“Leaving Neverland” aimed to overwhelm its viewers with details and shocking descriptions. Many critics and journalists repeatedly pointed out this fact as the most “compelling” aspect of the film. What they forgot to tell us, however, is that every time that Wade Robson and James Safechuck attempted to describe places, dates, or specific events, they’re vastly debunked by the hard facts. Here’s a list of no less than twenty-five lies they told us in “Leaving Neverland”.

Lie #1: Robson’s and Safechuck’s stories are similar even though they didn’t know each other

During the promotion of “Leaving Neverland”, the creators of the film repeatedly stressed that Wade Robson and James Safechuck’s stories are similar even though they have never met “as adults” before the film premiere at Sundance in January 2019. This claim is a blatant lie – the resemblances are far from being a coincidence.

According to Wade Robson’s own deposition in 2016, he met with James Safechuck at least once in early 2014. This is exactly when Safechuck was preparing to join Robson with a multi-million lawsuit against the Michael Jackson Estate. In fact, Robson and Safechuck are so synchronized that in July 2016, they both let go of their first lawyers, hired new ones, and changed their claims in perfect accordance with each other.

Lie #2: “Michael replaced me with young Brett Barnes”

Robson and Safechuck claimed that there are other “younger victims” that Jackson abused when they were “too old” for him. Safechuck spoke about the night in Chicago when he claimed he was replaced by Brett Barnes, who has defended Jackson and insists he was never molested. His attorneys demanded that the film remove any implications of abuse against him.

Lie #3: “Michael replaced me with young Macaulay Culkin”

Wade Robson claimed that Jackson replaced him with Macaulay Culkin. However, Culkin has consistently rejected these claims, stating that Jackson never did anything inappropriate to him.

Lie #4: Michael would keep us apart

Robson and Safechuck alleged that Jackson made efforts to keep them apart. Yet evidence shows they did meet as children, and many others at Neverland were aware of each other.

Lie #5: The Imaginary Train Station

Safechuck alleges abuse occurred at a train station in Neverland. However, this station didn’t even exist until construction began in 1993, years after the alleged events.

Lie #6: The Invisible Castle

Safechuck mentioned abuse occurring at a castle in Neverland, but multiple workers have debunked that there were ever beds there during the time of the alleged abuse.

Lie #7: Liar, Liar, Fake Items on Fire

The film ends with Robson burning items he claimed were gifts from Jackson. However, those items were later discovered to be replicas, far from the original items he auctioned for profit in 2011.

Lie #8: Joy Robson Got Rid of Anything Jackson-Related

Joy Robson claimed she disposed of Jackson-related items after Wade’s allegations. Yet, she had various memorabilia in the film, contradicting her statement.

Lie #9: “Michael taught us to hate girls”

Robson and Safechuck said Jackson taught them to hate girls, but many female friends of Jackson, including his niece, contradict that narrative.

Lie #10: The Robson Family Faxes

The letters presented as “love letters” were simply affectionate messages typical of Jackson’s communication with many of his friends, lacking any incriminating context.

Lie #11: The Safechuck Family Tapes

Safechuck presented a tape as evidence of his bond with Jackson, but an edited transcript revealed it lacked any suggestive context.

Lie #12: Mark Geragos’ Doctored Statement

A crucial clip of Jackson’s former attorney was taken out of context to insinuate Jackson had threatened witnesses, obscuring the entirety of the original content.

Lie #13: The Phonecall No One Called

Safechuck alleged Jackson pressured him to testify, but records confirm that he had no relevance in the 2005 trial proceedings.

Lie #14: The Grammy Awards

Safechuck mistakenly claimed he attended a Grammy awards performance. Jackson didn’t even attend the ceremony he mentioned.

Lie #15: Out in the Open

Safechuck asserted he was abused in clear view of others, yet the locations cited were highly visible to visitors and employees.

Lie #16: Grand Inconsistencies

Robson’s accounts have numerous contradictions regarding his time at Neverland, indicating an unreliable recollection of events he claims were traumatic.

Lie #17: The Nicknames

Robson and Safechuck alleged that Jackson’s nicknames were suggestive. In reality, the names were used affectionately among multiple friends of Jackson.

Lie #18: Way-Off-Camera

Robson claimed to receive a video camera after a supposed abuse event. However, records indicate he received the camera years prior, undermining his timeline.

Lie #19: The Reason Why Robson Testified in Jackson’s Defense

Robson testifying on behalf of Jackson while later claiming he didn’t know he was abused raises serious questions about the validity of his narrative.

Lie #20: Michael gave the Safechucks a house because they defended him

The timeline of events surrounding a loan from Jackson to the Safechucks contradicts claims that it was a payoff for their support during the trials.

Lie #21: Robson and Safechuck Have Nothing to Gain

The financial motivations behind both individuals’ lawsuits are clear, in contrast to claims made in the film.

Lie #22: Dancing Stephanie

Safechuck’s mother claimed she rejoiced upon Jackson’s death, yet her son had not revealed any abuse at the time.

Lie #23: “Michael pushed us away from our families”

Contrary to the claims in the film, both families testified they were often present during interactions with Jackson, dispelling the idea of family separation.

Lie #24: Never Left Neverland

Robson and Safechuck described Neverland as a paradise. They continued to visit even after Jackson’s passing, contradicting claims of trauma.

Lie #25: “Nothing’s emerged that cast any doubt on what they told”

Director Dan Reed’s assertion that no evidence undermined the claims is clearly contradicted by the substantial evidence against them.

The discussions surrounding “Leaving Neverland” bring forth numerous contradictions and false narratives that warrant a deeper look into the claims made therein. As seen above, there are significant inconsistencies and a lack of concrete evidence supporting the accusations presented in the documentary.