Michael Jackson was an extraordinarily talented entertainer who captivated millions of fans around the world. Yet his behaviour, particularly in relation to children, raises serious concerns.
Rather than forming normal adult relationships, Jackson appeared fixated on young boys and childlike activities. He went to considerable lengths to cultivate special bonds, ultimately spending hundreds—if not thousands—of days and nights alone with them, often behind closed doors and in bed, even after allegations of abuse had surfaced. Once those boys reached a certain age, they were frequently cast aside and replaced with younger companions, treated as though they were disposable playthings. For most adults, such conduct is profoundly disturbing and wholly unacceptable.
Many fans—often described as “stans” or part of the “cult of celebrity”—idolise Jackson and dismiss any allegations of wrongdoing. They argue he was merely attempting to relive the childhood he never had. To sustain this narrative, they frequently resort to conspiracy theories and misinformation, framing accusations and evidence as elements of a wider plot to tarnish his legacy.
Take, for example, Jordan Chandler, Jackson’s first accuser, who has long been the target of degrading conspiracy theories. Some allege that his father drugged him with Sodium Amytal and implanted false memories of abuse. The multi‑million‑dollar settlement—funded directly by Jackson and exceeding $15 million—is frequently reframed as the result of coercion by a mysterious insurance company, supposedly preventing Jackson from clearing his name. Furthermore, Chandler described distinctive discolouration on Jackson’s genitalia and, despite law enforcement confirming a match, supporters continue to insist there was a significant mismatch—without offering credible evidence.
Turning to Wade Robson and James Safechuck—whose accounts were explored in the documentary Leaving Neverland—both men have faced relentless and unfounded attacks. These have come not only from devoted fans, but also from the Jackson Estate and family, who claim their primary motive is financial gain. In truth, Robson and Safechuck spent nearly a decade fighting to have their cases heard and approved for a civil trial, navigating a series of complex legal obstacles. Their decision to accuse Jackson of abuse has brought considerable hardship not only upon themselves, but also upon their families. Should their day in court finally arrive and result in a favourable outcome, any potential compensation would be determined by the court—not by them.
Supporters also point to Jackson’s 2005 acquittal in the Gavin Arvizo case as proof of his innocence. However, in the United States, a “not guilty” verdict does not declare someone innocent; it simply means the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Jackson’s refusal to undergo cross‑examination, coupled with Robson’s later admission that he had initially lied about the abuse due to years of grooming, casts further doubt on the reliability of that verdict as a definitive measure of innocence.
Another persistent but false claim is that the FBI conducted a decade‑long investigation into Jackson before declaring him innocent. In fact, the FBI’s own records show they never launched such an investigation; they merely provided technical assistance to local law enforcement when requested. Nonetheless, Jackson’s defenders cite the FBI as an exonerating authority while disregarding the views of the Santa Barbara and Los Angeles police departments, both of which considered him a potential child predator.
Perhaps the most troubling defence from fans involves other boys—now men—who insist their relationships with Jackson were entirely innocent. This is used to imply that all accusers must be lying. While some relationships may indeed have been non‑sexual, there remains a strong possibility that, like Robson and Safechuck, these men are either unable or unwilling to acknowledge wrongdoing by someone they admired. In any case, as they were not present when others reported abuse, their testimony carries little weight.
It is deeply troubling that sections of society remain more inclined to celebrate and idolise Jackson than to confront his troubling behaviour and questionable conduct with children, even years after his death. This platform seeks to challenge the conspiracy theories and misinformation spread by his apologists, while also raising awareness of the complex realities of child sexual abuse.
