Mike Smallcombe Contradicts His Own Logic
Oct 10, 2019
Mike Smallcombe, an avid supporter of Michael Jackson, staunchly maintains that the main Neverland train station was not fully constructed until spring/summer of 1994, about eighteen months beyond the timeframe of James Safechuck's abuse. This assertion is echoed in a recent documentary titled "Chase the Truth," in which Mike Smallcombe appears alongside a questionable group of individuals, including Matt Fiddes.
Despite the vast expanse of Jackson's former Neverland Ranch, spanning over 2700 acres with at least 50 to 100 structures and two trains with multiple stations by the mid-1990s, Mike Smallcombe associates James's account with the main Neverland Train Station solely because it appears on screen in Dan Reed's Leaving Neverland.
In an email exchange with Mike Smallcombe several months before the release of Chase the Truth, I inquired whether he would address any inconsistencies in survivors' timelines or locations, as documented by child molestation expert Kenneth V. Lanning. Despite being a journalist, Mike Smallcombe appeared uninterested in highlighting imperfections.
This was my second email to him, following the initial one that went unanswered on May 4, and was sent on May 27.
Hello, I sent you an email on 4 May, asking why you hadn’t included important facts about inconsistencies made by genuine sex abuse survivors in any of your Neverland train station news articles, et cetera.
I don’t know why you haven’t replied, perhaps it’s because you don’t want to acknowledge that genuine survivors do mix up dates and locations, because it doesn’t suit your pro-Jackson agenda.
However, because I’m a honest and fair person I will make you fully aware that I will be making a blog post about your Neverland train findings, and highlight why you have left out important facts.
You can give your honest reason why you haven’t included those facts, or you can just ignore me.
Either way, it’s your choice.
Thanks for your time.
My work was to research the facts that Dan Reed, the director, failed to find and/or deliberately left out of the documentary. I’m a journalist, I’m entitled to do that. All journalists should challenge accusations, how dangerous would it be to just take everything at face value without challenge, especially when millions of dollars are at stake?
Without people like me, there would have been zero challenge to these accusations, which would have suited people like you (I assume, I don’t know you) who simply will not accept there could be another side to all of this, just because it’s a sensitive topic. We are entering dangerous territory, where we must believe all alleged sex abuse victims, because of MeToo. It seems their truth is the only truth. How is this fair on the accused? Don’t they deserve their day in court / a defence?
Of course I acknowledge that genuine sex abuse victims can mix up dates, etc. But I don’t get what you are you asking me to do, add a disclaimer to every story I’m quoted in that this can happen?
The train station story is a major inconsistency, and if you have actually viewed the clip where Safechuck describes the supposed sex scenes in the train station, you will see they are graphically detailed, accompanied by photos of that station, the only one in the property. Detailed to the point where it can’t be a location mix up. Either it happened there, or it didn’t. Why go into such detail if you can’t be sure?
And if it did happen – the station wasn’t built/open until 1994, so it can’t be a date mix up, unless the alleged abuse lasted much longer (2+ years) after he said it stopped/until he was on the cusp of adulthood/taller than MJ. Abuse in the train station couldn’t have happened until he was 16/17 (fact). It would change the narrative that Jackson lost interest in boys when they hit puberty at 12-14. Safechuck testified under oath many times that the alleged abuse stopped in 1992, when he was 14.
And I don’t have a pro Jackson agenda — my agenda is seeking the truth and balancing an incredibly biased ‘documentary’ with information that was either ignored or deliberately hidden.
Regards
Hi, and thank you for the reply.
On twitter you claim: “It’s about journalism – I’m not going to sit and do nothing when I have the knowledge/resources to challenge and research.”
I haven’t got a problem about you highlighting that the main train station probably wasn’t built until late 93 and didn’t fully open until early/mid 94. It’s the fact that every news article you’ve written has left out important facts about inconsistencies made by genuine sex abuse survivors.
For example, Neverland was huge in size, and probably contained at least 50 to 100 structures and buildings during the latter part of James’s timeframe of abuse. If child and adult survivors can get timeframes and locations mixed up in a normal abuse situations, then the odds of one or more inconsistencies would be very high in a place such as Neverland.
Child sex abuse, or abuse in general is a very taboo subject, but there are some great resources online, written by professionals with decades of experience in the field. Kenneth V. Lanning, a former FBI Special Agent has compiled a complete guide when investigating sexual exploitation of children.
Here’s the link: missingkids.org
On page 169 you can find this: “Allegations involving multiple acts, on multiple occasions, over an extended period of time must be evaluated in their totality and context.”
“In my experience, many valid claims of child sexual molestation, especially those by this type of child victim, involve delayed disclosures, inconsistencies, varying accounts, exaggerations, and lies often associated with false allegations.”
