'We had a wedding ceremony in his bedroom': Michael Jackson accuser reveals he 'married the singer when he was ten!

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,555
438
460
#1

(HBO Pic)​
ames Safechuck says that he was just 10 years old when he and Jackson, then 30, held a mock ceremony, while also showing off some of the pricey jewelry he received from the singer.

'I was really into jewelry at that time and he would reward me with jewelry for doing sexual acts to him,' explains Safechuck in a preview for the documentary.

'He would say that I need to sell him some so I could earn the gift.' At this time, Safechuck had known Jackson for a year after meeting in 1987 on the set of a Pepsi commercial.
'It just feels like the greatest thing when he calls. He'd come over and we'd spend the day shopping or hang out, or he'd come over and he'd spend the night. Or we'd go to the Hideout in Westwood and spend a few nights there.'

The Hideout was Jackson's apartment in Los Angeles where he would stay when recording or doing press because the Neverland Ranch he had purchased one year prior was a three-hour drive from the city.

Safechuck says that Jackson then took things one step further with a bizarre request
'So we were like this married couple. I say married because we had this mock wedding ceremony,' he claims.

'We did this in his bedroom and we filled out some vows like we would be bonded forever. It felt good. And the ring is nice. It has a row of diamonds. The wedding ring.'

Safechuck then holds up the ring, with his fingers shaking, and shows how it barely fits on his adult finger.

'It's hard to go back to that moment,' he says.
As Micheal came into the window
It was the sound of a crescendo
He came into His apartment
He abused him on the carpet
he ran underneath the table
There were wedding vows, he was unable
So he ran into the bedroom
he was struck down, it was his doom
James, are you ok?
So, James are you ok
Are you ok, James
James, are you ok?
So, James are you ok
Are you ok, James
James, are you ok?
So, James are you ok?
Are you ok, James?
James, are you ok?

You've been hit by
You've struck hit by
A sick criminal!

No but seriously, this guys story seems to match up from some previous statements, and they put him in the new documentary based on it. Suck that this guy was manipulated, I can kind of see why, he was ten and didn't understand the world, Michael was this big thing (this was post skin bleaching also) and was at the time the biggest pop singer, maybe even the biggest musician at the time as he didn't really start falling until the 90's.

But the wedding thing is very bizarre.
 
Jun 13, 2017
914
978
210
#4
Recently I have been wondering about MJ and noticing that people are ready to condemn R. Kelly and basically boycott his music (deservedly so) but people seem to willingly ignore/forget the child molestation accusations against MJ. Is it because there’s less public evidence against MJ?
its because MJ made good music.
 

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,555
438
460
#5
Recently I have been wondering about MJ and noticing that people are ready to condemn R. Kelly and basically boycott his music (deservedly so) but people seem to willingly ignore/forget the child molestation accusations against MJ. Is it because there’s less public evidence against MJ?
It's because of the White Privilege that MJ receives. lol.

But seriously, his pre-bleech albums off the wall and Thriller were kind of like the first decade ad a half of Eddie Murphy movies, soo good that everyone just decided to let everything slide, even though by the time the first accusations came out post-bleeching, he was already not as big as he was.
 
Dec 18, 2010
8,238
959
660
51
washington d.c.
#6
I’m a huge MJ fan so biased, but I’m going to need hard evidence. Michael wasn’t some slick, clever guy. None of this stuff ever held up in court, and the plaintiffs and parents were all too willing to settle for a check. Real abuse victims tend to be genuinely trying to prevent a criminal from doing a heinous act repeatedly. Not saying it’s impossible, but I’m going to need the proverbial smoking gun/video.
 
Last edited:

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,555
438
460
#10
No. Vast majority of his music was strictly on black radio, ‘ urban contemporary ‘. You would have to be pretty ignorant of his music to even suggest that.
You can keep denying his audience statistics but that won't change because you want to. They do track buyer demographics. The group HE wants to target is irrelevant.
 
Likes: Hayfield
Dec 18, 2010
8,238
959
660
51
washington d.c.
#12
You can keep denying his audience statistics but that won't change because you want to. They do track buyer demographics. The group HE wants to target is irrelevant.
Statistics. I would be curious to see the statistics you seem to be aware of that suggest his audience was predominantly white, like MJ. To me it’s self evident they are completely different target markets but I’m willing to be educated.
 
