6 Michael Jackson Secrets Netflix Didn’t Tell You

Some call it the trial of this century. Michael Jackson, the king of pop accused of child sex crimes. A new Netflix documentary series is shedding light on the infamous case. But there are a few things they missed. We're going through six major bombshells left out of the series. This is Scandal, presented by Lawn Crime. I'm Sierga Lesby. The mystique of Michael Jackson. A beloved icon, singer, dancer, trendsetter, the literal king of pop with too many billboard hits to count. But his life was also shrouded with controversy and damning allegations, including criminal charges he once faced for child sex crimes. And that's now the subject of Netflix's newest docu-series, Michael Jackson, the verdict. The three part series explores what led up to the charges, the trial, and the shocking verdicts. But there are a few things that the doc missed. And that's what will take a closer look into on today's episode of Scandal. So let's begin with the charges against Michael. There were ten and all, a pretty sizable number. And the allegations turned criminal charges were really severe. Here's how they broke down. Four counts of performing a lewd act upon a minor child. Four more counts of administering an intoxicating agent, in this case, alcohol, to assist in the commission of a felony. One count of attempting to commit a lewd act upon a minor child in one more count of conspiracy. And that last charge, by the way, stemmed from the allegation that he kept his accuser's family, quote unquote, "captive" at the Neverland Ranch, not allowing them to leave. Now, these charges came down in 2003, in the wake of the shocking documentary, living with Michael Jackson, that premiered the same year. Now, this doc was directed by famed journalist Martin Bashir, who was previously known for his bombshell interview with Princess Diana. His doc made waves almost right away because of the confessions made by Michael Jackson himself. Not only did this documentary give a look into Michael's life specifically what it was like to live at the Neverland Ranch, it also described a nighttime routine that many viewers found uncomfortable to say the least. Michael Jackson admitted to sharing a bed with children and denied any wrongdoing he said quote, "Why can't you share your bed? That's the most loving thing to do to share your bed with someone. It's very beautiful. It's not sexual. We sleep in the bed. We have hot milk, we have cookies, we watch movies." And here's where I had to introduce the Arvizo family. Michael Jackson came to know the family after the youngest son Gavin was diagnosed with cancer. And according to the doc, Michael took the family under his wing and helped pay for Gavin's medical bills, so much so that he was eventually deemed cancer-free. Now, Michael eventually invited the family to live at the Neverland Ranch and from afar, it actually seemed like a fairy tale, but in reality, was it a nightmare? After the doc premiered, a lot of questions arose about Michael's treatment of Gavin, Arvizo and other children, and that eventually led to police questioning Gavin, and he admitted that Michael Jackson had molested him. And that is where the criminal charges came from. Now, all of this was walked through in the Netflix docu series, and it gives a more in-depth look at the lengthy trial and Gavin Arvizo's gripping testimony. But when it came time for a verdict, there was a major shock. The king of pop, Michael Jackson, was found not guilty on all counts. He was free to go. And I have to say, the doc was very well done. It was really in-depth. I learned a lot. But as I was sitting there watching it, I thought to myself, "Okay, there are a couple of things here missing, and here's where we, the scandal squad, is focusing on all of that." Now, to start, we have to talk about the baby on the balcony incident. If you were around in 2002, I know you remember this, and if you weren't, here's a quick refresher. I'm telling you, I wasn't even 10 years old at the time when this happened, and I remember it. Everyone was talking about it because it was so shocking. It happened on November 19th, 2002, when Michael was staying at the hotel ad-lawn in Berlin, Germany. Now, he was there to accept a lifetime achievement award, and there were fans crowding the outside of the hotel screaming and cheering for him. But instead of just going to the balcony to wave and say, "Hey, guys, instead, he brought his youngest son, Prince Michael II, known by the nickname "Blanket" to the balcony. And the backlash here was almost instantaneous. The video was all over the news, the photos, all over the tabloids, children's advocacy groups were everywhere calling for an investigation, and maybe even charges for endangering the life of a child. But ultimately, German prosecutors found there was no wrongdoing, and Michael himself issued this statement. It said, "I make no excuses for what happened. I got caught up in the excitement of the moment. I would never intentionally endanger the lives of my children." Even though Michael was never charged, the incident itself looked really questionable and caused huge backlash, but maybe even some reputational damage. Nothing, though, compared to what the sex crimes allegations caused, and that leads into the next bombshell that was left out of the Netflix stock, Wade Robeson recanting his testimony. Now, before Gavin, our visa came forward, the sex crimes allegations against Michael were already a slew of allegations. People thought