😕 MJinnocent.com Deluded Open Letter to Transport for London

MJinnocent.com, a website specifically designed to pour doubt and confusion over the allegations made by Wade Robson and James Safechuck against Michael Jackson appeared on a number of London buses earlier this month (March 2019) before receiving widespread condemnation from the public and Survivors Trust, a charity that supports victims of child sex abuse.

The ads, which used the slogan," Facts Don't Lie. People Do." was later removed.

MJinnocent.com was created by a Northern Irish man, and former Big Brother contestant Seany O'Kane, who funded the campaign with a gofundme.com page.

The biggest problem with MJinnocent.com, which I highlighted in a lengthy post, is that the website contains very little facts, instead tries to discredit Wade and James through a malicious misinformation campaign, which isn't just shameful towards them, but all victims of child sex abuse.

After analysing MJinnocent.com I sent email to the owner, calling their website a blatant misinformation campaign and asked them to back up their "facts". I only got one reply back, which didn't answer any of my questions. I have since sent two emails and one tweet which have gone completely unanswered by the owner.

You can view my email conversation at the following link: https://mjnotinnocent.blogspot.com/2019/03/facts-dont-lie-mjinnocent.com-people-do.html

MJinnocent.com has since written an open letter on 18 March 2019 to TfL and the London mayor, Sadiq Khan, claiming that there campaign was wrongfully removed from London buses, but is there any truth in this?

All screenshots are from MJinnocent.com, with my response below each one.

MJinnocent.com claims that the statement "Facts Don't Lie. People Do." is a true statement. Well, yes, but they are implying that Jackson's accusers are lying, while Jackson himself couldn't have possibly falsely denied abusing them, which is false.

MJinnocent.com is only offering a one-way argument that Jackson was impeccable, while his accusers were not.

For example, they claim that the first accuser (Jordan Chandler) refused to cooperate, when in reality he did cooperate with the police and child molestation expert who believed he was telling the truth. He also made a description of Jackson's genitalia and pinpointed distinctive discolouration, which could only be seen if Jackson was naked.

It's true that Jordan Chandler, along with his parents received a settlement from Jackson believed to have been as high as $25 million, to withdraw from criminal proceedings. Jackson made the settlement himself, not some mysterious insurance company, and could have fought the Chandlers all the way, if they were extortionists.

You can read the full details of the multi-million dollar settlement at the following link: https://www.mjfacts.com/the-jordie-chandler-settlement-revisited/

You can make an argument from both sides that Jordan and Jackson just wanted to get on with their lives, therefore, avoided a trial at all costs. However, Jackson didn't learn his lesson, and continued enticing young boys into his bed after making a multi-million dollar settlement. A couple of years later, Jackson made another large settlement, this time to Jason Francia the son of his housemaid.

The law was then changed in California to stop people making out-of-court settlements in a civil trial, before a criminal trial.

MJinnocent.com claims that their campaign is directly aimed at Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who they say both lied under oath, which is a strange statement, because if they did, then they clearly lied about not being abused by Jackson, which is something no child sex abuse victim should be criticised for.

MJinnocent.com goes on to say that their campaign doesn't vilify other sexual abuse victims, but how do they know? Their website contains no references to child sex abuse victims, or how paedophiles groom and seduce their victims.

If you're a child sex abuse victim and you saw a website which was criticising two men for not disclosing their abuse the moment they were abused, I think you would question the empathy of anybody who had that mentality.

MJinnocent.com points out that Cliff Richard, a famous British singer, was accused of child sex abuse, yet never prosecuted. It's true, that Cliff suffered a lot with the press coverage, and was rightly cleared in the end.

Cliff Richard, however, had one allegation against him. This wasn't a man who befriended young boys and spent hundreds of nights behind closed doors with them, and continued on doing it despite being accused of molesting boys, like Jackson. Only Cliff Richard and his accuser knows whether he is 100% innocent or not, but the similarities between him and Jackson's accusers and miles apart.

