 7 years, but I bet that isn't in his "documentary" because it would ruin his timeline. And did I mention, it was my uncle, #MichaelJackson, who set us up? Wade is not a victim, #WadeRobsonlsaLiar.

View original tweet here.

However, given that Wade was listed as a potential victim in the 2005 molestation trial and was questioned extensively by both the prosecution and defence about whether Jackson sexually abused him, it is perplexing why Brandi—then an adult roughly Wade’s age—did not provide an alibi for her alleged former boyfriend.

Regardless of whether their relationship soured after Wade allegedly cheated, Brandi had an opportunity to defend her uncle and ensure the truth was revealed—yet this so-called truth remained concealed until the release of Leaving Neverland. Quite suspicious, wouldn’t you agree?

Even more bizarre is the fact that Scott Ross, whose job was essentially to uncover any evidence that could secure Jackson’s innocence, seemed unaware that his ‘star’ defence witness allegedly had the perfect alibi in Brandi Jackson, who could have easily refuted the prosecution’s claims that Jackson had sexually abused Wade.

Now, let’s turn to the 2005 trial transcripts to examine whether Brandi Jackson was actually a key figure in Wade Robson’s life.

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 we take the perspective of Jackson truthers and highlight that Wade was under oath, we must acknowledge that he was truthful in stating that Brandi Jackson spent only a single night in the same room with him and Jackson. Despite Brandi’s claims of their relationship and the extended period of being one big happy family, there was no mention of this in the courtroom. Even Jackson himself did not attempt to relay this revelation to his lawyers.

Further questions were put to Wade regarding 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. 

Read Wade Robson's testimony here.

Once again, there is no mention of Brandi Jackson as Wade’s former long-term girlfriend. Surprisingly, neither the prosecution nor the defence appears to be aware of Brandi Jackson's identity. Even during questioning of his mother, Joy Robson, and sister, Chantal Robson, Brandi Jackson is not referenced, despite her present claims of close friendship between her mother and Joy.

Furthermore, I find it perplexing that Brandi is so adamant in asserting that Wade’s behaviour changed drastically in his late teens, leading to infidelity and a pattern of lies and deception.

As shown in the tweet below, Brandi Jackson remains steadfast in her belief that Wade Robson is entirely untrustworthy:

I found out Wade cheated on me with multiple woman who he hoped would advance his career. You might know one of them, because it was a huge pop music scandal. Wade is not a victim, he's an #Opportunist

View original tweet here.

What stands out here is that Brandi is portraying Wade as he was before 2005. Any hypothetical relationship they may have had was over by his late teenage years, as Wade began dating Amanda Rodriguez, who is now his wife. Brandi lacks first-hand knowledge of the person Wade became—or didn’t become—after this period. Despite this, she and her extensive family, who were presumably aware of Wade’s questionable behaviour, had no reservations about him being called as a key witness in support of Michael Jackson’s defence. The very same man she now characterises as a cheat, an opportunist, and a habitual deceiver was the linchpin of her uncle’s “innocence” just a few years later.

You couldn't make this up!

I have no issue acknowledging that Brandi and Wade had an on-and-off childhood relationship. Even Dan Reed spoke to Wade’s mother, Joy, who essentially corroborated the existence of such a relationship, although the claim that it lasted over seven years seems somewhat ambitious. It’s not the relationship itself that raises scepticism, but rather Brandi’s attempt to persuade an audience that she and Wade were inseparable—and that, as a preteen and teenager, she would have been well aware of any potential abuse if it had been occurring—despite the 2005 trial transcripts revealing her minimal presence when Jackson and Wade were together.

By Brandi Jackson’s own admission, her relationship with Wade was so inconsequential that it wasn’t even considered worth mentioning in her uncle’s 2005 criminal trial. She also admits to never having voiced concerns about Wade Robson’s alleged cheating, lying, and exploitation of opportunities by the time he reached his late teens. By her own account, a 22-year-old Wade Robson was morally sound enough to defend her beloved uncle.

Perhaps the greatest irony—if there is any truth to her claims—is that she effectively validates the notion that Wade’s behaviour underwent a dramatic shift in his late teens, to the extent that he became a master of deception. This could potentially support his claims that Jackson taught him how to lie.