Inner Michael

This period may go down in the history books as one of the darkest times in human communication and interaction. Humanity has certainly had its dark epidemic moments: the Black Death; the Budonic Plague; the insanity that funded a Cold War and its MAD policy (Mutually Assured Destruction or the end of life on Earth;) Witch hunts, concentration camps; AIDS was epidemic as is poverty, genocide, slavery, famine and starvation of the weakest among us– children. Many of those “wake up calls” went unaddressed because of sexism, racism, sexuality, classism, nationalism and elitism. Some came out of cultural and even religious divisions with some of those archaic and ego-manufactured “isms” or divisiveness continuing even today.

Much of the abominable behaviors of humans are born of ignorance and the need to feel superior to someone. Why is there that need to feel superior or special? Where does it come from? It comes from the human ego– an ego that feels unloved.

That was then; this is now.

I think that we, of modern culture, can no longer blame illiteracy, superstition or ignorance. At one time the world was too big to even know about other cultures classes and traditions. Communications and technology have made that world smaller. Television brought “story” and the opportunity to stand in another’s shoes and walk that mile to their suffering as well as our own. Support for public education assures everyone the opportunity to learn at least till threshold of adulthood and many have opportunities to enhance their basic education should they want to and are willing to work toward it.

And now comes the Internet bringing the world to our lap.

No, we can no longer claim isolation or ignorance to the plight, hardships and suffering of others.

But this new creeping epidemic, the hybrid of cynicism and narcissism is anonymous and scary and causes intelligent and reasonable people to become frightened, shifting them into survival mode. Cave dwellers needed survival mode, barbarians need it. We are not living in caves and barbaric is unforgiveable.

This new “Narcynism” forgets unity and solidarity and the value of placing the common good of all above personal interests. And people infected by this scary new hybrid “ism” never examine the long term consequences or estimate projections of how their singular actions might affect community. They never examine the impact on recipients, the fallout to community, the longevity or latitude of the action and it’s worse case scenario. The eventual and future outcome cannot be measured but can be predicted because one action sets in motion another action, and other actions ad infinitum. Everything you do impacts your community. “Community” means your neighborhood and now your neighborhood is your group/s, your culture, the world and the future. The amnestic personal ego forgets that we are all in this together, that the world is an interconnected web and that what affects one affects us all. And it affects the future in the form of what can happen and especially what can’t happen when something benevolent promoting the common good set in motion is stopped. Benevolent action is frequently killed by selfishness. The mini-mind sabotages the collective mind.

An action taken from within an “it’s all about me” (narcissism) or “I’m gonna get mine” (jealous resentment) is a mini-mind that is reactionary, retaliatory and violent. It’s an act of desperation and a silent scream: “I am afraid I’m not loved and never will be loved!” This flailing and lashing out is a cry for love.

There is another loss of love here when one loses his belief in self as an adequate and capable being. That belief in one’s own ability to provide and be provided for is to lose Self Love. And that is the most dire of situations. This lack of love for self and belief is a black hole of fear and eventual self loathing that can only end in one’s decay. It’s a rotting from the inside out and it’s all because one feels frightened and unloved.

The mirror is your looking glass. And the looking glass is your salvation. Self is the only savior here. Treachery will not save you. Money will not save you. So…

Newsflash: Throwing someone under the bus is NEVER EVER gonna get you some love. We human beings instinctively know what is soulful and what is not. Throwing someone under the bus is not soulful. Your soul knows it. Your body knows it. Your innards know. So you’re now on a one way ticket to your own ride under the bus. That bus has already left the station and is on a collision course with your future. It’s already on the way and barreling toward you set in motion by your own hand. You’re now in the crosshairs of escalating fear, and you have now invited it to be your constant companion. Love is gone. “And you can’t get it again.”

Everything reduces. It’s either fear or it’s love.

There are times, usually during or after catastrophic events, that human malaise and indifference to the suffering of other humans crashes past some invisible threshold and humans cry out or take action. But the tragedy that triggered the outcry soon fades from the human psyche and it’s back to normal for the collective. We must endeavor to be a vigilant and awake collective.

“The collective,” meaning humanity taken as a whole, is a strange being. It’s an alive amoeba-like animal with a mind made from the vectoring of where humans place their attention, concern, emotion, sensibilities and sense of moral and social justice. This collective when it speaks as one, has a voice that is effective, authoritative and can change things in the blink of an eye. When it’s recruited and organized or launched spontaneously to change something that is unacceptable, it’s unstoppable. But humans, when being dull and indifferent creatures, must first be shaken awake by a graphic and emotional appeal that stirs up sensibilities and outrage. But it’s often too weak with a short attention span. Sound bites are not change; they are lip service to change. Politicians count on the forgetfulness of the collective, the rapid *yawn* of the amoeba now on to the next fascinating or shiny thing.

The collective, once awake and stirred into commitment has made miracles, has taken on goliaths and won, has changed assumptions and changed culture and once in awhile changes the world and even saves planets.

But a once vibrant and healthy social conscience and impulse to improve things and thereby improve the world has gone to sleep. The pastime of rallying for common good has been replaced by a new pastime, a new game called Under the Bus. The rules of the game are: there are no rules. The idea is to find a way to throw other people under the bus– for fun, for profit, for personal gain, to secure 15 minutes of fame, to claim a temporary and false sense of superiority. In this game there are no winners. In fact everybody who plays loses. The players lose, the played lose and the observers lose. Everybody comes out of the game with a dose of PTSD from the trauma- inflicting it, experiencing it or witnessing it. In order to play this game you must live in fear but hide it from yourself. You must carry this fear to your finish line. While playing the game you must find ways to distract yourself from fear’s painful and gnawing presence– numb it, avoid it, deny it, medicate it… What’s the grand fear? That ‘there is not enough love to go around and you’re not getting your share.’

We’re not talking about romantic love or physical and sexually expressed love here. We’re not talking about the love you get for what you do (applause, applause.) We’re talking about the other kind– the love you get just because you’re you. The love you have for yourself because you  like who you have become. Love– just because you’re here. It’s not Divine Love itself (if you don’t know that kind or have a vacuum where it should live) but it’s the human expression of it– a pretty close second.

