Is the “Brett Barnes” Twitter Account a Fake?
Feb 22, 2020
In August 2010, the Twitter account @IAmBrettBarnes was created, claiming to be Brett Barnes from Melbourne, Australia, who had a close relationship with Michael Jackson as a child and adult. Brett Christopher Barnes, who would now be around 38 years old, accompanied Jackson on numerous trips and spent over 450 nights in his private bed, most of them as a preteen, according to the 2005 trial transcripts.
The @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account initially featured a image of a young Brett Barnes with Michael Jackson at Disneyland Paris, before being changed to a black circle and background, presumably in support of Black Lives Matter. The Wayback Machine has archived the @IAmBrettBarnes account back to 12 August 2013, revealing that the description, which states: “Applehead Club Doodoohead,” has remained unchanged.
The account is rather mundane, with its entire Twitter timeline easily readable within an hour. Most of the tweets revolve around wishing Michael Jackson a happy birthday and marking his death, along with numerous retweets from Taj Jackson and other selected Twitter users. Additionally, the account shares a few holiday snaps and random photos, none of which feature Brett Barnes himself. Notably, since the release of Leaving Neverland, the account has directed baseless and derogatory tweets at its subjects, James Safechuck and Wade Robson.
For example, one tweet compared their allegations to the fictional space alien movie, Independence Day.
So people are getting their facts from a movie now? I wonder how they feel about the documentary showing the great alien invasion of '96. I think it was called Independence Day.
View original tweet here.
Despite a decade-long close personal relationship with Jackson, the account does not disclose any personal moments with Jackson, share unique photographs, or regularly interact with any of its 7000+ followers, particularly when personal knowledge is required.
A verified Twitter account isn’t solely about disproving sceptics or providing followers with a sense of superiority; its purpose is to signify the authenticity of the account and "encourage and maintain trust between users on the platform."
For more than ten years, the @IAmBrettBarnes account has remained unverified. Contrary to the widespread belief that only “celebrities” can obtain the blue tick, this is not the case. Anyone of public interest can apply to have their Twitter account verified.
This is what Twitter says:
"The blue Verified badge on Twitter lets people know that an account of public interest is authentic. To receive the blue badge, your account must be authentic, notable, and active."
It is safe to assume that an account managed by the genuine Brett Barnes would attract significant public interest, particularly considering Brett's substantial presence in the public eye before, during, and after the 2005 Michael Jackson molestation trial, as well as in 2019 following the release of Leaving Neverland.
There are various methods to verify a Twitter account, with the simplest involving the provision of a “government-issued identification document, such as a driver's license or passport.”
The @IAmBrettBarnes account has made tweets, concerning a holiday in Greece.
If we are to assume that this is indeed the authentic Brett Barnes, an Australian citizen, then it is evident that they possess a passport that could be submitted to Twitter for account verification.
Jackson fans have resorted, and will continue to resort, to extreme measures to defend their idol. Jordan Chandler has been victimized by impersonation multiple times, including the circulation of a fabricated confession story soon after Jackson’s death. Gavin Arvizo has faced even more distressing experiences, including threats of severe violence and the targeting of his 2013 wedding. Despite never accusing Jackson of any wrongdoing, Brett Barnes has remained quiet since 2005, at least officially. This silence alone must irritate the MJ fan base, and it is not unreasonable to suspect that an imposter might intentionally impersonate him to create a favourable impression.
After all, anyone can sign up and assume any identity within a matter of minutes. Even some Jackson fans have expressed scepticism about its legitimacy. When questioned, the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account posted the following tweet:
Hi. I'm a real private person so sorry I won't share a new photo. But I essentially look the same as the photos of me in 2005. And maybe one day I'll share my story.
View original tweet here.
The tweet posted by @IAmBrettBarnes appears rather peculiar for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Brett Barnes is already a well-known public figure, and hence the release of a single unique photo would not constitute a serious breach of privacy. On the contrary, it could dispel doubts and demonstrate respect to the account's followers. It's also hard to imagine that the real Brett Barnes would not possess unique photographs of himself with Jackson, or personal gifts akin to those received by James and Wade.
It's also unusual that there are no interactions from former school friends, current acquaintances, work colleagues, neighbours, or family members. Given Brett's global exposure as a child alongside Michael Jackson, including a television appearance orchestrated by Anthony Pellicano, and his involvement in a high-profile 2005 trial, it's surprising that there is no interest from those who knew him personally.
Fans who oppose the authenticity of the account being scrutinized often assert its legitimacy based on the endorsement by Taj Jackson. However, over the past year, I've come to realize that Taj Jackson is a habitual liar with credibility akin to those who believe the earth is flat.
