Is the Brett Barnes Twitter Account Real or Fake?

Feb 22, 2020

In August 2010, the Twitter account @IAmBrettBarnes was created, presenting itself as belonging to Brett Barnes from Melbourne, Australia, who had a close relationship with Michael Jackson throughout his childhood and early adulthood. Brett Christopher Barnes, now around 38 years old, accompanied Jackson on numerous trips and, according to the 2005 trial transcripts, spent over 450 nights in Jackson’s private bed—most of them as a preteen.

The @IAmBrettBarnes account originally displayed a photograph of a young Brett with Jackson at Disneyland Paris, before later switching to a black circle and background, presumably in support of Black Lives Matter. The Wayback Machine has archived the account as far back as 12 August 2013, showing that its description—“Applehead Club Doodoohead”—has remained unchanged for more than a decade.

The account itself is relatively boring, with a timeline that can be read in under an hour. Most posts consist of predictable annual messages marking Jackson’s birthday and the anniversary of his death, alongside frequent retweets from Taj Jackson and a small selection of other users. It also shares occasional holiday snapshots and miscellaneous images, none of which include Brett Barnes himself. What is striking, however, is the shift in tone following the release of Leaving Neverland. Since then, the account has increasingly targeted Wade Robson and James Safechuck with tweets that are not only baseless but openly derogatory.

One such example is a tweet that attempts to trivialise their allegations by comparing them to the plot of the science‑fiction film Independence Day:

Despite Barnes’s decade‑long close relationship with Jackson, the account offers no meaningful insight into that relationship. It shares no personal anecdotes, no unique photographs, and no reflections that might substantiate its claims of authenticity. Nor does it engage meaningfully with its 7,000‑plus followers, particularly when questions require genuine personal knowledge.

Can the account be verified?

A verified Twitter account is not merely a tool for silencing sceptics or granting followers a misplaced sense of superiority. Its purpose is to confirm the authenticity of the person behind the profile and to “encourage and maintain trust between users on the platform.”

For more than a decade, however, the @IAmBrettBarnes account has remained unverified. This is despite the common misconception that only “celebrities” can obtain the blue tick. In reality, anyone deemed to be of public interest can apply for verification, and many far less prominent individuals have successfully done so.

Twitter itself is explicit about this:

It is reasonable to assume that an account genuinely managed by Brett Barnes would attract significant public interest, particularly given his visibility before, during, and after the 2005 Michael Jackson molestation trial, as well as his renewed prominence in 2019 following the release of Leaving Neverland.

There are several ways to verify a Twitter account, the simplest being the submission of a government‑issued identification document, such as a driving licence or passport.

Despite this, the @IAmBrettBarnes account has posted tweets about a holiday in Greece.

If we are to assume that this is indeed the authentic Brett Barnes, an Australian citizen, then it follows that he would possess a valid passport—one of the documents Twitter accepts for account verification.

Is the account just a sad MJ stan?

Jackson fans have resorted, and will continue to resort, to extreme measures to defend their idol. Jordan Chandler has been impersonated multiple times, including through the circulation of a fabricated confession story shortly after Jackson’s death. Gavin Arvizo has endured even more distressing experiences, ranging from threats of severe violence to the targeting of his 2013 wedding. Despite never accusing Jackson of any wrongdoing, Brett Barnes has remained publicly silent since 2005—or, at the very least, he has never uploaded a video of himself or issued any statements through an officially verified account. This silence alone is enough to irritate sections of the MJ fan base, and it is not unreasonable to suspect that an imposter might attempt to impersonate him in order to create a more favourable impression.

After all, anyone can create an account and assume any identity within minutes. Even some Jackson fans have expressed scepticism about the account’s legitimacy. When questioned, the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account posted the following tweet:

The tweet posted by @IAmBrettBarnes appears rather peculiar for several reasons. To begin with, Brett Barnes is already a recognisable public figure, so the release of a single unique photograph would hardly constitute a meaningful breach of privacy. If anything, it would help dispel lingering doubts and demonstrate a basic level of respect towards the account’s followers. It is also difficult to believe that the real Brett Barnes would not possess any distinctive photographs of himself with Jackson, or personal items comparable to those received by Wade Robson and James Safechuck.

Equally striking is the complete absence of interaction from former school friends, current acquaintances, colleagues, neighbours, or family members. Given Brett’s global exposure as a child alongside Michael Jackson—including a televised appearance arranged by Anthony Pellicano—and his involvement in a high‑profile trial in 2005, it is surprising that no one who knew him personally has ever surfaced in the replies. The silence is conspicuous, and it raises further questions about the authenticity of the account.

But, Taj Jackson said so

Fans who oppose the authenticity of the account being scrutinized often claim it is genuine simply because Taj Jackson has endorsed it. Yet over the past year, I’ve come to recognise that Taj Jackson is a habitual liar, with credibility comparable to those who insist the earth is flat.

I tweeted:

@wikibustamante responded:

I responded:

View original tweets here.

After pointing out to a Twitter user (@wikibustamante) that Taj Jackson had included misleading statements in his $777,000 GoFundMe description—effectively creating a fraudulent campaign under GoFundMe’s own terms and conditions—it prompted an angry reaction from the @IAmBrettBarnes account, which responded with the following tweet:

The @IAmBrettBarnes account could have chosen to respond in a composed and thoughtful manner to address doubts raised by people like myself. Instead, it chose not to take that approach.