Love comes in many forms– acknowledgment, recognition, care, friendship, relationship, community, conversation, belonging, nurturing, caring, reciprocating, fierce protective love, someone (or you) demanding or evoking your best, someone cautioning you or saying “no” when you are about to harm yourself, rewards, promises, politeness, worthiness, manners, affection, listening, hearing, validating, including, surprising, hugging, acceptance, being seen instead of overlooked, encouragement, forgiveness, compassion, invitation, compliments, gifts, thanks, noticing, initiating, responding, replying, requesting, respecting…

You can’t do anything to get that kind of love; it’s freely given because of who you are being. People feel that. They know it. It’s a myth that there’s not enough love or not enough to go around. It’s a lie that love will run out. Love generates more of itself. It is expansive, not contracting.

Just as hate generates more hate, takes life and destroys– it contracts– leading to decay. Love, however, generates more of itself, gives life and deeper breath, healing, fullness and leads to rejuvenation and generation, creativity and aliveness and sparkle.

So which to do you choose?

Are you sure? When was the last time you threw someone under the bus?

Michael Jackson chose LOVE. Always. It’s how he was wired.

A study of Michael’s life finds a great deal of it spent under the bus by people who threw him there. For their own selfish reasons. The real cost is what the world missed out on whilst Michael Jackson was constantly struggling to get himself out from under the bus. Betrayals by employees, friends, spiritual advisors, neighbors, collaborators, hotel staff, flight attendants, hospital staff, “biographers,” loved ones, hangers on, hundreds of frivolous lawsuits, bought-and-paid for tabloid stories for cash held out by “journalists” and “reporters” and that’s only a fraction of the busses that came along. A piece of Michael Jackson was worth a lot of money and hundreds flocked to assert claims and cash in. They still are. They are still throwing him under the bus. The man was proved innocent and the man is dead! Is it any wonder he sought unconsciousness nightly? Is it surprising that he needed relief from pain? Hunting, hounding, exploiting and bullying publicly someone who was born sensitive and only to give the gift of art to the world is terrorism. And it seems the terrorists never stopped even up until his death. And now beyond it.

There is no blood left! There is only blood money.

I confess that I have, for a time, backed away and gone into seclusion. My faith, shaken, slipped sideways, now sits askew. I have isolated and pushed people away declining to engage. I don’t know how long this whatever-it-is will last. It doesn’t feel like a dark night of the soul; it feels necessary. I haven’t explored it deeply enough to know what it is yet or where it’s leading. It will reveal its secrets one day and do what it’s supposed to. If it’s supposed to heal, it will. Maybe it will even morph into more understanding and clearer direction that can somehow serve the future. Is it another call to “art in the service of humanity?” It carries that kind of energy but lags behind in words.

One thing contained in it is the coming face to face with the full frontal reality of a category of robbery that goes far too unrecognized. It is a knowingness that is hard to develop and harder to explain. And it’s painful. To go there takes a mixture of a willingness to stand in the fire of a truth while it burns and consumes you, feeling that truth fully without filtering it or censoring it and without any attempts to avoid or distract from it. “Cures” are not allowed: no TV, alcohol, medication, drugs, entertainment, music, sports, or false charity or cheerfulness. There is nothing cheery about this. It’s deadly.

To touch it means being quiet in the despair. It means allowing the realization to pierce you and paralyze you long enough to fully realize, fully experience the terror of it. We can talk about something abstract like what happened to someone else or we can place on our heads, the hat of the Empath, feel it and let it leak down and soak into the bones.

It is the opportunist that behaving like an insect or vampire, finds the robust and reddest blood, targets an easy appearing mark and sinks a bloodsucking tube deep in the jugular and completely de-sanguinates the body for the feeding of its own interests. That act is such an empty and angry loathing of self and disbelief in the abilities of self, in the future in the divine or God, that it wallows in its own vacuum where love and loving should be. There is nothing but death and decay in that prison. It was a choice. But no longer. Once chosen, it becomes a way of life.

A recent event by a Michael Jackson associate catapulted me into a position of choice. I could jump into the fray or I could allow the sucker punch to fully land. I let it land. And it led me somewhere. It led me to examine the whole stinking mass and mess of humanity that allowed this all to happen. And it’s only one example of it, and one human being but it involves someone so visible and so well known that it can shine a bright light on the darkest motives of humans and the shadow ghosts that motivate them.

Michael Jackson comes once again to give us a gift. The world’s poster boy for bullying in his life, driven by the pain of that, of mockery and no privacy, to seek relief in prescriptions to the point of unconsciousness, quite possibly and actually bullied to death certainly dissolved over time and most acutely in his last weeks of life, is now– after being exonerated of all accusations and charges– bullied after death by someone whom he befriended, mentored, and jump started in a lucrative artistic career that wouldn’t exist without him.

No matter that he is not being believed, doesn’t sound credible, finds the most opportunistic moment during a trial where his employer is accused of caring so little as to miss the signs that a fellow human being is in trouble and dying. His employer. Now and future employer. An employer embroiled in a trial that involves his past benefactor and his present one. So choose.

So he chose.

Yet, why should that have surprised me? It’s typical business-as-usual. The cost of doing business. Dirty business. And during trials the weapon of choice to sway public opinion and juries is… planted stories. Ugly stories. Ugly business. This is the corporate sociopathic business and profit at any cost. Michael Jackson became damaged goods the moment an ugly accusation was made. And all manner of decisions followed, followed by all manner of manipulation and sabotage. And it didn’t end with his death.

I can’t remember a time when I have seen humans demonstrate such ugliness and so little care for fellow humans. It’s not just about Jackson; it’s about everybody breathing. The human shadow is so restless and looms so large that it bursts and splats everywhere and on everyone. This is the mark of a self loathing society. Perhaps this plague should be exposed, should stink to high heaven so that it gets noticed. So that it sickens. So that it makes us shudder and shiver in disgust enough to provoke change.

We are not acting alone in this world. Not ever. Everything we do ripples out from us and into the greater world and that carries a grave responsibility.