it strange that Michael was hanging out with kids, and inviting some families to live at the Neverland Ranch. So as a way to clear the air, the defense called some of these kids to testify, including by the way, child star McCulley Culkin, who then, and now has repeatedly denied any allegations of wrongdoing at the hands of Michael Jackson, but one of the other kids that they called to testify was Wade Robeson. And I say kid, because he was a child when he met Michael, but when he testified, he was actually 22 years old. Wade's history is kind of similar to Gavin Arvisso's. He met Michael Jackson when he was just five years old, back when Michael was touring Australia, which is Wade's home country. Wade was then and is now an amazing dancer, so Michael took him under his wing. He later invited Wade and his family to live at the Neverland Ranch, and for a time, that's all it looks like happened. Wade testified in support of Michael Jackson's criminal defense, saying Jackson never touched him inappropriately, essentially rebutting what the prosecution was alleging. But here's what the Netflix doc left out in 2013, a few years after Michael's death, Wade switched his tune. He filed legal action against Michael's estate, alleging he'd suffered a nervous breakdown following the trauma of abuse at the hands of Michael. In 2019, Wade and his family appeared in the HBO docu series, leaving Neverland, where they detailed Michael's alleged grooming and sexual abuse of Wade. Interestingly, even though Wade recanted his testimony, this wasn't mentioned in the Netflix doc. And speaking of recanting testimony, by the way, I have to mention the Arvisos again. The doc left out whatever became of them. And you have to remember, Gavin Arvisso himself took the stand and testified about the alleged sexual trauma that Michael caused. But it may have been this video that saved the defense. And Gavin was the one that asked him, "Could I call you daddy?" And Michael said, "Of course." This video is recorded after the Martin Bashir doc came out, in which the Arviso family basically said, "Michael Jackson's great. He's taken us under his wing. He's helped us out. He's done nothing wrong." So when Gavin came forward with these allegations, this video was played in court basically to say, "Hey, were you lying then or are you lying now?" And breaking his credibility, at least from the defense's point of view. Now, the Netflix doc also failed to include any allegations against Michael Jackson post the trial. Now, I already mentioned Wade and all of his allegations, but there were more made by a former child actor James Safechuck. The latter came forward with those allegations in 2014, claiming he was groomed by Michael Jackson from 1988 to 1992. He alleged it took him so long to come forward because of the brainwashing, all at the hands of Michael, and the shame he experienced as a result, and by the way, he also appeared in that HBO documentary. And again, this is just me speculating here, and we're going to discuss it more in our interview, but is it possible that both Wade and James came forward when they did because, at that point, Michael Jackson was already dead? And that's another thing the doc didn't touch on. Obviously, this happened after Michael was acquitted of the criminal charges, but he died just a few short years later, and there were criminal charges involved with his death. Michael Jackson was 50 years old when he died on June 25, 2009. He was just about to go on the, "This Is It Tour" in a couple of weeks when he was found dead at his homeby hills mansion in Los Angeles. An autopsy later determined Michael died of acute propifal intoxication after his personal doctor, Conrad Murray, provided him with multiple sedatives. This ended in a criminal trial of its own with Dr. Conrad Murray being found guilty of manslaughter in November 2011. He was sentenced to the max of four years in prison, but served only two years and was released in 2013 for overcrowding and good behavior. And that brings you up to date. Everything the doc covered and what it didn't, but I want to take a closer look with a professional. So let's bring on one of my all-time favorite guests. It's former federal prosecutor Nima Romani. Nima, as always, thank you for coming on Scandal. It's so good to see you. You're joining us from California, where the trial happened, and were you actually there during the time of the trial? I was Sierra, and this is one of the biggest trials in really Southern California history. Now, the only thing preventing it from being bigger was the fact that it wasn't televised. But this was really up there. Maybe just a notch below OJ Simpson, but in terms of trials of the century, it really doesn't get much bigger than this. Yeah, and I tend to agree with you too. I mean, we just covered the P Diddy case. I had you on all the time. And it was huge, but if it would have been televised, I think it would have been. like Johnny Depp and her and the same for this situation with Michael Jackson so many people were following it even though it wasn't televised it was huge because it's the king of pop and I guess that kind of leads into my next question at the time were you surprised that any charges criminal charges were brought against him? I wasn't surprised because these rumors were circulating for really more than a decade right and you have a very aggressive district attorney in Santa Barbara that wanted to go after Michael Jackson really wanted to go after him earlier from the 1993 incident