When misinformation backfires

In a trademark attempt to sow doubt and confusion, Taj Jackson alleges that Wade Robson lied in Leaving Neverland about having dinner with Michael Jackson before giving his testimony. Wade explained that he had seen a frail Jackson surrounded by his children, an encounter that strengthened his resolve to support him when he took the stand. Taj Jackson now claims that this dinner actually occurred after Wade testified, not before.

He made the following tweet:

Taj Jackson then brings the @IAmBrettBarnes account into the discussion and makes the following statement:

Nevertheless, I saved a tweet from @StinsonHunter dated 12 April 2019, in which he notes that Brett Barnes testified under oath that he spoke with Wade Robson at Neverland Ranch the day before appearing in court. The tweet was reported and subsequently removed, despite not breaching Twitter’s terms and conditions. Fortunately, I was able to locate an archived version of it through the Bing search engine.

@StinsonHunter stated:

See the archived version here: archive.ph

The @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account, again, responds angrily and states:

Under oath Brett Barnes states the following when under cross examination by Mr. Zonen.

Ron Zonen directly questioned Brett Barnes about his most recent conversation with Wade Robson prior to that day, and Barnes unequivocally stated that it had taken place the previous day at the ranch, leaving no room for ambiguity. Yet the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account vehemently insists that Barnes never interacted with Wade Robson at the ranch — a claim that is demonstrably false.

 For more information, read post 18.

The Applehead/Doodoohead club thing

It is difficult to believe that a grown man, approaching his 40th birthday, would openly support The Applehead Club — a setting in which an adult man invited unrelated children not only into his private quarters, but also into his personal bed for one‑on‑one sleepovers. This is the same club whose former members now state that they were groomed, seduced, and sexually abused by Michael Jackson.

In 2005, a 23‑year‑old Brett Barnes effectively stated that he stopped sharing a bed with Michael Jackson at the age of 19 because he felt it was no longer appropriate, given Jackson’s role as a parent to his own children.

Questions by Mr. Zonen:

Subsequently, Brett verified that he was 19 years old...

Mr. Zonen even brings to Brett Barnes' attention Michael Jackson's extensive collection of sexually explicit material.

It is peculiar that the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account actively endorses the so-called "Applehead Club," while Brett Barnes, at 19 and later at 23, didn't perceive it as appropriate to share a bed with other people's children.

Brett Barnes believes in integrity

Once more, during the molestation trial, Brett is questioned about his relationship with Jackson and whether he was subjected to any sexual molestation or inappropriate touching by Jackson.

Questions by Thomas Mesereau:

Brett is questioned about his sentiments regarding being identified as a potential victim by the prosecution.

Therefore, unless Brett Barnes was dishonest and protecting Jackson, it can be stated with confidence that he presents himself as someone who values honesty and strong moral principles. This is reflected in statements such as: “Never. It’s not the type of thing that I would stand for” and “Yes, I am. And I’m very mad about that.”

Yet the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account continues to ignore repeated requests from both supporters and sceptics to address the question of its authenticity. Most notably, it refuses to acknowledge that an unverified account is an obvious vehicle for ongoing misinformation — something that the genuine Brett Barnes, by his own standards, should find deeply troubling.

Moreover, if the real Brett Barnes becomes “very mad” when people make baseless and false claims about him, it raises an unavoidable question: why would he then make baseless and false claims about Wade and James on social media? The contradiction is stark. Either the real Brett Barnes is a hypocrite who fails to uphold the very principles he professes, or the impostor behind the account simply didn’t do their homework.

Brett wants nothing to do with Leaving Neverland

On 26 February 2019, a legal letter was sent to the creators of Leaving Neverland on behalf of Brett Barnes, demanding the removal of his name and likeness. While I have little doubt that the Jackson Estate and/or family orchestrated the entire effort, one would expect, at the very least, that Brett had given his explicit consent. Yet I have never seen a copy of this letter, nor any discussion of it, on the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account — which, if the account were genuine, would surely be the primary place to address such a significant development.

The brief document contains statements such as:

• “Mr Barnes has been living a quiet, private life for many years and wants to keep it that way.”
• “Mr Barnes and his family have received unwanted inquiries and visits from the press and strangers seeking to speak to him about Mr Jackson.”
• “Put simply, Mr Barnes wants nothing to do with the film, does not consent to the use of his image and likeness in the film, and wishes to be left alone.”

However, the @IAmBrettBarnes account has been actively creating and retweeting posts related to Leaving Neverland. As previously noted, some of these posts engage in victim‑shaming, alongside baseless retweets from Taj Jackson and Charles Thomson.

There is also no mention in the document of Brett Barnes’s social media accounts being inundated with unwanted attention — which, once again, raises questions.

Read the document here: leavingneverlandfacts.com.

Conclusion

Honestly, I am not certain whether the account is authentic. What is clear, however, is that it was created specifically to engage with Jackson’s fanbase, yet it has never shared personal stories or posted unique photographs, even after more than a decade. Some might argue that the real Brett Barnes would not tolerate an impostor, particularly one that appears on the first page of Google. But it is equally possible that he tried and failed to have it removed, or simply does not consider it important. Paris Jackson, for instance, had an Instagram impostor that remained active despite thousands of complaints before it was finally taken down.

If the account does belong to the real Brett Barnes, then of course his statement that he was not abused by Jackson should be respected. However, he should not use that relationship to undermine others, nor should he be posting baseless or derogatory comments about people who say they were abused by Jackson.

WhoWasJacko?

I blog about Michael Jackson.