Foxy,

While not trying to defend MJ who died a decade ago, I find the complete lack of any attempt by the documentary makers to incorporate any contrary evidence or commentary to be ethically objectionable given that the potential damage and consequences will not be felt by MJ, but only by his children and family.

Being old enough to remember the original trial of MJ and the associated press, accusations and speculation, there is virtually nothing new that is in the documentary that was not aired during the 2004/5 trial. MJ undoubtedly behaved inappropriately, and if tried today would not be able to pay off the parents who in many cases took the $ms and continued to let their children associate with MJ, several of whom have subsequently tried to boost their payoff by trying to sue MJ's estate and have failed due to the statute of limitations.

Secondly, if it is OK to give an unbalanced review on MJ, then it should also be permissible to accuse other historical characters such as the prophet mohamed of pedophilia due his taking of a wife under 10 years old for just one example.

SM,

Those who try to manipulate history and accuse
Muhammad of pedophilia - want to depict Islam
as a religion that legitimises child abuse and
abuse of women. They are disregarding the times
in which Muhammad lived and his actual relationship
history. The following link explains:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2012/sep/17/muhammad-aisha-truth

As for the documentary - "Leaving Neverland" it was more
about finding closure for the two young men. They were
entitled to have their say. As for MJ's children and family? -
that is something that they would have had to deal with -
because sooner or later the truth has a way of surfacing.
Children can't be held responsible for the sins of their
parents. As I'm sure Rolf Harris's daughter would confirm.

Foxy,

We agree then that the "documentary" was purely a platform for the 2 men to air their grievances after they said exactly the opposite on their previous platform in court.

That Aisha made the most of her "marriage" was in spite of the fact that she had bugger all options. That children were married off at six and raped at 9 was a sign of the times in Arabia and not in the rest of the world.

In Rome the practise was to arrange marriages to occur at 18, and in many other cultures marriages were arrange earlier, but very seldom consummated before puberty.

SM,

No we don't agree that the film was purely a platform
for the two men.

The film was described by the producer as a study of the
psychology of child sexual abuse told through two ordinary
families who were groomed for 20 years by a pedophile
masquerading as a family friend. The producer chose not
to comment on MJ's actions or motivations and to leave the
documentary "neutral." He wanted to present the film in a
way that was fully understandable in all its complexity.

Neither boy nor their families received any financial
compensation for the film.

As for child marriages? They were common throughout
history for reasons relating to poverty, insecurity,
as well as political and financial reasons. They were
common not only in ancient Rome but in England, Imperial
China and so on. Child marriages were always a truly
global occurrence that cut across countries, cultures,
religions, and ethnicities. Child brides could be
found in every region of the world. And they still are.

Foxy,

In your own words the producer portrayed the story as told by the two men without any feedback or criticism, that is as one sided a platform as it is possible to get.

Child marriages before 16 were common but not 6 year olds to old men.

Shadow Minister,

There's been a great deal of feed-back
concerning the film "Leaving Neverland."

It holds an approval rating of roughly 98% - and
its consensus states "crucial and careful."
"Gives emphatic breadth and depth to the complicated
after life of child sexual abuse as experienced by
adult survivors."

The reviews have been done by media outlets such as -
Boston Globe, Vanity Fair, Washington Post,
Los Angeles Times, Entertainment Weekly, Hollywood
Reporter, Daily Telegraph, Rolling Stone, Chicago
Sun, and many more.

As for child brides?

In many countries -( past and present) age
requirements were/are often ignored. The UN state departments
tell us that children (including some just above
or even below the age of puberty) are often still being
force to marry - (Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia,
Ukraine, Romani communities, Pakistan, to name just a
few.

Child marriage as stated earlier was/is a truly global
phenomenon that cuts across countries, cultures,
religions, and ethnicities. Child brides were and can be found
in every region of the world as a study of history will show.

See you on another discussion. This one for me has now run
its course.