Another Michael Jackson Victim Comes Forward

Read the details of the Jimmy Safechuck claim here

Yet again, we are reveal the sad news that another Jackson victim has come forward. Jimmy Safechuck was Jackson’s constant companion for several years after he starred alongside Jackson in a Pepsi commercial. Safechuck has added his name to the molestation suit filed by Wade Robson and alleges many of the same things. Rather than go into those claims again, I have been looking at the fan reaction to these new claims.

The reaction was puzzling at first – rather than waiting for details to become clear, or to hear the allegations in full, they have immediately launched an attack on yet another potential victim. Sensible people would realise that false child abuse claims are rare, in most studies they range between 0.5% and 5%, so to now have a sixth person to come forward with allegations against Jackson shows that there is indeed merit to them. To recap:

  • Terry George reluctantly admitted that Jackson was masturbating during a phone call to then 13 year old George;
  • Jordan Chandler told of kissing, mutual masturbation and oral sex between himself and Jackson;
  • Jason Francia endured fondling by Jackson under his shorts at Neverland;
  • Gavin Arvizo was the victim at the centre of the 2005 molestation trial against Jackson;
  • Wade Robson in 2013 revealed abuse commencing when he was seven until age fourteen including kissing, masturbation and sodomy by Jackson;
  • Jimmy Safechuck, the latest accuser, has said that Jackson abused him between the ages of ten and fourteen

Jackson fans have vilified, attacked and stalked all six men. Is this how civilized people should treat men who have the courage to come forward with allegations of abuse? Particularly galling is Jackson fans reference to the spurious argument that these men are only after money. No amount of money is worth disclosing for when there is a huge amount of shame and embarrassment, not to mention the advantage of an automatic assumption of innocence against the perpetrator due to the Halo Effect, involved in coming forward. Jackson fans would also presumably be against victims of Catholic priests, notorious UK pedophile Jimmy Savile or sick US pedophile Jerry Sandusky receiving compensation for the horror abuse they suffered from those men. The “they just want money” argument just isn’t going to fly.

‘He is not doing this for the money, that’s not what this is about.’ – wife of James Safechuck Jr, 15th May 2014

However, when you reflect upon fan behaviour against Jackson’s victims, you come to realise that they are taking cues from Jackson himself. Jackson, the master of deceit and manipulation, was only ever interested in saving his own skin and attempting to preserve his own reputation. Jackson never truly cared about children, as his habit of putting children in ambiguous situations shows. His compulsive need to spend time alone with young boys now has grown men who are looked upon as suspected of being abused purely due to Jackson’s actions (and you must concede this whether you believe Jackson to be innocent or guilty of the accusations). Jackson is the one at fault here.

Check out  James Safechuck Jr & Equitable Estoppel

Jackson never apologized for his actions towards children, even when it was shown that his behaviour was damaging to them. After the first damning Chandler case, Jackson continued his habit of taking young boys to bed against all advice from those close to him. To fans, their explanation is that he shouldn’t have stopped because he “didn’t think he was doing anything wrong” – a hollow argument indeed which can be shown by applying it to any other activity that goes against society’s moral code, such as behaving unethically in business or being racist.

How did Jackson react against those who made allegations against him? In the Chandler case, he hired the convicted thug Anthony Pellicano to tap the Chandler’s phones, to intimidate the Chandlers and anyone close to them, and accused them of extortion (a claim cleared by the police after investigation); in the Arviso case he once again hired shady private investigators to intimidate, stalk and harass the Arvizos, and once again, through his lawyer Tom Mesereau, to accuse them of merely making claims to extort money from Jackson (even when there is absolutely no evidence of that, then or since); in the case of the Francias Jackson, through others, threatened the mother with violence if she went public. Never once did Jackson admit any wrongdoing – in all cases he attacked the alleged victims ruthlessly and without mercy, calling them liars, money grubbers and attempting to vilify them. Fans followed his lead, and Jackson could have asked them to behave appropriately towards the alleged victims yet never did. Instead he subtly encouraged them by playing the victim himself.