I tweeted:
Well, naturally, when you set up an account and call yourself Brett Barnes: the boy who spent hundreds of nights in Jackson's bed, you would expect sum basic elements of proof.
@wikibustamante responded:
Well Taj follows him, I think he would have realized if he wasn't the actual Brett Barnes, don't you think?
I responded:
Yeah, but #TajJackson has deceived millions of donors via his GoFundMe page.
View original tweets here.
After highlighting to a Twitter user (@wikibustamante) that Taj Jackson has included misleading statements in his $777,000 GoFundMe description, essentially creating a fraudulent campaign according to GoFundMe's terms and conditions, it elicited an angry response from the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account, which tweeted the following:
Listen here, you pathetic little troll. Crawl back into the little hole that you came from, look in the mirror at yourself everyday, and remind yourself that you will never amount to anything except for being a poor excuse for a human.
View original tweet here.
The @IAmBrettBarnes account could have chosen to respond in a composed and intellectual manner to prove doubters wrong, such as myself. Instead, it opted not to do so.
In a random attempt to sow doubt and confusion, Taj Jackson alleges that Wade Robson lied in Leaving Neverland about having dinner with Jackson before he testified. Wade stated that he had seen a frail Michael Jackson surrounded by his children, which solidified his determination to support him before giving evidence. Taj Jackson asserts that this dinner took place after Wade testified, not before.
He made the following tweet:
"How do you know, you weren't there."
That has been one of the main lines the press have used against me as I speak up for my uncle.
Someone sent me this part of the "doc", and I can tell you with 100% certainly, Wade's WHOLE family flat out lied on camera in this video...
View the original tweets at: X.com
Taj Jackson then includes the @IAmBrettBarnes account in the discussion and makes the following statement:
My mother, sister and myself were definitely there for dinner that night.
Nevertheless, I saved a tweet from @StinsonHunter on April 12, 2019, where he points out that Brett Barnes testified under oath that he spoke with Wade Robson at Neverland Ranch, the day before appearing in court. This tweet was reported and taken down, although it didn't violate Twitter's terms and conditions. Fortunately, I was able to locate an archived version of it using the Bing search engine.
@StinsonHunter stated:
Oh dear @tajjackson3 @lambrettbarnes states under oath he was at Neverland with Wade the day before they testified in court...
See the archived version here: archive.ph
The @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account, again, responds angrily and states:
Hey dipshit, we were at court the day before we testified, waiting for the prosecution to rest. That's when I spoke to him. I didn't say I spoke to him at the ranch.
Under oath Brett Barnes states the following when under cross examination by Mr. Zonen.
Q. Do you know Wade Robson?
A. Yes.
Q. How well do you know Wade Robson?
A. Not very.
Q. Have you kept up some kind of friendship with Mr. Robson?
A. Nope.
Q. Is that a “no”?
A. That’s a “no.”
Q. When was the last time you spoke with Mr. Robson?
A. Today.
Q. All right. Today you saw him. When was the last time prior to today?
A. Yesterday.
Q. Okay. So you’ve been staying at Neverland, have you?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you have an opportunity to talk with Mr. Robson?
A. I had an opportunity, yeah. Yeah.
Q. And did you speak with Mr. Robson?
A. Yes.
Ron Zonen directly questioned Brett Barnes about his most recent conversation with Wade Robson prior to that day, to which Barnes unequivocally stated it was the previous day at the ranch, leaving no room for doubt. However, the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account vehemently asserts that Barnes never interacted with Wade Robson at the ranch, a claim that is evidently false.
For more information, read post 18.
It's difficult to believe that a mature man nearing his 40th birthday would openly support The Applehead Club, a setting where an adult man enticed unrelated children not only into his private quarters, but also into his personal bed for one-on-one sleepovers. A club whose "former" members now assert that they were groomed, seduced, and sexually abused by Michael Jackson.
In 2005, a 23-year-old Brett Barnes essentially stated that he ceased sharing a bed with Michael Jackson at the age of 19 because he felt it wasn't appropriate, considering Jackson's role as a parent to his own children.
Questions by Mr. Zonen:
Q. You can’t tell us how old you were when you stopped visiting Neverland?
A. I still -- I continue to visit to this day.
Q. Do you still sleep with Michael Jackson?
A. No, I don’t.
Q. How old were you when you stopped sleeping with Michael Jackson?
A. I couldn’t tell you that.
Q. Why don’t you still sleep with Michael Jackson?
A. Well, he’s got kids now.
Q. And?
A. And I -- it would be purely speculation if I told you. I could not answer that knowingly, like -- it’s just --
Subsequently, Brett verified that he was 19 years old...
Q. Can you tell us the names of the people who stayed in the room with you?
A. My sister. Macaulay Culkin. There was Levon and Elijah. There was Frank, Eddie, and Dominick.
Q. Was Frank --
A. Prince as well.
MR. MESEREAU: Objection, he hasn’t finished the question.