Every action we take is being watched by someone who is perhaps vulnerable an any number of ways: young, impressionable, easily led, quickly influenced, uneasily hopeful, emotionally wounded, or simply lost… in a world that seems indifferent. And those who are observing us and our actions may be: children looking to adults for evidence of what matters and whom to emulate; what to copy from what they see; people looking for identity; human beings searching for their place in the world; children, or adults who are internal children trying to deal with the assaults of the world brought by choosing ego over spirit ; people confused by the bombardment of daily conflicting messages; minds discouraged by the inauthentic political rhetoric and impasses; psyches overwhelmed by the glut of data coming from every direction; bodies overtired and overworked trying to make it financially during lean times; weary spirits trying to make sense of the world; and the weary who have had enough but don’t have the courage to exit and so their spirit begins to wither while still in a body. They are the wounded. They don’t feel the love and that wound is gaping and festering. They are the walking wounded. They are us.

There is no love under the bus.

There is no love under the bus for you when you are there and there is no love under the bus when you throw someone there. And when you know you have thrown someone under the bus, your body knows you’ve done that; your mind knows you’ve done that; your soul knows you’ve done that. And from then on, there is no rest.

There are mangled bodies under the bus and those wounds are visible and heal from the inside out. If you threw someone under the bus, you are mangled too but invisibly. Those wounds will attempt to heal from the outside in– perhaps via the salve of money or promises of attention or fame or favor. But thirty pieces of silver burns an invisible scar into the hand that receives it that never goes away and no matter how many distractions are attempted, begins to eat away the flesh– of the mind and the body and the soul of the betrayer. If you are on the way to the bank laughing because you, an opportunist, threw someone under the bus, know that you just lit the fire of consumption inside you. Know that you have just invited your death into being. Know that you are now dying inside. It will be a slow death as your insides eat you from the inside out.

We humans know intuitively whether something is soulful or not. We know it; no arguments. The soul is your source of living and being even if you don’t recognize it. It is a kind of umbilical cord to the divine. And you have just cut it and severed your lifeblood supply. Shiny new things that sparkle will not satisfy. No amount of payoff will wash your soul clean again.

When you throw someone under the bus, you throw your soul under there too. Let the mangling commence for you have just thrown away your chance at love and you will never get it again.

So where do you go to feel the love? Well, you certainly don’t find it under the bus. And you don’t find it in yourself after you have thrown someone under that bus. What you find now is an unconscious self loathing. There will be no more love for in order to invite it into your life, you must love self first and love others equally. Every single religion on earth, every single tenet of morality, every mystical core of every philosophy or spiritual/religious practice when cracked open reveals the same golden secret: “Do unto others what you would have them do to you.”

Capitalism and the accumulation of wealth valued above all else, and above the welfare of human beings has brought us to this juncture in history and to a dark and dangerous place…

Under the bus.

Throwing people under the bus is a business practice. It’s also the cost of doing business. Mangled bodies? That’s just “collateral damage.” No animals were harmed in the making of this story? Humans are animals. Were people harmed in the making of this history? Collateral damage or damage control is necessary if the bus throwing is ever revealed. The Pentagon has a name for humans as collateral damage: “Bugsplat.” You are nothing more than a splat on glass. On your looking glass.

Throwing people under the bus has become business-as-usual, mainstream, cavalier, even an expected strategy for getting ahead or doing damage control. Corporations do it; politiicans do it; celebrity gossipers do it; the media does it; books do it; sports commentators do it; television interviewers do it; journalists, writers and authors do it; sitcoms do it; movies do it; law enforcement does it; even priests do it.

How much is enough? How much money? How much recognition? How much market share? And citing that old standard about having to answer to your investors– well money is not the only valued commodity. People, the planet and the future are too. So in thinking about that future what did you build today? Or did you throw the future under the bus?

And media: nobody but you really cares about your “breaking news” and whether you broke the story or not. Everything moves fast now and nobody keeps track of who said it first. Your race to be the first to break the story is an internal illusion. It’s a myth of invisible power that is only true inside your industry, inside your newsrooms and inside your heads. It doesn’t exist outside your fantasies. Nobody out here cares who “breaks the news” because we will have forgotten by tomorrow who said it first. It doesn’t matter to us. You all race around and risk breaking your necks to “break the story” while running over truth, over accuracy, over reasonable care, and even over bodies. All this racing to be the first doesn’t impress any of us. You don’t have to sell us the news; you just have to give it to us. Straight. You don’t have to make it sexy to get us to listen. We don’t need the gore and the blood and quite frankly we don’t respect you for violating the rules of decency.

All it takes is for one person with a platform or an agenda– legitimate or otherwise, to throw someone under the bus and the bus-throwing gets hyped becoming momentary exciting entertainment that spreads like wildfire, the flames fanned by the media itself. This bus-throwing is a mental illness. It’s called “conversion disorder” and it’s “dissociative” meaning one is disconnected– from oneself and one’s personal or collective humanity. It suggests people are not in their right minds. Hysteria is dissociative– separate from humanity- one’s own and others’. Pointing a jeering finger at someone and throwing them under the bus and then sending it viral doesn’t just diminish their dignity and humanity, it diminishes yours. And mine. All of ours.

Responsibility
No matter where you go or what you do, you are a member of the culture, a citizen of the world, an instrument of the future, a steward of the planet and… you are a role model.

Whether you realize it or not people look to you for evidence of humanity because they are starving for it. Give them some. They look for validation, for dignity and respect. Give them yours. Another word for evidence of humanity, empathy, vaidation, dignity or respect is…. LOVE.

People are hungry for LOVE and a world that loves them. Cynicism is eating people alive. Bodies are wasting away in an ecosystem where cynicism flourishes. It’s barren. The emptiness and meaninglessness of this epidemic of barrenness and desert and bleakness produces pathology that is flesh eating.

The new Michael betrayal stunned me. Who could have seen that coming? Those who know anything about Michael Jackson, his life and how he was treated know this is just one more bloodsucking attempt at draining the man just one more time. Everybody in his life did it. Why not in his death? There is no more blood, no warm flesh, there is only bloody money. And ill gained, it won’t nurture or keep its recipient warm. It should come as no surprise that stories are planted in news outlets and magazines especially during trials by those who would win at any cost, who would throw anyone under the bus to do it.

It should come as no surprise also that several writers who attempted to point out inconsistencies and facts that should be revealed were turned down by editors. “Michael Jackson” sells news, and therefore its procreators gain financially. And if the “Michael Jackson” story is tweaked just enough to make it shocking or sensational, it sells so much better. But they have known that for decades. The have done it for decades. The man has not one drop of blood left. He is dead. He is gone. There is nothing left to feed on but you can be sure the bloodsuckers, the leeches, the vampires will find something to gnaw on even if it’s only his bones.