Likes: JareBear
Jan 17, 2006
1,676
426
1,150
#14
I’m a huge MJ fan so biased, but I’m going to need hard evidence. Michael wasn’t some slick, clever guy. None of this stuff ever held up in court, and the plaintiffs and parents were all too willing to settle for a check. Real abuse victims tend to be genuinely trying to prevent a criminal from doing a heinous act repeatedly. Not saying it’s impossible, but I’m going to need the proverbial smoking gun/video.
And in this instance there is no longer any criminal to repeat the crime.
 
Likes: highrider
Jun 14, 2011
1,564
321
510
#15
I would like to see the evidence, it seems like the people coming out of the woodwork are looking for some quick cash. I wouldn't want any cash if someone did this to a loved one, I would want them to rot in jail.

I saw the following video posted somewhere else and checked some of what it says and it all checks out:

So, about that evidence, present it.
 
Last edited:
Jan 17, 2006
1,676
426
1,150
#17
Have any of these people that have come forward shown that they have spent thousands of dollars on psychologists due to the severe impact on their lives these incidences have caused them? If not than I assume they are bullshitting, have lived a happy healthy life and were not touched.
 
Likes: haxan7
Mar 6, 2018
1,871
2,507
300
#24
He had a secret family after the allegations, that he knew for years, and that all said he was a great person that never so much as made them uncomfortable. The kids in the family pretty much grew up knowing Michael. They did an hour interview with Oprah after he died, and said they wanted people to know. They had lots of pictures with Michael.

That interview and the way I openly talked about Michael Jackson for years was one of the main moments in my life that caused me to stop believing any allegations made without evidence I could see or hear for myself. Not to say that they couldn't still be true, but it's none of my business to judge someone about something that horrible without knowing if he actually did it. I also wouldn't judge his accusers and assume they're lying. Those matters should be for a court to decide and no one else.
 
Jan 7, 2018
859
566
290
#27
Robson who appears in the documentary defended Jackson in court in 2005. He also attented his funeral and has praised him many times after his death. He wanted to be in Michael Jackson Cirque du Soleil show few years ago but the Estate didn't want him. Then he started the accusations and sued them. They are only after money.

Here is a statement Jackson's Estate released some time ago:

Leaving Neverland isn’t a documentary, it is the kind of tabloid character assassination Michael Jackson endured in life, and now in death. The film takes uncorroborated allegations that supposedly happened 20 years ago and treats them as fact. These claims were the basis of lawsuits filed by these two admitted liars which were ultimately dismissed by a judge. The two accusers testified under oath that these events never occurred. They have provided no independent evidence and absolutely no proof in support of their accusations, which means the entire film hinges solely on the word of two perjurers.

Tellingly, the director admitted at the Sundance Film Festival that he limited his interviews only to these accusers and their families. In doing so, he intentionally avoided interviewing numerous people over the years who spent significant time with Michael Jackson and have unambiguously stated that he treated children with respect and did nothing hurtful to them. By choosing not to include any of these independent voices who might challenge the narrative that he was determined to sell, the director neglected fact checking so he could craft a narrative so blatantly one-sided that viewers never get anything close to a balanced portrait.

For 20 years Wade Robson denied in court and in numerous interviews, including after Michael passed, that he was a victim and stated he was grateful for everything Michael had done for him. His family benefitted from Michael’s kindness, generosity and career support up until Michael’s death. Conveniently left out of Leaving Neverland was the fact that when Robson was denied a role in a Michael Jackson themed Cirque du Soleil production, his assault allegations suddenly emerged.

We are extremely sympathetic to any legitimate victim of child abuse. This film, however, does those victims a disservice. Because despite all the disingenuous denials made that this is not about money, it has always been about money—millions of dollars—dating back to 2013 when both Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who share the same law firm, launched their unsuccessful claims against Michael’s Estate. Now that Michael is no longer here to defend himself, Robson, Safechuck and their lawyers continue their efforts to achieve notoriety and a payday by smearing him with the same allegations a jury found him innocent of when he was alive.
 
