Thread by @ibelieve_6

🧵MYTH: “JASON FRANCIA ADMITTED TO BEING ABUSED BY MICHAEL JACKSON ONLY BECAUSE THE DETECTIVES WERE PRESSURING HIM AND HE LIED TO GET THEM OFF HIS BACK.”
#leavingneverland

Reality: More than myth, this is an assumption that if analyzed with the facts that have happened in the long term, it really does not make sense. If Jason Francia had admitted to being abused just to please the police

at the time, he would not have continued his story twenty-five years later.

Let's review the facts:

In November 1993 and March 1994, the thirteen-year-old son of Michael Jackson's former maid, Jason, was questioned by police as part of the investigations into

the Jordan Chandler case. On first questioning, he denied any abuse, stating that he did not recall any indiscreet touching from MJ. Detectives began to pressure him, saying they "knew" that Macaulay Culkin had also abused and referring to Michael Jackson in derogatory terms .

The pressure of the authorities on children during sexual abuse interrogations is not unusual and is not out of protocol, since most children are not willing to cooperate, whether due to fear, shame, complicity or some other inhibitor. This is a problem for the

authorities because testimonies are the only sustainable evidence in cases of sexual abuse. According to the FBI book "Child Molesters: A Behavioral Analysis," interviewing children whose sexual victimization is only suspected can be the most

difficult, complex, and sensitive interviews. The investigator must weigh a child's understandable reluctance to talk about sexual victimization against the possibility that the child was not a victim. Quoting:

Perhaps the only thing to debate is the offensive words used by the detectives against Michael Jackson, but as far as their work is concerned, the insistence is justifiable.

After investigators told Jason that, he said, " Well, I'll have to work on that ." He finally gave in to the pressure. According to excerpts from the interrogation of him that Mesereau showed him in 2005 , Jason said : “They [the interrogators] made me come out with a

lot more things that I didn't want to say. They kept pressing. I wanted to get up and hit them over the head."

He also admitted that he said things in those interviews because "I was trying to figure out how to get out of there."

The truth is that it is rare for a pre-teen boy to lie about being abused by another man, even if it is supposedly to please the authorities:

Eight common myths about child sexual abuse

People suggest that his words mean that he lied in order to get away from the police. Could that be the justification?

No, if we take into account subsequent events.

If his confession had been just a lie to get the police off his back, he would have simply denied it later, or given it up long ago. He wouldn't have talked about it for the next twenty-five years. In 1995, a complaint

was filed on his behalf to file a lawsuit with the authorities, but Michael Jackson paid in an out-of-court settlement declining to proceed. In 2005, ten years later, Jason collaborated with justice as one of the prosecution's witnesses. In 2017, he met with

Dan Reed to tell him about his experience. The truth runs marathons, and the truth of Jason has run 25 years.

Interviewer: Were there other accusers who spoke up but didn't want to be on camera?

With all this, the justification of the defenders simply does not hold, the most reasonable and what Jason also explained, is that during the interrogation he felt angry that the police did not stop questioning him and finally gave up, telling the truth. For a child, especially

a boy, it is not pleasant to say that a man touched your genitals. It's not an easy thing to accept, which is why Jason was so reluctant and so upset to finally have to confess. Quoting one of the paragraphs of the aforementioned book: “Interviewing a teenage victim

of sexual exploitation is extremely difficult at the best of times.The stigma of homosexuality and the shame of victimization greatly increase the likelihood that the victim will deny or misrepresent sexual activity. The investigator must accept the fact that even if revealed

by a victim, the information is likely to be incomplete, minimizing her involvement and responsibility and, in some cases, exaggerating the criminals.”

From Child Sexual Abuse Disclosure: What Practitioners Need to Know (2016)

That is precisely what Jason explained about his questioning on the stand .

The fact that in his interview with the authorities Jason first denied abuse and then did not detail his story in full the first time, is not evidence of falsehood. Actually, it may be corroborative evidence.

From Child Sexual Abuse Disclosure: What Practitioners Need to Know (2016)

Jason entered therapy shortly after his confession to the police. He lasted in her until she was 18, which he wouldn't have had to do if it had all been based on a lie. (And obviously Mesereau tried to dispute that fact.)

He also said that he had become a religious youth minister and that his pastor was one of the only people who had recently told him about his abuse. Until that moment, it was obvious that Jason was still feeling shame for what happened to him.

The manner in which this confession was given is not unusual for children who have been sexually abused, so the fan argument that it is due to a hoax really does not fit into the reality of sexual abuse investigations. childish.

Credit : link here
…erdad-sobre-michaeljackson.tumblr.com/post/615107298…