I wasn’t going to write more about it because I didn’t want to give it energy, or feed it. But there may be something happening here that is important and cannot be foreseen. We don’t know yet. After being on trial all his life, maybe Michael Jackson is putting the world on trial.

Jackson seemed to be everybody’s banker and they all wanted their withdrawals from what they perceived as a bottomless pit and wellspring of cash, fame and vicarious glory. Once cash poor but asset rich, the estate once again appears to hold a treasure to those who would dip. This latecomer’s story wasn’t swallowed whole and didn’t get the attention and traction that was planned. In fact, people questioned the timing, the motive for revealing it now at the very moment the claimant’s employer is on trial for its uncaring and abysmal treatment of Michael Jackson. They’re not buying it. And what this betrayer and AEG is revealing is the cost of doing business with a disposable commodity– what Jackson has always been. They are also demonstrating what humanity has become. It sickens me. And I hope to god it sickens you.

In the last post we heard from Craig Baxter. I asked a few more prominent voices to weight in. With their permission, here is more response:

“I’ve had the opportunity to watch WR’s telecast interview(s). I prefer to use his initials as opposed to his name because I don’t care to contribute to his self-created, expanding celebrity status … at the expense of Michael Jackson’s name and reputation.

This man’s current allegations remind me of Thomas Mesereau’s assertion that “Michael Jackson was guilty … of being too kind to too many people.” In retrospect, he was certainly too kind to WR.
If WR’s claims were legit, he would be dealing with his “trauma” in therapy — NOT on a series of national & international TV shows. Did his therapist advise him to go on TV programs to deal with his recently-discovered “problem”? Of course not. Perhaps his banker or financial adviser did — more likely!

His attitude as a “victim” is rather cavalier; he comes across as smug, not traumatized. Presenting himself as a victim of long-ago and long-term “abuse,” he is unconvincing to me. I have had clients who were sexually abused and they do not present themselves or their situations like he does — and certainly not on television!

We know for certain that he is a liar. To be a liar NOW–rather than during MJ’s trial in 2005–bodes very well for his pocketbook. If he prevails, he stands to be awarded millions of dollars; he will never have to work again, at the age of 30 or 31! If he loses, he will have garnered an immeasurable, astronomical amount of publicity [the dollar value of the publicity will be in multiple millions of dollars]. Win or lose, he will have catapulted himself to the status of a real celebrity — controversial perhaps, but known everywhere. How else could a troubled, failing choreographer project himself onto the international pinnacle of fame, celebrity, victimhood, and POWER all at one time — with little expenditure of effort or money?

It’s a brilliant strategy and a no-lose situation for a man who aspires to be at the top of his profession. Historically, he rode the wave of MJ … to the point of his professional talent-plateau. He is a recent TWO-TIME loser to his rival Jamie King, whose talent earned him the coveted jobs on both of Cirque du Soleil’s magnificent Michael Jackson shows. Very ironic … and humiliating for a man–especially a protege of Michael Jackson!–with big career expectations and an ego to match.

Now he is creating another wave [in the other direction] that he hopes to ride to global celebrity status that will eclipse Jamie King and countless others who have talent and ability, … and all on Michael Jackson once again. This time, however, it’s through betrayal, disloyalty, and a reckless disregard for anyone but himself. Michael Jackson has a large family, loving children, and ardent fans around the world who will truly suffer from this debacle. I believe that WR is narcissistic, self-absorbed, and conniving.

I realize that it is not socially acceptable to criticize an individual who presents him/herself as the victim of sexual abuse. However, all of the elements of this case — timing; implausibility on so many levels; the prospect of quick, easy, and huge money; a deceased alleged perpetrator who cannot defend himself; titillating secrecy of the “sealed” allegations; and on-camera behavior that is incongruent with a real victim’s–override the social niceties, in my opinion. This man has a plan. Hopefully he will be revealed as a plotter and an opportunist of the worst kind.”

Dr. Karen Moriarty, Licensed Clinical Psychologist & Author of “Defending A King ~ His Life & Legacy.”
———————————-

Charles Thomson, British journalist and Huffington Post Blogger had something to say about this situation as well:

The sworn testimony that will come back to haunt Wade Robson

When you’ve been covering Michael Jackson for any significant period of time, you come to believe that nothing can shock you anymore. Since I began reporting on Michael Jackson for various media organisations, he has announced the biggest concert residency of all time and then died before he could complete it. A doctor has been jailed for his homicide and a posthumous album has caused international scandal by containing tracks allegedly sung by an imposter.

For many years, Michael Jackson’s life (and after-life) has been a quagmire of scandal, controversy and legal wrangling. Presently, entertainment company AEG – which promoted Jackson’s ‘This Is It’ concerts – is on trial over what the singer’s family feels is a modicum of responsibility for his death. Already, witnesses have testified that Jackson was banned from the stage during some rehearsals for fear he would injure himself. A producer has testified to weeping as she saw Jackson rambling at rehearsals that God was speaking to him. She told jurors she had warned senior production members she believed he was dying and needed to be transported to hospital, only for her pleas to go ignored. Less than a week later, he was dead.

To a seasoned Jackson correspondent, none of this was surprising. It seems that not a week goes by without some drama or another engulfing the deceased music legend or those closely associated with him, from copyright disputes to kidnap allegations. But last week there was a development in the Michael Jackson sphere which truly did surprise me. Wade Robson, who has staunchly defended Michael Jackson for 20 years and even testified for him in his 2005 trial, filed papers against various organisations connected to the pop legend, seeking multiple pay-outs for alleged childhood abuse.

The choreographer claims he was sexually abused for seven years, from age seven to age 14. The news has rocked the Michael Jackson community. Those who loved him have sprung to his defence while those who built careers on attacking him had reacted with undisguised glee. Jackson’s ex-wife Debbie Rowe has labeled the financial demands ‘opportunistic’ and Jermaine Jackson has branded the choreographer ‘full of shit’.

