Brandi Jackson Remembers Wade Robson’s “Bad” Antics
Aug 2, 2019
With the controversy and uproar caused by Leaving Neverland, it was inevitable that fans of Michael Jackson would respond with their own "documentaries" to counter the claims of him being a serial child molester.
One of the earliest responses on YouTube was a 30-minute documentary titled "Neverland Firsthand: Investigating the Michael Jackson Documentary," directed by Eli Pedraza, who incidentally bears a striking resemblance to the children's character, Where's Wally.
View the "documentary" at YouTube.
Despite the criticism aimed at Leaving Neverland for not including interviews with third-party sources outside of James and Wade’s family, this pro-Jackson documentary follows the same pattern by only interviewing individuals who present a positive image of Jackson.
Outside of the fan community, the documentary received mainly negative reviews, with the Telegraph labelling it a "ludicrous rebuttal strictly for the truthers" and awarding it 1 star out of 5.
The documentary attempts to establish Jackson as a victim of extortion by replaying a spliced audiotape of Evan Chandler and Dave Schwartz from Anthony Pellicano, without acknowledging that the recording was part of a larger conversation in which money or extortion was not mentioned.
Around the three-minute mark, the documentary addresses the issue of the multi-million dollar settlement that Jordan Chandler received in 1994 after accusing Michael Jackson of molestation. The documentary questions why an "innocent" man would pay such a large sum of money? That's easy, it wasn't Michael Jackson who made the payment, but rather his insurance company, according to private investigator Scott Ross, who was part of Jackson’s 2005 defence team.
His exact words are:
The money that was paid out to Jordan Chandler didn't come from Michael Jackson, it came from his insurance company. Have you ever had a car accident, and you say… but it wasn't my fault? The insurance company doesn't give a shit. They make a decision, and they do what they want to do. Everybody's going, but if he didn't do this… why is he paying this family $20 million? He didn't do it, the insurance company did.
A screenshot is even included in the documentary:
The notion that a mystery insurance company covered the multi-million dollar settlement instead of Jackson himself is quite peculiar. There was no mention of this during the negotiations in 93/94, and there was no indication that Jackson was prevented from defending himself. Jackson's signature can be found on the confession of judgment, where he agrees to pay Jordan Chandler $15.3 million.
The insurance settlement claim emerged shortly before the 2005 trial and was perpetuated by Brian Oxman, a long-term Jackson family lawyer who was ironically disbarred for "dishonest and unethical conduct" in 2012.
Instead of reiterating existing information, MJFacts.con has an excellent article on this topic, including Thomas Mesereau's agreement that no insurance company was involved in the 1994 settlement. (Link: mjfacts.com/insurance/)
Moving on to Brandi Jackson, who is featured in the documentary and boldly asserts that she had a relationship with Wade Robson for over 7 years, after meeting in 1991 when she was around 9 or 10 years old.
This alleged relationship has been extensively leveraged by Brandi Jackson and her cousin Taj Jackson to undermine Wade Robson’s allegations in both his civil complaint and Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland.
The notion that the alleged relationship discredits Wade’s allegations doesn't add up. Firstly, Wade, nor any other boy, alleged that Jackson molested them in front of others. Secondly, Wade, Brandi, and Jackson probably never spent more than one night together in the same room (more on that later).
According to Brandi Jackson, Wade had developed a crush on her and asked her uncle to arrange a situation for them to get to know each other. This led to a meeting at Neverland Ranch with Wade’s family, where after a week, Wade asked her to be his girlfriend, to which she agreed.
In the documentary, Brandi Jackson emphatically presents her and Wade's closeness, highlighting the genuineness of their relationship, particularly as they entered their teens, and the positive dynamic with the whole family.
She states:
We were always at each other's houses, our mothers were friends and this went on for years, and everything was fine until he became about 17 or 18 years old, and I started to see his behaviour change. He started to cheat on me and when confronted, he would deny it and claim he was working on a project or doing something else.
Both Brandi and Taj Jackson have heavily criticized the omission of these details in Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland, using it as a potent weapon to suggest that Wade is untruthful about being sexually molested by Michael Jackson from the age of 7 to 14.
Brandi Jackson underscores this viewpoint on her Twitter account (@BJackson82).
Tea time
Wade and I were together for over 7 years, but I bet that isn't in his "documentary" because it would ruin his timeline. And did I mention, it was my uncle, #MichaelJackson, who set us up? Wade is not a victim, #WadeRobsonlsaLiar.
View original tweet here.
However, given that Wade was listed as a potential victim by the prosecution in the 2005 molestation trial, and was repeatedly questioned by both the prosecution and the defence about whether Jackson sexually abused him, it's perplexing why Brandi, as a fully grown woman approximately the same age as Wade Robson, didn't provide an alibi for her former alleged boyfriend.
Irrespective of whether their alleged relationship allegedly turned sour after Wade allegedly cheated, the opportunity was there not only to defend her uncle but also to ensure the truth was revealed. This alleged truth remained concealed until the release of Leaving Neverland. Quite suspicious, wouldn't you agree?
