Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Why do some people defend Michael Jackson despite allegations?
Executive summary
Many defenders of Michael Jackson point to his 2005 criminal acquittal, decades-long fandom, and what they call inconsistencies or motives in accusers’ accounts; fans and family mounted legal and media rebuttals after the 2019 Leaving Neverland film and earlier claims [1] [2] [3]. Scholarly and journalistic accounts show organized, forensic fan campaigns that marshal trial records, depositions, witness statements and counter-documentaries—and critics say those same tactics can amount to motivated denial or “forensic fandom” [4] [5] [6].
1. Why the 2005 acquittal remains central
Many supporters treat the 2005 jury verdict—Jackson was acquitted on all criminal charges—as decisive evidence of innocence, and repeatedly cite the trial and long investigations that “did not conclude he was guilty” when rebutting later allegations [1] [3]. Legal outcomes are concrete events fans can point to; journalists note that fans frequently highlight trial transcripts, depositions and perceived inconsistencies in accusers’ testimony as bases for ongoing defense [4] [6].
2. Fandom as organized counter-investigation
Jackson’s most loyal fans are not passive; reporting describes organized, digitally savvy communities that assemble evidence, file lawsuits, produce rebuttal films, and launch social media campaigns (#MJFam, #MJInnocent) to contest accusations and the narrative in Leaving Neverland [2] [6] [7]. Academics label this activity “forensic fandom,” where fan-produced nonfiction seeks to restore an artist’s reputation by discrediting accusers and reinterpreting publicly available records [5].
3. Family, friends and former colleagues who defend him
Family members and long-time associates publicly defended Jackson—calling some accusers opportunists or liars—and some launched projects to counter allegations, such as nephew Taj Jackson’s crowdfunding for a documentary and legal actions by fan clubs in France invoking defamation law [4] [7]. Industry colleagues and people who worked with Jackson have also testified they never observed wrongdoing, and these personal recollections are widely circulated by defenders [8] [2].
4. Why critics call these defenses partial or biased
Scholars and some journalists warn that fan defenses often rely on selective evidence and a partisan reading of facts—what a ResearchGate essay calls “biased argumentation” that can reinforce myths about false allegations and present extortion narratives as default explanations [5]. Major outlets described certain fan communities as highly zealous and prone to treating the issue as a battle over reputation rather than a neutral forensic inquiry [6].
5. The role of narrative and perceived injustice
For many supporters, the story of Michael Jackson is not just about legal facts but about perceived character: his music, charitable persona, and decades of admiration create cognitive and emotional investment that fuels denial of damaging claims [9] [10]. Journalistic accounts show fans view Leaving Neverland as one-sided and lament the lack of direct opportunity for Jackson (or his defenders) to respond, reinforcing their sense of a media “public lynching” [2] [6].
6. Accuser reversals, timing, and motive questions
Defenders point to changes in accusers’ accounts—such as Wade Robson, who testified in Jackson’s defense in 2005 and later sued the estate—as grounds to question motives and credibility; this reversal is frequently cited in defense narratives [1] [11]. Legal and journalistic sources note that such timeline shifts complicate public understanding and are used by both sides to argue credibility or fabrication [1] [3].
7. Recent controversies and competing allegations
Contemporary reporting includes new disputes over declarations and claims—supporters attacking accusers’ statements and, conversely, the estate accusing former defenders of extortion in more recent filings—showing the dispute remains adversarial and legally entangled [12] [13]. Available sources do not mention a single uncontested resolution; instead they document ongoing battles over evidence, motive and reputation [12] [13].
8. What the sources do and do not settle
Primary reporting and analysis document why defenders rely on acquittal, witness statements and investigation outcomes; they also document organized fan efforts and scholarly critiques of those efforts [1] [5] [6]. Available sources do not mention any new, universally accepted forensic conclusion that conclusively resolves the matter for all observers—coverage shows dispute and polarization persist [4] [10].
Conclusion: The mix of a high-stakes criminal acquittal, decades of intense fandom, organized “forensic” rebuttals, close personal testimonies, and later reversals or lawsuits creates a combustible set of reasons why some people continue to defend Michael Jackson; at the same time, scholars and journalists warn those defenses can be selective and motivated, leaving the broader public debate unresolved [3] [5] [6].