Civil rights lawyer Tom Mesereau, who defended Jackson in his 2005 trial, has suggested the claims are ‘suspicious’ as their public filing coincided so neatly with the AEG trial. Indeed, the allegations broke as make-up artist Karen Faye testified that she and others had raised repeated concerns about Jackson’s health but had received callous responses from those in charge. Robson’s televised interview days later ensured little media attention was paid to testimony from an AEG employee that financial papers proved Murray was the company’s employee, not Michael Jackson’s. Wade Robson has repeatedly worked for AEG and apparently already has future work lined up with the corporation, but his lawyer has denied any connection between the court cases.

In light of Robson’s sudden change of tune, I have dusted off my complete trial transcripts from the 2005 government prosecution of Michael Jackson. While many news reports have mentioned that Robson testified for Jackson in the case, few have made any particular effort to underscore the gravity of his testimony.

Wade Robson was such a compelling and assured witness that Michael Jackson chose him to open his defence case at trial. Under sustained and sometimes aggressive questioning by government prosecutor Ron Zonen, Robson not only denied any impropriety on Jackson’s part, but did so repeatedly, vigorously and convincingly – even mocking prosecutors and describing the mere suggestion of sexual abuse at Jackson’s hands as ‘ridiculous’.

As a side-note, the idea that in a trial about alleged child sex abuse, a genuine abuser would choose somebody they had molested for seven years as their first witness to undergo unrelenting government cross-examination may seem somewhat far-fetched to the casual onlooker.

When viewed alongside some of the comments he made on the Today Show this week, Robson’s testimony is likely to cast more than a reasonable doubt over his new claims. He answered clearly and competently to detailed questions about various examples of alleged misconduct. The testimony is so immensely damaging to his new legal demands for money that he and his lawyer have already floated two potential, but arguably equally unconvincing, explanations for the bizarre u-turn.

When the story about his demands for money went live last week, Robson’s lawyer was quoted as saying the choreographer had recovered ‘repressed memories’, a story many suggested could have been designed to explain away Robson’s strenuous denials in the 2005 trial without admitting to perjury. However, Robson’s claim was met with such incredulity – many eminent psychologists do not even believe in repressed memories and even those who do took rather a dim view of Robson’s somewhat extreme story – that he has since changed tact.

Robson claimed in his TV interview this week that the real reason he told jurors he was not molested was that he had not realised that what Jackson allegedly did to him was abusive – another claim guaranteed to raise many an eyebrow. He was a successful, professional 22-year-old man at the time of his testimony.

Under oath in 2005, Robson was asked repeatedly about particular acts and whether he knew Michael Jackson to have performed them upon any child. He responded vehemently that not only had he never witnessed any such behaviour, but he was steadfast in his opinion that Michael Jackson would never have engaged in it.

Looking back over the 2005 court documents, the latest explanation for his testimony simply does not stand up to scrutiny. For instance, he was asked specifically whether Jackson had touched his body. Regardless of whether he believed Jackson’s conduct to constitute sexual abuse, if Jackson had indeed touched his body, the clear answer would have been ‘yes’. But it wasn’t ‘yes’. It was ‘no’. Over, and over, and over again.

He even testified that after what he now claims were several years of sexual abuse at Jackson’s hands, he returned to the scene of the alleged crimes more than 20 times in later life, with friends and relatives in tow, for relaxing getaways. He also testified to remaining in touch with Jackson and still considering him a close friend. Indeed, several years after the trial, Robson continued to socialise with Jackson.

Shortly after Jackson’s death was announced in 2009, Robson wrote that Jackson was ‘one of the main reasons I believe in the pure goodness of humankind’. According to Jackson’s brother Jermaine, Robson and his mother helped him pen portions of his autobiography about the media’s unfair portrayal of his brother as a child molester. Indeed, since Jackson’s death Robson has paid public tribute to the star repeatedly, as recently as 2012. He even applied last year for a job choreographing a tribute show to his alleged molester, but did not get the gig.

Wade Robson has filed a creditor’s claim against Jackson’s Estate, seeking a cash pay-out for alleged childhood abuse. He has also filed a civil lawsuit against various Jackson-affiliated companies, seeking further financial compensation for his alleged abuse.

He insisted this week that his new claims were ‘not about money’.

The full transcript of Robson’s testimony on May 5, 2005, totals almost 14,000 words and runs across 60 pages of A4. It includes lots of repetition and discussion about where he lived, when his parents separated and various other tangential asides. Below, I have extracted what I believe to be the key testimony. It is difficult to see how, given the existence of this sworn testimony, Robson could ever convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that Jackson had ever acted inappropriately in his presence.

A cynical person might therefore interpret Robson’s high profile TV interview this week as an attempt to avoid ever getting into a courtroom and having a jury test his new claims. How many more high profile public attacks can Jackson’s Estate suffer before it is forced to begin considering a settlement? At this stage, the ability to damage the Estate’s earning potential is about all Robson has got on his side – because the evidence is firmly on Michael Jackson’s.

Here is the testimony nobody else in the media is showing you. See for yourself.

Under direct examination by Michael Jackson’s lawyer, Tom Mesereau:
Q. Do you consider Michael Jackson your friend?
A. Yes.

Q. Do you consider him a close friend?
A. Yes.

Q. You’re aware of the allegations in this case, are you not?
A. Yes.

Q. And are you aware, as you sit here today, that there’s been allegations that Mr. Jackson molested you?
A. Yes.

Q. Mr. Robson, did Michael Jackson ever molest you at any time?
A. Absolutely not.

Q. Mr. Robson, did Michael Jackson ever touch you in a sexual way?
A. Never, no.

Q. Mr. Robson, has Mr. Jackson ever inappropriately touched any part of your body at any time?
A. No.

Q. How many times do you think you’ve stayed in Mr. Jackson’s room at Neverland?
A. Same amount of times as I’ve been there. Well, no, that’s not true, I’m sorry. I’ve been there a bunch of times without Michael, just with other friends and family traveling there. But, I don’t know, maybe 15 to 20.

Q. And at no time has any sexual contact ever occurred between you and Mr. Jackson, right?
A. Never.

Q. Have you ever taken a shower with Mr. Jackson?
A. No.

Q. Have you ever gone swimming with Mr. Jackson?
A. Yes.

Q. And please explain what you mean.
A. One time with my sister and I, my sister and I and Michael, we went in the Jacuzzi at Neverland Ranch.