so when you had victims who came forward I think there was pressure on him to act because people were asking like look and I'm sure there are a lot of people watching scandal who are Michael Jackson super fans so don't hate me in the comments but I think everyone would agree at a minimum what he was doing was creepy right he's admitting to sleeping in the same bed as these young boys so there was a lot of smoke there add you know complaining victims and aggressive DA it really had the makings of a prosecution which is exactly what happened there and I think it's tricky right because you mentioned this everyone loves Michael Jackson's music let me say that specifically the music I mean it's really hard to say he doesn't have hits every Halloween you know I'm listening to thriller like amazing performer I don't think that anybody could say that he's not but then as you pointed out when we pair that with his personal life and just the changes even physically it was jarring at the very least and then this Martin Bashir documentary comes out where Michael Jackson's on cam saying yeah I sleep in bed with kids like it's not a big deal why are you making it sexual I mean do you think that really spurred this investigation and put it into overdrive I do Sarah's really that documentary right and we know the power of a documentary when we've seen it time and time again right it can be our Kelly you know Britney Spears you know there's so many examples where it can really change the course of a legal case the Menendez brothers right so now you have this bright light that's shined on Michael Jackson's estate never never land you know he's there with young boys again at a minimum it's strange right then you have DCFS which are the social workers here and I like they're getting involved right ultimately did it ended up not pursuing a dependency case and taking Michael Jackson's kids away from them or taking the you know the alleged victims from their parents but all of a sudden you know everyone's talking about it and Sarah you and I have talked about this before every prosecutor in this country is either elected or appointed by someone who is so that type of attention and public outcry can really affect the legal case which is what we saw here yeah and I want to talk about the case too because prosecutors felt that they had enough evidence obviously to bring the charges they took it to trial they came you know it was multiple week long trial where they called you know testament witness testimony after witness you know they really brought all that they could do and I'm wondering obviously it didn't turn out to be enough but how do you think the prosecution did in terms of the trial I think they did the best they could with the hand that they were dealt right these cases Sarah they often come down to likeability and credibility right when you're talking about sex abuse because look it happens behind closed doors there's no smoking gun evidence right where you have a recording you know and here they didn't really didn't have any friends of evidence we're really relying on the testimony of the kids and their parents you know the alleged victims here but the problem was there were significant credibility issues and I'm sure we're going to get into it and I think what the defense did a good job doing is really sort of painting a picture of people who have changed their story who have lied their timelines at best were inconsistent at worst they were outright lies and they've filed other claims before so they really did a good job making the prosecution's witnesses seem like they were scammers or they were shakedown artists and the other thing aside from credibility is likeability right and Michael Jackson like a lot of celebrities they are very likeable and Sarah you know I've represented celebrities I've sued even more celebrities and those cases can be very difficult because jurors they're ordinary people they can't help but be enamored by the king of pop and I think it's hard if you're a prosecutor to get 12 out of 12 to agree on anything right men and women but now you have a celebrity right there's going to be something that are going to probably do that celebrity the benefit of the doubt and then when you're talking about reasonable doubt on top of it I'm not surprised that the prosecution was unable to prove their case yeah when you're talking about a celebrity I mean Michael Jackson was everywhere whether it's MTV and people are watching him you know in their living room in their bedroom whether it's the radio and you know people listen to like music when they're in the shower Michael Jackson is with all these people everywhere they feel like they know him they know his songs and I mean we've heard about people getting star struck if this is this likable man in the courtroom and they're like wait he couldn't have done all of these terrible things and then you brought up the defense this this I think they did a really good job of kind of you know making the jurors question the witnesses so of course we have this young man Gavin Arvisa who goes up on the stand harrowing testimony I'm sure I wasn't in the courtroom obviously it wasn't recorded we have that testimony but at the same time the defense comes forward with this video from the Arvisa family that was recorded prior to any of these allegations coming to light and basically they're saying Michael Jackson is like a father he opened his home to us he's this great guy so that to me I really think that they did a good job of poking