Everybody knows that the police never get it right 100% all of the time, as in the case of Operation Midland, but there are also examples where the police have failed badly to protect children from criminal sex gangs, such as those in Rotherham.

The Santa Barbara Police Department and Tom Sneddon have never been suspected or prosecuted for any wrongdoing during their lengthy investigation into Jackson.

MJinnocent.com talks about the impact of "false allegations" on men and women, but again conveniently forgets that Jackson was the one who orchestrated everything. He's the one who built a zoo and funfair in his back garden. He's the one who constantly wanted one-on-one contact with young, unrelated boys, even after being accused of sexually abusing them.

If anybody was falsely accused of a crime because of their own stupidity, the chances are they would change their ways and make sure it never happened again. The fact that Jackson didn't, strongly suggests he was a predatory paedophile who simply couldn't stop.

Lastly, did MJinnocent.com break the rules of TfL’s advertising policy? Well, considering their website is nothing more than a pack of lies designed to portray Jackson's latest accusers as money hungry perjurer's, I would personally say yes. The website was also published well before the airing of Leaving Neverland, and after watching it, it's clearly a very credible and deeply heartbreaking documentary, that highlights the extreme complexity of child sex abuse to the general public.

Anything that can cause distress or offence, is against TfL’s terms and conditions.


Freedom of speech?

Where was the freedom to let people watch Leaving Neverland and make their own minds up without constant interference from MJinnocent.com, and other pro-Jacko sites? HBO and Channel 4 were targeted by people/lunatics demanding that the documentary be pulled, even before a single millisecond was shown. Is that respecting freedom of speech or expression?

Why was MJinnocent.com created and then immediately filled with misinformation, rather than facts, and then force it down people's throats through an expensive London buses advert campaign? Is that respecting freedom of speech or expression?

Why does MJinnocent.com think Survivors Trust, a charity that specialises in child sex abuse, wasn't allowed to voice their opinion and criticise London transport for allowing ads that direct people to a website that vilifies two men who have been brave enough to disclose that they were sexually abused by Michael Jackson, and give their reasons as to why they defended him? Is that respecting freedom of speech or expression?

It appears that MJinnocent.com is a dictatorship, who believe they are the absolute authority when it comes to Michael Jackson.

MJinnocent.com is under the impression that every single criminal is found guilty, no matter who they are, or what country they are from.

Michael Jackson was never sent to prison, but that doesn't mean he was innocent. As I pointed out in my first post to MJinnocent.com, that Jimmy Savile, a man who was universally loved by the British public, somebody who raised £40 million for the less fortunate, was exposed as one of the worst sexual predators in British history after his death. He had two allegations against him while he was alive, both of which were quickly dismissed because of lack of evidence, yet when he kicked the bucket, hundreds upon hundreds of victims, detailed horrific sexual abuse that was happening in BBC studios and hospital wards.

Jimmy Savile was a sexual predator in plain sight, yet never spent a second behind bars.

Look at the facts. Jackson made an out-of-court settlement first time round, instead of fighting for his name. Second time round, he had the opportunity to be completely honest and transparent about his obsession with young boys, but refused to answer a single question in court. If Wade Robson falsely denied being abused because he was emotionally attached to his abuser, and felt completely complicit in the sexual activities, then how many others did as well?

It was hardly a fair or honest trial, if victims were refusing to testify, or testifying that nothing went on when in fact it probably did. Like Ron Zonen said, you need complete corporation, to get a conviction.

The 2005 trial also highlighted just how utterly obsessed Michael Jackson was with young boys, detailing that he spent nearly 1000 nights in bed with just a handful of young boys, and cried and wept on the doorsteps of parents to make it happen.

Being acquitted of molesting one boy, because there was reasonable doubt, possibly because the mother was iffy, doesn't mean Jackson never molested that or any other boy.