Q. And do you know approximately when that was?
A. I don’t. I can’t say for sure. I have a feeling that it was within that first trip in ‘89 when I went there.

Q. Do you recall what Mr. Jackson was wearing in the Jacuzzi?
A. From my recollection, he was wearing shorts. You know, like swimming shorts. And that was it.

Q. Did anything inappropriate ever happen in that Jacuzzi?
A. No.

Q. Has anything inappropriate ever happened in any shower with you and Mr. Jackson?
A. No. Never been in a shower with him.

Q. Mr. Robson, has anyone told you what to say in this courtroom today?
A. No.

Q. Is everything you’ve said the complete and honest truth?
A. Yes.

Q. Did Mr. Jackson ever do anything wrong with you?
A. No.

Under cross-examination by government prosecutor Ron Zonen:

Q. All right. Now, the first time that you slept with Mr. Jackson you were seven years old; is that correct?
A. I slept in the same bed with him. But, yes, I was seven.

Q. Did you understand my question to mean something other than that?
A. Sounded like it.

Q. Were there periods of time when you were at Neverland and working with Mr. Jackson on dance routines?
A. No. I mean, we would mess around and dance a little bit in the studio every now and then, yes.

Q. Was there ever an occasion where you were on the dance floor with Mr. Jackson and he was showing you a routine and he grabbed your crotch in a manner similar to how he would grab his own crotch while doing those performances?
A. No, that’s not true.

Q. You have no recollection of that?
A. No.

Q. That didn’t happen?
A. No.

Q. Now, at any time did you start to develop conversations with your mother about the propriety of sleeping with this man who’s now well into his 30s?
A. No.

Q. Did you consider it unusual at all?
A. No.

Q. Did your mother consider it unusual?
A. No.

Q. Did you ever talk to your father about it?
A. Yeah.

Q. You talked to your father about your sleeping with Michael Jackson?
A. No, I mean, you know, everybody knew, and nobody ever said that it was — we never talked about it being unusual or anything like that.

Q. Did your mother ever ask you if anything inappropriate happened in bed with him?
A. No.

Q. Did she simply assume nothing happened?
A. Yes.

Q. You’re telling us nothing happened; is that right?
A. Yes.

Q. All right. What you’re really telling us is nothing happened while you were awake; isn’t that true?
A. I’m telling you that nothing ever happened.

Q. Mr. Robson, when you were asleep, you wouldn’t have known what had happened, particularly at age seven, would you have?
A. I would think something like that would wake me up.

Q. Was there, in fact, a shower at Neverland in the suite, the bedroom suite?
A. Yes.

Q. But you didn’t use it?
A. I used it by myself.

Q. Was he in the room while you were using it?
A. In the bedroom, not in the shower room, which had its own door.

Q. You haven’t gone back to Neverland since you were 13?
A. I have. Not with him.

Q. Have you gone back to Neverland since you were 13 and actually stayed overnight?
A. Yes.

Q. On how many occasions since you were 13?
A. A lot. Same thing. 20, 25. Something like that.

Q. Mr. Jackson would periodically kiss you, would he not?
A. No.

Q. Periodically hug you?
A. Yes.

Q. Touch you?
A. Hug me. That would be —

Q. Put his hands through your hair?
A. No.

Q. Touch you about the head and the face?
A. Yeah.

Q. Did he ever kiss you on the cheek?
A. Yeah.

Q. Did he ever kiss you on the lips?
A. No.
Q. Were there occasions that Mr. Jackson would summon you to Neverland Ranch?
A. Summon me?

Q. Yes. Call you up and ask you to come and be there; invite you to Neverland Ranch?
A. Invite us, yeah.

Q. On the occasions that you stayed in bed with Mr. Jackson, would you ever cuddle in bed?
A. No.

Q. Would you lie next to one another?
A. No.

Q. Would you touch?
A. No.

Q. Would you consider it to have been inappropriate to have cuddled in bed?
A. Sorry?

Q. Would you have considered it to be inappropriate to have cuddled in bed?
A. No.

Under re-direct by Tom Mesereau:

Q. Okay. The prosecutor asked you questions about whether or not you were considered family. Did you consider yourself to be part of Mr. Jackson’s family?
A. Yeah, I mean, in a friendship sort of way. Because we were that close. It was like family.

Q. And did you use the word “family” once in a while —
A. Yes.

Q. — when you spoke to him?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you hear your mother or sister using the word “family”?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you think anything was strange about that?
A. No.

Q. The prosecutor for the government asked about Mr. Jackson giving you a kiss on the cheek.
A. Uh-huh.

Q. And you said that happened sometimes?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you think there was anything inappropriate about that?
A. No.

Q. Did you do it in front of your mom?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you do it in front of your sister?
A. Yes.

Q. Did your mother kiss him on the cheek?
A. Yes.

Q. Did your sister kiss him on the cheek?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you kiss Mr. Jackson on the cheek?
A. Yes.

Q. Did your mother used to hug Mr. Jackson?
A. Yes.

Q. Did Mr. Jackson used to hug your mother?

MR. ZONEN: I’ll object as irrelevant what happened with his mother.
THE COURT: Overruled. Go ahead.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did Mr. Jackson used to hug your mother?
A. Yes.

Q. Did your sister used to hug Mr. Jackson?

MR. ZONEN: I’ll object as leading as well.
THE COURT: Overruled.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Did your sister used to hug Mr. Jackson?
A. Yes.

Q. And would you see Mr. Jackson hug your sister?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever think there was anything inappropriate about Mr. Jackson hugging any member of your family?
A. No.

Q. Did you ever think it was inappropriate to see any member of your family hug Mr. Jackson?
A. No.

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.

Q. And what do you recall the children doing in his room?
A. Well, before we went to sleep, same sort of things. We’d play video games, watch movies. Have pillow fights. You know, yeah.

Q. Did you ever see anything of a sexual nature between Mr. Jackson and any of those children?
A. Never.

Q. Have you seen Mr. Jackson hug other children at Neverland?
A. Yes.

Q. Have you seen other children hug Mr. Jackson at Neverland?
A. Yes.

Q. Have you ever thought any of this was inappropriate?
A. No.

Q. Have you seen Mr. Jackson kiss children at Neverland?
A. On the cheek, yes. Or on the head, or on the top of the head, something like that.