holes in the testimony when they were like hey we got this video saying you love Michael Jackson you love to met are you lying then are you lying now what's going on what do you think about that tactic I thought it was very effective cross-examination here and look you got to be sensitive when you go one after a victim but they went after him pretty aggressively and it wasn't just Gavin his brother star Janet the mom there were a lot of issues with her as well and it was just kind of piece by piece this really meticulous cross-examination that really poked so many holes in the defense case look it's not easy to get an outright acquittal 12-0 but even the initial vote from the jurors it was 93 in a favor of acquittal it was just a matter of trying to convince those three holdout jurors so that's a week the case was I mean it was strongly a defense case and it was a defense case that was based in large part on cross-examination then of course the defense called their own witnesses all sorts of other people including of course McColley Culkin who came and testified that he slept with the bed with Michael Jackson and nothing sexual happened right he wasn't given alcohol so I think the fact they have all these other witnesses on the defense side as well as credibility issues with the prostitution witnesses it really had the makings of an acquittal and again I'm not saying that it didn't happen but I'm saying as as a prosecutor it's not what you know it's what you can prove and if you're relying on the testimony of victims and their parents and there's credibility issues you better corroborate that testimony with some sort of independent evidence and you know they tried to with some of the staff at never never land some of those witnesses they had their own credibility issues they had fallen employment claims they had stolen so they didn't really have the buttoned up witnesses that the defense ended up happening and you're sort of weighing the evidence there and of course we know that any tie or even closer has to go to the defense it was pretty clear that the defense's witnesses were more credible yeah credibility is huge in this case because something that you alluded to was the fact that the defense kind of brought this forward to the jury that the mother here Janet Arviso had a past situation in which she filed a sexual incident against someone else and that's me they showed you know hey is this a pattern are these are viso skim artists they just want to have a big payday that to me right away I was like okay well there's your reasonable doubt right there you know because they have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt and to me as a jury I would think okay maybe some reasonable doubt now you also mentioned the defense having really strong witnesses of course McCulley Culkin who way back then and even now has come forward and said everything was great Michael Jackson was kind of a mentor to me a good guy but interestingly back when this trial happened Wade Robson who was a choreographer or dancer at the time now choreographer he testified and said everything was good you know Michael Jackson was a great guy nothing untoward happened however in 2013 after Michael Jackson's death he came forward and filed suit against his estate and later became part of that huge wildly successful HBO documentary leaving Neverland where he alleged grooming and sexual abuse at the hands of Michael Jackson so what do you make of all of that yeah look it's hard you're right McCulley Culkin even recently denied anything improper Wade certainly changed his testimony listen and I know the psychology of an abuse victim and why someone might deny it might not report it right away you know but one of the challenges always if you are prosecuting these cases or representing victims I represent victims of sex abuse is to explain the shift right and sometimes you'll bring expert witnesses and it's trauma and obviously they want to suppress it they don't want to talk about it but you know when you've given testimony under oath in a criminal case under penalty of perjury and then all of a sudden you flip it it's a problem and it's challenging and when you have a not contemporaneous report a report made many years later especially if it's about money right a lot of people think well this about justice why don't you go to the police why are you trying to get money from Michael Jackson's estate right so I think it was some of those civil claims and I'm telling you as a plaintiff's word I file civil lawsuits all the time but it was the previous attempts to use their children to get money right you had Chris Tucker, George Lope, has all these people testify that look they're using their kids of cancer to try to get money from us, right? And there's the JC Penny incident when they filed this lawsuit saying that they were roughed up by security, but maybe it was the father that was abusive. So, you know, there were so many different ways that the defense was able to really do a really good job to show that the people that the prosecution was relying on were just not reliable. Yeah, it's really tricky because you and I have talked about many other cases involving things like this. P Diddy is a great other example where it took people kind of a long time to come forward with their accusations. And we've had, you know, we've heard from many experts saying this kind of happens. It could be PTSD, repressed memories, it could be, you know, trying to protect yourself. It could also be the fact that