Nadia 🌹

Fellow journalists, just as a thought experiment: Consider, for a brief moment, that Michael Jackson is innocent. We can return to regular programming (the default assumption of guilt) soon. But just for a moment….consider it. From someone who has spent a lot of time researching the artist, interviewing those close to him, trying to approach the subject fairly, there are some legitimate things to consider, among them: - I’ve personally spoken to some of Jackson’s accusers as adults and they vehemently defended him. This shouldn’t be too surprising as they have also defended him publicly and in some cases on the stand under oath, before later changing their positions. - MJ, of course, faced an exhaustive criminal trial and was acquitted of all charges in 2005. That case, when removed from salacious headlines, was actually quite weak. The posthumous cases are objectively weaker. - I’ve always felt the most compelling allegation would be one not attached to millions of dollars. Every posthumous allegation has been tied to changed stories and enormous sums of money, which would seem to at least invite some level of scrutiny. - The vast majority of people who spent time at Neverland as children continue to assert that nothing sexual took place. That matters when trying to establish patterns of behavior and grooming. - Multiple unannounced raids on Jackson’s properties revealed nothing incriminating. Not the case obviously for other recent high profile cases (Diddy, Epstein, etc.), where the evidence is clear. - Nobody was clamoring for “complexity” and the “whole story” when Leaving Neverland came out. The media left its premier at Sundance in complete lockstep even though it intentionally left out hundreds of conflicting accounts. - MJ was and is a target because of his differences/eccentricities and because of his wealth. - Race continues to play a role. We can deny it or rationalize it but it’s always been there. James Baldwin saw it as early as 1985. White journalists have always been quicker to judge, malign, and assume his guilt. Even the “Wacko Jacko” tabloid nickname has racist roots. Is none of this context relevant? If MJ was in fact not guilty as he asserted, as his family and friends believe, as a jury determined, the treatment he received in his lifetime (and still, decades later) would be reprehensible. It’s at least worth considering…