The BBC has a more simplified page on why sex abuse victims forget details: bbc.com/future/story
All of these resources are easy to find, and for somebody like you who claims to be all about journalism and research, it’s baffling why not a single one of your articles contains anything about inconsistencies.
Sure, I get you work for British tabloids, and they want sensational stories, minus the full picture. But you also have your own Twitter account and other platforms where you could have given a much fuller picture on your findings.
I also understand you will be appearing in a Amazon film sometime next month. Will you be offering a full and balanced picture on your findings, or will it be another case of this train station did not exist, therefore we must think the worst about James and other Jackson accusers?
View the original emails here.
Despite making multiple attempts, I received no additional responses from Mike Smallcombe. It was clear that he had no intention of sharing any links to articles related to child sexual abuse or addressing whether he would incorporate fundamental facts about discrepancies in his involvement with Chase the Truth.
In Chase the Truth, Mike Smallcombe makes the following statement:
"In the Leaving Neverland documentary, James Safechuck gives this detailed story about how he was abused in different places around Neverland by Michael Jackson, including the grand train station which people will know from the floral clock in front of it... it's quite an iconic piece. So he goes into this detail about how he was abused in a room upstairs and pictures appear on screen, so it's definitely that train station."
Once more, Mike Smallcombe emphatically asserts that the location must be the main Neverland train station because of its on-screen appearance in Leaving Neverland, leaving no room for doubt.
In my initial writing about the Neverland train station in the spring, I consistently emphasized the inability to be completely certain that James was referring to the main Neverland train station, and its visual inclusion in the documentary was down to Dan Reed, who had little knowledge of the layout of the ranch.
For example, in a January 1992 Rolling Stone article, there is a description of a "train room" at Neverland Ranch, accessed by ascending a narrow staircase. For a survivor of historical child sex abuse, recalling specific details from decades past may lead to confusion between an upstairs train room and an upstairs train station room.
Here's the intriguing part: in Chase the Truth, at precisely 34:24, the director, Jordan Hill, displays images of the main Neverland train station immediately followed by a picture of the smaller CP Huntington train, which was installed in late 1990. This sequence occurs while Mike Smallcombe is on screen vehemently criticizing James Safechuck.
Below is the clip.
This train was not only operational within James Safechuck's timeframe of abuse (between 1988 and 1992), but Jordan Hill and Mike Smallcombe failed to acknowledge that it didn't even correspond to the photos presented by James in Leaving Neverland.
If I follow Mike Smallcombe’s reasoning, I can only arrive at one conclusion. The presence of the smaller CP Huntington, coupled with photographs of the primary Neverland train station in Chase the Truth, strongly suggests its existence prior to 1993. This train operated within Neverland from late 1990 onward and would have required at least one train station. According to Smallcombe, there was only one at Neverland Ranch, as the below screenshot shows.
I reached out to Mike Smallcombe once more to inquire whether he had previewed Chase the Truth before its August airing, and if he maintains his position on all aspects covered in the documentary, including the on-screen visuals, and so on.
For this communication, I employed a different email address, fully aware that I would never receive a response through my authentic account.
I recently watched a documentary that you featured in titled “Chase the Truth”. You specifically say regarding the Neverland train station that this has to be the train station that James Safechuck was allegedly abused in because it’s featured on-screen in Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland.
I was wondering, did you have a chance to view the documentary before it was released in August, or are you happy with the way you appeared in the documentary and stand by every word you said, along with the footage that the director included during your on-screen appearance?
Looking forward to your response and many thanks.
Hi, I don’t really understand what you mean.
Hi,
Sorry for the confusion. What I'm asking is do you stand by every word you said on that documentary and are you happy with the way the director portrayed your on-screen appearance?
Thanks.
I can’t recall saying anything I don’t stand by. Is there something that surprised you / I shouldn’t have said?
Are you happy with all the images the director used while you were speaking? Did you have a chance to view the documentary before it’s release online?
Thanks.
At this stage, Mike Smallcombe did his disappearing act, refusing to entertain any further inquiries. Subsequently, I attempted one final email to elicit a response regarding his awareness of the significant error made by him and the director in featuring the incorrect train, effectively undermining their own argument.
To be more precise, are you happy with the director showing images of the main Neverland train station, followed by a picture of the train? The very train when you’re speaking?
Thanks.
View the original emails here.
In essence, both Leaving Neverland and Chase the Truth show photographs and video clips fleetingly on-screen, with little discernible difference between them. Mike Smallcombe takes a critical stance against James Safechuck, asserting that he had ample opportunity to rectify any misrepresentations by Dan Reed if his photos were unrelated to the abuse. However, as a self-proclaimed Jackson expert with one pro-Jackson book available and another in the works, he failed to ensure that the director of Chase the Truth accurately depicted the train in relation to the correct train station.
All the assertions he has made over the past 6+ months, along with the multitude of tabloid news articles and television appearances, have been starkly contradicted by himself in a 60-minute documentary that he meticulously rehearsed for.