these allegations were against Michael Jackson, the king of pop. I mean, it's no small feat whether he has millions or billions of dollars. He's also a face that many people know and love. So that's tough. But all of this kind of amounted to a sweeping verdict in Michael Jackson's favor. We've kind of talked about this, you know, now retroactively about like how it makes sense why this happened. But at the time, what were your thoughts, Nima, were you surprised? You know, I was surprised because, you know, we were getting reports and because it wasn't televised, it was crazy. Of these reporters literally running out of the courthouse, you know, doing their stories and running back. And that's why I think we should have cameras in every courtroom. It's ridiculous that we don't. But look, you know, I was surprised because there was a lot of smoke there, right? And there were multiple prosecution witnesses and there were multiple prosecution witnesses who were victims and staff, right? That were reporting seeing these sexual acts. So you would think and kind of like the diddy case, right? That you have victim after victim was kind of telling a similar story, right? That that would be enough for the prosecution to get over that hurdle. But it wasn't in both cases, right? Obviously, in the diddy case, you had three victims. I think the issue there was the victim stayed in the relationship with Diddy or stayed in the personal or professional relationship. They didn't report it. I think that was the challenge. And that's why the defense was able to argue in the diddy case that it was consensual. I think in the Michael Jackson case, the issue was the abuse wasn't reported right away or the stories changed. And there were these other claims and lawsuits. So I think that it was just not enough when it was all said and done. And you got to tip your hat to the defense that did a good job. That's what good defense lawyers do. They can attack the credibility of the victims and ultimately they ended up carrying the day. Yeah, the defense did just that, brought on a really strong defense. And in the end, Michael Jackson is acquitted of all of these criminal charges. But the question is, was there major reputational damage? Because as you pointed out, the allegations about child sex crimes first came about in 1993. I mean, now we're in 2026. Obviously, Michael Jackson is no longer with us. But documentary is like this or leaving Neverland come out. And I'm wondering if his reputation has been shrouded. Of course, he's no longer here. And actually, one of my co-workers, our editor, Mikey, brought this up today. And he said, I think if Michael Jackson was still alive, he maybe would be canceled at this point. But he obviously passed away in 2009. What are your thoughts on his reputation and whether if this, if this dot came out today, which it did or this Wednesday, rather? And Michael Jackson's still alive. Do you think he'd be canceled? I think so, because again, there's a lot of people that think that he was abusing these young girls. Now, young boys, excuse me, that Michael Jackson was abusing these young boys. And look, a lot of people think that he was abused himself by his father, and that's why he had the high pitched voice. And that's why he was sort of living in that sort of trauma right of being a young boy. But I do believe that he would have been canceled. And frankly, I believe that this case tarnished his reputation in such a way that I'm not saying that it caused his death. Obviously, you know, that was, you know, Conrad Murray. And we were talking off camera. My old law firm actually defended AEG and that lawsuit brought by Michael Jackson's estate. But certainly his legacy was very different. There were people that thought that he was still guilty. You know, even though he's acquitted, he was essentially like an OJ, right? Not a violent murderer, but someone who people thought and still do think is a sexual predator. That's why we see so many documentaries about Michael Jackson and the abuse and what happened at Neverland, right? So, I do think that it contributed to his downfall personally and professionally. Obviously, he ended up needing prescription drugs, popo fall just to go to sleep. The 1993 settlement ended up coming out to life that he paid someone more than 20 million dollars, right? This settlement. And even though the defense argued that it was the insurance company and the insurance company made the payment over their objections, I still think a lot of people think, look, you know, if you didn't do anything, why are you paying someone that some money back in the 90s? It's probably like 40, 50 million now. So, I think a lot of that bad evidence came out and ultimately Michael Jackson was never the same in people's eyes. Yeah, especially in retrospect as we're going back and looking at his lifetime and his career, it really took, you know, super high and then a low and the way that it ended. It's a tragic story for pretty much everyone involved. It's a really interesting one to look at. Nima Romani, thank you for coming on Scandal and locking us through your experience with the case. Thank you so much, Sierra. Love being on. Thanks for having me. And that's where today's episode of Scandal leaves us for now. If you like what you saw and you want to see more or connect with me on social media, you can find me on places like Instagram @SierraGlespie. Thanks for watching today's episode of Scandal. As always, I'm your host SierraGlespie and I'll see you next time.