THE WITNESS: His son Prince as well.
Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Prince? Prince is how old now?
A. I’m not quite sure.
Q. About what, seven?
A. Yeah. I guess so.
Q. And how old was Prince when he stayed in the room with you and Michael Jackson?
A. I think he was three.
Q. All right. So it was about four years ago?
A. Yeah.
Q. So you stayed in the room with Michael Jackson when you were 18 years old?
A. Yeah.
Q. You’re 22 now?
A. 23.
Q. So you were 19 years old?
A. Yeah, I guess.
Mr. Zonen even brings to Brett Barnes' attention Michael Jackson's extensive collection of sexually explicit material.
Q. BY MR. ZONEN: Were you aware that he possessed sexually explicit material?
A. No.
It is peculiar that the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account actively endorses the so-called "Applehead Club," while Brett Barnes, at 19 and later at 23, didn't perceive it as appropriate to share a bed with other people's children.
Once more, during the molestation trial, Brett is questioned about his relationship with Jackson and whether he was subjected to any sexual molestation or inappropriate touching by Jackson.
Questions by Thomas Mesereau:
Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever molested you?
A. Absolutely not. And I can tell you right now that if he had, I wouldn’t be here right now.
Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever touched you in a sexual way?
A. Never. I wouldn’t stand for it.
Q. Has Mr. Jackson ever touched any part of your body in a way that you thought was inappropriate?
A. Never. It’s not the type of thing that I would stand for.
Brett is questioned about his sentiments regarding being identified as a potential victim by the prosecution.
Q. Are you aware of any allegations being made that Mr. Jackson inappropriately touched you when you were with him?
A. Yes, I am. And I’m very mad about that.
Q. You’re mad about it?
A. Yeah.
Q. Why?
A. Because it’s untrue, and they’re putting my name through the dirt. And I’m really, really, really not happy about it.
Therefore, unless Brett Barnes was dishonest and protecting Jackson, it can be firmly stated that he upholds honesty and strong moral principles, as evidenced by statements such as: "Never. It's not the type of thing that I would stand for" and "Yes, I am. And I'm very mad about that."
However, the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account continues to disregard requests from both supporters and sceptics regarding the authenticity of the account, and most notably, refuses to recognize that an unverified account could be a source of persistent misinformation, a fact that should understandably provoke considerable anger in the genuine Brett Barnes.
Furthermore, if the real Brett Barnes gets "very mad" about people making baseless and false claims against him, then why would he make baseless and false claims against James and Wade via social media? Either the real Brett Barnes is a hypocrite who doesn't practice what he preaches, or the impostor didn't do their homework.
On February 26, 2019, a legal letter was dispatched to the creators of Leaving Neverland on behalf of Brett Barnes, insisting on the removal of his name and likeness. While I have no doubt that the Jackson estate and/or family orchestrated the entire effort, one would anticipate, at the very least, that Brett provided his explicit consent. Nevertheless, I have yet to come across a copy or any discussions of this on the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account, which one would assume to be the primary platform for such information if the account were legitimate.
The brief document contains statements such as:
However, the @IAmBrettBarnes account has been actively creating and retweeting posts related to Leaving Neverland. As previously mentioned, some of these posts involve victim shaming as well as baseless retweets by Taj Jackson and Charles Thomson.
There is no mention within the document about Brett Barnes social media accounts being flooded with unwanted attention, which, again, makes you wonder.
Read the document here: leavingneverlandfacts.com.
Honestly, I am not certain whether the account is authentic or not. However, it remains undisputed that the account was created specifically to engage with fans of Jackson, yet it has not shared any personal stories or posted unique photographs even after a decade. One could argue that the real Brett Barnes would not tolerate an impostor, particularly when it appears on the first page of Google. However, it is possible that he tried and failed to address it, or simply does not deem it important. Jackson's daughter, Paris, had an impostor on Instagram, which took thousands of complaints before it was removed.
If it is indeed the real Brett Barnes, then naturally, his statement that he was not abused by Jackson should be respected. However, he should not use that relationship to discredit others, nor should he be posting baseless and derogatory comments towards those who say they were abused by Jackson.
December 2021 Update: It is now almost certain that the @IAmBrettBarnes Twitter account truly belongs to him. After nearly 11 1/2 years, Brett chose to share a picture of the navy suit he wore to Jackson's 2005 trial in response to further inquiries regarding his authenticity. The reason behind his decision to confirm his identity on social media after such an extended period, when he could have done so as early as 2010, remains unknown. While much of the content in this blog post may have become irrelevant, there are still some intriguing details that I will retain for readers.