Even more peculiar is the fact that Scott Ross, whose responsibility was essentially to uncover any evidence that would ensure Jackson's innocence, was apparently unaware that his "star" defence witness had the perfect alibi in Brandi Jackson. She could have easily refuted the prosecution's claims that Jackson sexually abused her alleged boyfriend.
Let’s now turn to the 2005 trial transcripts and examine whether Brandi Jackson was an integral part of Wade’s life or not. During cross-examination, Wade is asked whether any girls stayed in Jackson’s bed.
Q. Were there ever any girls, other than your sister, at age seven, who actually spent the night in Mr. Jackson’s room with you during the years that you knew him and spent the night in his room?
A. Yes.
Q. Who?
A. There was Brandy Jackson.
Q. I’m sorry?
A. Brandy Jackson, who is Michael’s niece.
Q. And she spent the night on how many occasions with you?
A. Only one that I can remember.
Q. One night?
A. Yeah.
Q. All right. So we’re talking about a period of about five years; is that right?
A. Yeah.
Q. In the five years, you can remember Brandy. Who else do you recall?
A. As far as females?
Q. Yes.
A. My sister. Brandy. That’s all I remember.
Q. Now, your sister actually never went back into that room and spent the night with you after that first week when you were seven; is that correct?
A. Yeah, not that I can remember.
Now, if we adopt the approach of Jackson truthers and emphasize that Wade was under oath, we must acknowledge the fact that he was truthful when stating that Brandi Jackson only spent a single night in the same room with him and Jackson. Despite Brandi’s assertions of their coupledom and the extended period of being one big happy family, there is no mention of this in the courtroom. Not even Jackson himself attempted to convey this revelation to his lawyers.
Further questions are posed to Wade about the sleepovers and Brandi Jackson:
Q. Now, you said your sister would sometimes stay in Mr. Jackson’s room, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And how often do you recall that happening?
A. I remember it just within that first trip we were there. So it was -- it was, you know, three or four nights or something like that.
Q. And you mentioned Brandy. Is that who you mentioned?
A. Yes.
Q. Who was Brandy again?
A. She was Michael Jackson’s niece.
Q. You saw Brandy staying in his room?
A. Yeah.
Q. What’s the largest number of kids you ever saw stay in Mr. Jackson’s room, if you remember?
A. Yeah, probably four to five.
Read Wade Robson's testimony here.
Once again, there is no mention of Brandi Jackson as Wade’s former long-term girlfriend. Surprisingly, neither the prosecution nor the defence seem to be aware of Brandi Jackson's identity. Even during the questioning of his mother, Joy Robson, and sister, Chantal Robson, Brandi Jackson isn’t referenced, despite her current claims of close friendship between her mother and Joy.
Furthermore, I find it perplexing why Brandi is so convinced in asserting that Wade’s behaviour drastically changed in his late teens, leading to infidelity and a pattern of lies and deception.
As illustrated in the tweet below, Brandi Jackson is unwavering in her belief that Wade Robson is entirely untrustworthy:
I found out Wade cheated on me with multiple woman who he hoped would advance his career. You might know one of them, because it was a huge pop music scandal. Wade is not a victim, he's an #Opportunist
View original tweet here.
What stands out here is that Brandi is portraying Wade prior to 2005. Any hypothetical relationship they may have had was over by his late teenage years, as Wade began dating Amanda Rodriquez, who is now his wife. Brandi lacks first-hand knowledge of the person Wade became or didn’t become after this period. Despite this, she and her extensive family, who presumably were aware of Wade's questionable behaviours, had no reservations about him being called up as a key witness to support Michael Jackson’s defence. The very same man she now characterizes as a cheater, opportunist, and a habitual deceiver was the linchpin of her uncle’s “innocence” just a few years later.
You couldn't make this up!
I have no issue acknowledging that Brandi and Wade had an on-and-off childhood relationship. Even Dan Reed conversed with Wade’s mother, Joy, who essentially corroborated the existence of such a relationship, although the claim of it lasting over 7 years seems a bit ambitious. It’s not the existence of the relationship that raises scepticism, it's the fact that Brandi is now attempting to sway an audience into believing that she and Wade were inseparable, and as a teenager and preteen, she would have been well aware of any potential abuse if it were occurring, despite the 2005 trial transcripts revealing her minimal presence when Jackson and Wade were together.
By Brandi Jackson’s own admission, her relationship with Wade was so inconsequential that it wasn’t even worth mentioning in her uncle's 2005 criminal trial. She also admits to never voicing concerns about Wade Robson's alleged cheating, lying, and exploitation of opportunities by his late teens. By her own account, a 22-year-old Wade Robson was morally integral enough to defend her beloved uncle.
Perhaps the greatest irony, if there is any truth to her claims, is that she effectively validates that Wade’s behaviour underwent a dramatic shift in his late teens to the extent that he became a master of deception. This could potentially support his claims that Jackson taught him how to lie.