Check out  MJ Facts EXCLUSIVE: The Jimmy Safechuck Story

Thus we see the seeds of why fans react the way they do. Like Jackson, they are of the view that a celebrity is more important than children or their rights. They believe the Jacksons money making image should not be compromized. Jackson fans believe every child molestation claim against Jackson is about money, not obtaining justice. They believe Jackson’s victims (and every child Jackson took a liking to was a victim because of the situations he put them in) are fair game to abuse, stalk and harass. Jackson’s influence looms large, and it’s not pretty. Hate for victims is accepted in the fan community because of Jackson’s lead. Looking in from the outside it is ugly and sad, yet fans will never see it that way – to them, Jackson’s reputation is more important than justice for abuse victims.

How many more victims will need to come forward before Jackson fans realise he was a pedophile? Surely now, with a sixth accuser coming forward, they can admit they have been wrong about Jackson and it’s time to side with victims? When will fans finally see the truth about Jackson? Probably never. In order to see the light, they will need to open their eyes.

  • Are you suggesting that no children were molested by Catholic priests because they received monetary compensation?

    For your information, The Arvizo family went to the police.

    • Jax789

      I am not talking about Catholic Priests. I am talking about the Arvizo family. They went to a lawyer first,it was then that the police became involved. That family is known for being liars and extorting money from several people and businesses. Read about them before you go blasting your mouth off about Michael Jackson. Look up the story about Janet Arvizo and the hot air balloon.

      • The Arvizo family went to see a civil lawyer, William Dickerman, because Jackson had his goons remove the contents of their apartment and put it in storage, and subsequently wouldn’t return it.

        You can read the evolution of the Arvizos visiting a civil lawyer, his referring them to Larry Feldman because he knew something wasn’t right, and Larry Feldman in turn referring them to Dr Stanley Katz who was the first person they (reluctantly) reported their abuse to. Dr Stanly Katz notified the police.

        Larry Feldman’s testimony begins on page 153.

        Dr. Stanley Katz’s testimony begins on page 111.

        Bill Dickerman’s testimony begins on page 233.

        Here is the exchange between William Dickerman and Mark Geragos for the return of the Arvizo’s furniture and effects.

        The Arvizos visit to a civil lawyer had nothing to do with the molestation of Gavin by Michael Jackson.

        Now Mr Jax789, I suggest you stop vomiting your fantasies from fan sites all over this site. If people want to read said fantasies, they can go to those sites directly.

        If you have something of value to add, add it. Stop trying to regurgitate fan site fallacies such as “naughty children can’t be abused”. Molesters can’t believe their luck when they attach themselves to families like the Arvizos – they know that they can molest at will and then easily discredit the family if they complain about it.

        • Jax789

          F OFF

          • Thank you for your erudite reply Jax789. Did it sting you, finding out that the Arvizos didn’t go to a civil lawyer for some easy payout?

            I’m not sorry.

  • That’s a question you will need to ask them.

    However, my first guess is “OMG this might impact on how much money we’ll get. WE’LL NEED TO DO SOMETHING. Quick, get the fans to stalk James Safechuck Jr then run a web campaign and attempt to discredit him. WE NEED TO KEEP THE MONEY ROLLING IN!!!”

  • Hi again Jax789. And thanks again for your lovely words.

    Look, I understand. A lot of other women like you have come to this website and have found out the truth about Michael. Their initial reaction was the same as yours – shock and denial. It’s painful for you, I know. You were probably in love with Michael, fantasized about having sex with him even. You don’t want it to be true that he preferred young boys as bed partners, but there is no escaping it.

    As you come to terms with it, you will go through other stages – pain, anger, depression – but eventually you will come to reconstruction – where you will put your life back together without Michael. Don’t rush it though, you need to fully experience all stages to reach the final stage of acceptance – acceptance that he was a child molester. That’s the point where you will be free, free of the enturbulating emotions that Michael and his behavior instilled in you.

    Good luck on your journey girl.

    • Jax789

      First of all I am not a girl and I will not be going through any stages that u described. I am very aware that Michael Jackson was an innocent man. No amount of words can ever convince me otherwise.