Q. Ever seen kids kiss Mr. Jackson?
A. Yes.

Q. Any of that ever look inappropriate to you?
A. No.

Q. Have you seen lots of children visit Neverland on occasion?
A. Yes.

Q. And what do you mean?
A. I think we were there once when he had one of his gatherings, like a Heal the World Foundation thing where he had a bunch of kids come up there and — you know, and have the day there.

Q. And how many kids are you talking about, do you think?
A. Probably about 100 or 50. 75 to 100, something like that.

Q. Were there adults with those children?
A. Yes.

Q. And you said, “Heal the World.” What did that mean to you?

MR. ZONEN: I’m going to object as exceeding the scope of the direct examination, and irrelevant, and beyond the scope of his knowledge.
THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer.
THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question?

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Yeah. What was “Heal the World,” as far as you remember?
A. As far as I knew, it was a foundation or a charity that Michael had created that, you know, raised money for kids with illnesses. I don’t know exactly what kind, but —

Q. Did you interact with any of these kids that visited that day?
A. I may have, yeah, I mean, waved at them or met a couple of them or something like that.

Q. Did you see Mr. Jackson hugging other children?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you see them hugging him?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you see Mr. Jackson kiss children?
A. Yeah.

Q. Have you seen them kiss him?
A. Yes.

Q. Ever seen anything inappropriate?
A. No.

Q. Did you see Mr. Jackson hug adults who were with those children?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you see adults hug Mr. Jackson who were with those children?
A. Yes.

Q. Ever think any of that was inappropriate?
A. No.

Q. Now, the prosecutor for the government asked you questions about whether he touched your hair.
A. Uh-huh.

Q. Do you recall Mr. Jackson ever touching your hair?
A. I can’t recall an exact thing, but it seems like something he might have done at some point.

Q. Do you ever recall Mr. Jackson doing anything inappropriate with your hair?
A. No.

Q. Ever seen Mr. Jackson touch another child on the head?
A. Yes.

Q. Have you seen that many times?
A. Many times.

Q. Did it ever seem like anything inappropriate was going on when you saw that?
A. No.

Q. Ever see Michael throw water balloons at kids?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see Michael in golf carts with kids?
A. Yes.

Q. When you used to play at Neverland during the day, would Michael often be with you?
A. Yes.

Q. And what would Michael do with you?
A. We’d go on rides together, you know, where we’d drive around in the golf cart together, look at animals together, watch movies together.

Q. Did you see Mr. Jackson act in a similar way with other children?
A. Yes.

Q. Ever see anything inappropriate go on when he was doing any of these things?
A. No.

Q. Now, how often do you recall your mother going to Neverland with you?
A. It’s been every time except for that one time that I spoke of when I was there with Jordie Chandler and Macaulay and I.

Q. What do you recall seeing your mother do at Neverland?
A. A lot of the same things with us.

Q. Would she sometimes be with Mr. Jackson when all the kids were playing?
A. Oh, yes. She was playing along with us.

Q. Now, you mentioned visiting an apartment in Century City with Mr. Jackson, right?
A. Yes.

Q. And what do you recall doing in the apartment with Mr. Jackson?
A. Same sort of things. He had arcade games there. You know, candy. We’d eat, we’d watch, you know, T.V. shows, Stooges. Hang around, play games, you know.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Jackson do anything inappropriate with any child at that apartment?
A. No.

Q. Where else have you been with Mr. Jackson?
A. Like I said, we covered Las Vegas. Westwood apartment, Century City apartment. Sheraton Hotel. He came and stayed at my place once.

Q. Where was that?
A. That was in Hollywood. It was — my mother and I had a condo, and my sister.

Q. Did you see Mr. Jackson do anything inappropriate at any of these locations?
A. No.

Q. Ever seen Mr. Jackson touch any child in a sexual way at any of these locations?
A. Never.

Q. Did Mr. Jackson ever touch you inappropriately in any of these locations?
A. No.

Q. Now, have you been following media reporting in this case?
A. Yeah. On and off.

Q. You’re aware of allegations that were made that Mr. Jackson —

MR. ZONEN: I’m going to object as leading and exceeding the scope of the direct — cross.
THE COURT: I don’t know what the question is yet.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Okay. You’ve been following these reports that somehow Mr. Jackson was seen inappropriately touching you?
A. Yes.

Q. What do you think of them?
A. I think it’s —

MR. ZONEN: I’ll object. I’ll withdraw the objection.

THE WITNESS: I think it’s ridiculous.
MR. MESEREAU: No further questions.

Under re-cross by Ron Zonen:

[NB: Prosecutors showed Wade Robson a handful of legal art books found among tens of thousands of books at Jackson’s home, which included a large library. Some of the art books, featuring work by respected photographers, depicted children, occasionally nude. Others featured adult men in ‘homo-erotic’ poses. Some were found bubble-wrapped and unread. Others featured inscriptions, showing they had been mailed to him by fans. All of the books remain legally available to purchase. Also found at Jackson’s home were thousands of adult, heterosexual pornographic magazines, some of which were also shown to Robson.]

Q. Okay. You can go ahead and close that one right now. Mr. Robson, are you concerned about a man possessing these seven books being in bed with a 12-year-old boy?
A. If it was a man I didn’t know, maybe. But not Michael.

Q. Is that because you view Mr. Jackson as being, for the most part, asexual?
A. No.

Q. Because you believe that he doesn’t really have a sexual interest?
A. I believe that he has a sexual interest in women.

Q. Did you know that he possessed these magazines?

MR. MESEREAU: Objection, Your Honor, he didn’t let the witness complete his answer.
THE COURT: Sustained.
MR. MESEREAU: Could the witness complete his answer, Your Honor?
THE COURT: Yes.

THE WITNESS: I believe that he has a sexual interest in women.

Q. BY MR. ZONEN: In women?
A. Yes.

Q. These books don’t suggest otherwise?
A. Not necessarily.

Q. The collective material that you have just been shown does not cause you a moment of pause when you think about the prospect of this person who possesses all of this crawling into bed with a ten-year-old boy?
A. No.