If you're celebrating that Michael Jackson successfully groomed and seduced young boys (and their parents) into becoming his intimate one-on-one bed friend, and escaped a lengthy prison sentence, then you're just supporting paedophilia.

Wade and James have gone down the legal route of seeking compensation, but have been rejected by Jackson's estate because of the statute of limitation, not because they are not credible. Why does mjinnocent.com have such a problem with Wade and James going through the courts, the very same courts they keep quoting that found Jackson "not guilty"?

I guess they like to choose which bits they like, and which bits they don't.

This is a prime example of just how deluded the author of mjinnocent.com is.

Their campaign is harmful towards other sexual abuse victims, especially victims of child sex abuse. They are criticising two grown men who were groomed and seduced into becoming an intimate friend of Michael Jackson, to the point that they ended up spending hundreds of nights behind closed doors and in bed with him as children.

Millions of child sex abuse survivors were abused by men or women who displayed all the same characteristics that Jackson did. That's a fact.

Survivors Trust specialise in child sex abuse, and know all the ins and outs of how child molesters abuse their victims and how victims behave afterwards. MJinnocent.com is run by a morally bankrupt lunatic, who clearly doesn't know fact from fiction.

Does mjinnocent.com believe that there is a wild conspiracy theory and Survivors Trust is silencing those who defend Jackson's boy bedding behaviour?

At least one in six men have been sexually abused either as children or adults. That's a staggering high number that simply can't be ignored.

I wouldn't mind if mjinnocent.com was actually factual, rather than pure misinformation. If they were making good points about James and Wade, while respecting how victims behave, then I wouldn't be writing this blog.

MJinnocent.com said they offered to amend some of the wording used on London buses, but what's the point, it would still directed people to the same website, which is criticising two grown men for speaking out about child sex abuse and their conflicting feelings for their abuser.

MJinnocent.com appears to be fixated that Michael Jackson was found "not guilty" of molesting one boy in a United States court of law, and thinks nobody is entitled to a different opinion, or pointing out that criminals evade justice all the time.

Michael Jackson displayed all the characteristics of a textbook child molester, spent nearly 1000 nights in bed with young boys based on just the court documents alone, owned so-called "art" books featuring nude pictures of children, had tons of pornography lying around his "child friendly" home, and ultimately killed himself through a chronic drug addiction.

But MJinnocent.com thinks everybody should view Michael Jackson bathed in a glowing light directed from the heavens. I'm sorry, the guy was clearly a monster, and his bad behaviour shouldn't be excused because he made a handful of good songs.

You can read The Survivors Trust take on Leaving Neverland at the following link: http://thesurvivorstrust.org/news/leaving-neverland/


Yet again, the author of MJinnocent.com has demonstrated how just how deluded and morally bankrupt he is. This time he's targeting the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, and Transport for London, with an open letter, which unsurprisingly tries to portray Jackson as the poor innocent victim, who never put a foot wrong, or could be viewed as a possible predatory paedophile.

Seany O'Kane thinks his freedom of speech is being infringed on, but can comprehend, he's the one who's been forcing blatant misinformation upon people, rather than letting them research the facts themselves.

Nowhere on his website's are there any references to paedophile characteristics or how child molesters groom and seduce their victims. It's nothing but a biased one way misinformation hate campaign.

As I've already mentioned, I made author of mjinnocent.com fully aware of this website as soon as it was published, and gave him the opportunity validate his claims, or discredit mine. I've been met with nothing more than a wall of ignorance and silence.

No comments:

Post a Comment

This blog is about investigating Michael Jackson's questionable behaviour, and recognising the complexity of child sex abuse. You'll gain nothing from this blog if you're a Michael Jackson stan, who sees nothing wrong with a grown man having one-on-one sleepovers with unrelated children.

Therefore, ensure that all comments are civilised and on-topic. Misinformation or abuse directed at Michael Jackson's accusers will not be tolerated.