      • Pea

        Apologies for misgendering you, Jax. However, it often is a reasonable assumption that most of Jacko’s ardent Wackos are women, and many (but not all) of them want to have sex with him. So, as you can imagine, it makes little sense to us that a healthy adult male would waste his time defending a man who tried to make himself look like Diana Ross (when he was “black”) and Elizabeth Taylor (when he was “white”), therefore, we assume that 9 out of 10 times a screeching fan is female.

        I’m not completely convinced, by the way, that Michael Jackson’s male fans don’t want to have sex with him — after all, he was very smooth, silky, and effeminate from “Rock With You” to “Dangerous” and had a certain sexiness that I can imagine would appeal to many people. So, to me, your gender is inconsequential.

        “I am very aware that Michael Jackson was an innocent man. No amount of words can ever convince me otherwise.”

        So, why are you here arguing? Without fail, Jacko’s Wackos coming on to MJ Facts expose that they are not at all interested in anything but a fight. You do not own the Web, and you don’t get to decide what’s written about Jacko in every corner of it. I can especially testify that I’ve been where you are, thinking there would never be a day when I would think Jacko was guilty — but then it happened, and I didn’t fight it anymore.

        But if you’re not interested in reading things that challenge your point of view then go on somewhere else. There’s no point in you getting hypertension over an Internet discussion. Stress kills, boo. xx

        • Jax789

          Do not ever tell ME what to do or what to think. You can go on making a fool of yourself….you are the one who sounds WACKO…why are U wasting your time talking about a man u despise and have contempt for. If u did not have the guts to continue fighting for MJ it just shows your lack of loyalty and a gullible personality. Go wither in a corner and hide from the bad guys. Stress is not the only killer.

          • Jax789, I apologize profusely for mislabeling you as female. You must understand my confusion – I’ve never seen a normal, moral man condoning man/boy sleepovers before. It’s usually women infatuated with the idea of Jackson being heterosexual (to keep their fantasies alive) who do that.

            I must admit I do find it suspect when men start saying Jackson was innocent, and seem to think it was OK for him to take young boys to bed night after night after night. I’m sure you have your reasons. Hopefully they aren’t nefarious.

            Now, Pea never told you what to think, so I’m not sure where you got that idea. Perhaps your reading comprehension skills aren’t up to scratch. And do you really believe Pea flippantly changed her mind about Michael Jackson? Of course not. She carefully studied all the evidence rationally and came to the only conclusion possible.

            It’s a bit odd too that you call Pea gullible when it’s you who has swallowed Michael Jackson’s PR? And do you suggest people should remain “loyal” to a man who acted like a pedophile? That’s quite bizarre. I’m sure it makes sense in your own mind.

            I need to ask too, why do you torture yourself? This website and the comments here seem to distress you greatly, yet looking at the website stats, I notice you’ve visited many times and viewed many pages (not to mention a few… um… interesting photo downloads). That’s quite puzzling. Perhaps it might be safer for your stress levels if you stuck to visiting your fan sites.

  • Pea

    Jax, if you dislike being defined by “raunchy” comments like, “F–k off,” there’s a solution: don’t make them.

    As for divergent opinions, they are welcome if they are given in good faith. However, by admitting nothing could ever change your mind about Jacko (many here have had an opposite experience & not because they were gullible), you’ve proven your only purpose is to get into a fight, rather than reach some kind of consensus. A good one would be Michael Jackson may have been a great entertainer but, at the very least, his behavior with other people’s sons was often inappropriate, or that he often treated confidantes & business partners like crap. If you cannot even admit that, you’re much too far gone in Jacko Worship, and there’s nothing to talk about.

    As for making money from clicks, there’s no money to be made from exposing the improprieties of a deceased pop icon. However, there’s tons of money to be made in continuing to portray Jacko as a heterosexual stud (e.g. Frank Cascio’s & his bodyguards’ books) or a victim of evil conspiracies.

    The Jackson 3 are fine — they are super rich and have more friends now than they ever had while Jacko was alive & hoarding them to himself; it’s not their fault that they were purchased by a pedophile who paraded one of his boy lovers around like he was their older brother cum stepfather (pun insinuated).

    Who may not be okay are the men who had the courage to admit their abuse but are being ridiculed, stalked, & harassed by Jacko’s Wackos:

    Now, Jax, don’t go away angry; just go away.