Last edited:
Sep 4, 2018
2,504
2,779
265
#29
is this the guy that already testified before a court that nothing happened? then he went bankrupt and immediately started changing his story?

i believe MJ is innocent. there were multiple trials held and nothing came out. there were massive raids on his compound, tons of detectives looking into it, and they found nothing. most of his accusers were caught lying about all kinds of things. including this very one. his family was also making shit up.

it's one thing for Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein to have dozens of accusers, that shows a pattern, and is verifiable by investigating multiple witnesses. if this guy was a serial child molester, with a huge organization working for him to accrue victims, then where are the other victims? clearly they could have come out in the decades since it happened, especially with the whole #Metoo thing.

where are they? apparently they don't exist.
 
Last edited:
Sep 28, 2014
2,180
356
325
#35
Yeah all these claims were proven to be bullshit in the court of law and every single one of them has always been after money, not justice. If some dude touched my kid, the last thing I would care about is financial compensation. I'd want that piece of garbage behind bars after I beat the living hell out of him.

MJ is still innocent until there is hard evidence to say otherwise.
 

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,555
438
460
#37
Have any of these people that have come forward shown that they have spent thousands of dollars on psychologists due to the severe impact on their lives these incidences have caused them? If not than I assume they are bullshitting, have lived a happy healthy life and were not touched.
What's funny about this quote is, if you replaced MJ with "women" and made this same quote almost every other site outside of GAF would attack or ban you.

But since Micheal is a straight white male, that means he did it, evidence be damned.
 
#43
Wow weird reception. This isn't just some accusations out of the blue looking for a paycheck. This is about a grown man who lavished kids and their parents with expensive gifts in order to sleep alone with them. A person who didn't show any signs of sexual interests with adults. Someone who obviously craved affection from children. You give any pedophile a hundred million dollars and autonomy, a Neverland-ish mansion would be a very likely result. It's more of a stretch to say he wasn't doing something wrong with those kids than he was.
 
Nov 20, 2018
486
445
235
#44
Yikes, yeah, this is really uncomfortable. But I think it was very obvious that something was wrong with him when he started to undergo those surgeries. I am guessing the fame really made him mental.
 
Sep 4, 2018
2,504
2,779
265
#45
nope, he's always been crazy. there is an interview in Rolling Stone before Thriller came out, he was talking to the guy who designed the Pirates of the Carribean ride, having them install robots in his house. he's just a weird guy.

the person who this documentary is based on already accused him, then told the court he lied, and it never happened. his parents were also caught making up facts in the case. now he is reversing his story again. after the initial trial, he tried to work for MJ on several projects years later, before his death, then years after that, he went broke and started shopping around a tell-all book. nobody bought the book, so he went and did this interview, changing his story a third time. or is it a fourth?

anyways, if MJ was a serial molester, where are all the other victims? the time is right, the man is dead, and if he really abused all these kids, made this park with the specific intent to lure them in, then where are all the other victims? Cosby and Weinstein had dozens of accusers. this is this one guy, again, who already admitted to lying to the court.
 
Last edited:
Jun 6, 2004
3,129
6
1,300
36
Kentucky
#48
This is obviously just someone after money, and it's hard to believe HBO actually ran this (or is it?).

Hell, look at interviews with Corey Feldman and Macaulay Culkin as adult men; both of which spent a ton of time with MJ as children, and both say that absolutely nothing sexual ever happened.
 
Likes: DeafTourette

Voost Kain

Daily Mail headline writer
Jun 6, 2015
1,555
438
460
#49
Yikes, yeah, this is really uncomfortable. But I think it was very obvious that something was wrong with him when he started to undergo those surgeries. I am guessing the fame really made him mental.
Initially, the surgeries were for a disease and then it became more personal right before he fully bleached and then after it stayed personal.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
3,912
3,144
410
#50
I mean it seems like everything lines up for him to be a pedo, but there has yet to be any evidence produced that he was. After all these years and all these accusers nothing. Reading whats being written here these two guys stories sound even fisher then originally thought.

Micheal clearly had issues, and he had lots of money too. But I don't know if I can say 100% for sure that he molested children. I will watch the doc but it does feel sleazy that they come out with this now that the man is dead and can't defend himself.

Was any of the stuff about this guy changing his story mulitple times mentioned in the documentary or do they treat this as some sort of new revelation?
 
Likes: DeafTourette