Q. And you would allow a child to crawl into bed with such a person?
A. If I knew the person, yes.

Q. If you knew them?
A. Yes.

Q. Your own child, you’d have no problem sleeping with a 35-, 40-year-old man?
A. If I knew the person well, no.

MR. ZONEN: No further questions.

Under re-direct by Tom Mesereau:

Q. Mr. Robson?
A. Yes.

Q. That’s your fiancee right there, correct?
A. Yes.

Q. You are heterosexual, correct?
A. Yes.

Q. You are a close friend of Michael, correct?
A. Yes.

Q. By the way, did Michael Jackson ever — oh, I’ll ask from there. When you were a young child, did Michael Jackson ever show you any sexually explicit material?
A. No.

Q. Did you ever see Michael Jackson show sexually explicit material to any child?
A. No.

Q. Okay. And let me show you again Exhibit No. 842, “A boy; A Photographic Essay,” okay? And that’s the one with the inscription, “To Michael, from your loving fan, Rhonda,” okay?
A. Yes.

Q. And have you had a chance to flip through that book?
A. Yes.

Q. In fact, you see young children with rather innocent photographs of young boys, correct?
MR. ZONEN: I’m going to object as leading, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Overruled.

Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: Innocent photographs of young boys in various situations, right?
A. Yes.

Q. Okay. You see a young boy hanging from a tree, right?
A. Yes.

Q. You see a young boy sitting outside a door, right?
A. Yes.

Q. See young boys on a beach, right?
A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Now, let’s go to — quickly, to the material the prosecutor for the government showed you, okay? He showed you some magazines with heterosexual activity, correct?
A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Have you seen one book that depicts child pornography in that group?
A. No.

MR. ZONEN: I believe there was a Court restriction on the use of that word, Your Honor, one initiated by the defense. Unless that reservation is finished.
MR. MESEREAU: He’s correct. And I made a mistake using the word. I’ll withdraw it, and I apologize.
THE COURT: All right. The problem is that sometimes it’s an appropriate word to use and sometimes it’s not. But the jury’s been instructed on it. And so if you want to rephrase it, that’s fine.
MR. MESEREAU: Okay.

Q. In those books that the prosecutor for the government showed you, you see books about men, right?
15 A. Yes.

Q. You see one book that says, “A Study of Male Sexuality” and shows some sexual acts between men, correct?
A. Yes.

Q. And he showed you a number of magazines involving sexual activity between men and women, correct?
A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Has he shown you one book involving children having sex?
A. No.

Q. Has he shown you one book where a man is having sex with a child?
A. No.

Q. The prosecutor tried to suggest that Mr. Jackson is asexual. Do you remember that question?
A. Yes.

Q. Do you believe he’s asexual?
A. No.

Q. Have you seen Mr. Jackson with women in your lifetime?
A. With what kind of woman? A woman that he’s in a relationship with?

Q. That he’s been married to.
A. Yeah, with Lisa Marie.

Q. When you were at Neverland, did you ever see anything that suggested pedophilia?
A. No.

Q. Ever see any magazine or poster that suggested pedophilia?
A. Never.

Q. Has anything this prosecutor for the government has said to you changed your opinion of Michael Jackson?
A. Not at all.

Q. Does it change your opinion as to whether or not he ever did anything inappropriate with a child?
A. Not at all.

MR. MESEREAU: No further questions.
MR. ZONEN: I have no questions.
THE COURT: Thank you. You may step down

 

The saddest voice to weigh in on the “he harmed me” story was Taj Jackson revealing something that he would have preferred (and should have been) kept private:

Taj Tweeted:

What people will $ay and do for money and to $tay relevant is $ickening. De$perate times call for De$perate mea$ures.  #Money
I will not sit back and let someone flat out lie about my uncle. PERIOD.
I write these words knowing that the minute I press send my life will never be the same afterwards.
I was sexually abuse (sic) By an uncle on my mom’ side of the family when I was a kid.
My uncle was a support system for me and my mom. He wrote a letter to her that many have seen already, u just didn’t know what it was about
That is how I KNOW Wade is lying. Because I AM a survivor.
My hands are still trembling.
Don’t forget I was living at Neverland when Wade testified during my uncle’s case. I sat there and ate dinner with him and his family.
I will not let them smear my Uncle’s legacy.
I don’t want to go on TV. I don’t want publicity, I just want the truth.
I always told my uncle Michael that I would take a bullet for him. I mean it today just as much as I meant it back then.
I hate that Wade made me do this, this way. But since my uncle Michael is no longer here to defend himself. I will.
Make no mistake. Since my uncle Michael is no longer here to defend himself. I WILL. Even if that means friendships.

The illustration is of a letter written to Dee Dee, Taj’s mother from Michael Jackson:

“Dee Dee, please Read this article about child molestation and please read it to Taj, Tj and Taryl, it Brings out How even your own relatives can be molesters of children, as even uncles or aunts molesting nephews or nieces. Please read. Love MJ”

Oh the courage that it took to send out these Tweet messages. Taj’s message is that his Uncle Michael was his support system and his mother’s support system after he was molested by another relative. And Uncle Michael kept the secret his whole life to honor a young man’s privacy. And now he is compelled to reveal it to the world.

He was just re-victimized. He is reliving it once again. He is being re-traumatized now and Michael’s own children are being traumatized and abused right now as we speak.

Even children thrown under the bus is just the cost of doing business.

This week this is what I remembered. Someone who must remain anonymous sent it to me:

We Are Here

They prepare a sweet feast, and bid us, “Covet.”
They have dressed the table in
snow-soft linen;
each place gilded with
silver flagons, crystal salts and
plates of porcelain, placid blue.
Thin consomme bowls
shine in coppery decadence.

They tease us with the scent of sugar;
trifles of cake and pink-berry cream,
tins of iced caviar, with spoons –
mirages of serene seas.

They have numbered all his bones;
accounted, weighed, and measured
each humiliation, loss, slice, and stab.

His loneliness and despair
chilled, gelled
to delicate aspic.

Dine with us.
Dine on Michael Joseph Jackson.
Dine on beauty, compassion, faith and charity.

They bid us, “Sup.”
Sup on creation;
On the father,
brother,
son;
On God’s child;
his genius and talent,
sweat, joy, generosity;
his pride,
his courage, strength
and frailty.
Sup in vampiric delight.

We see the glaring shine of glass,
and glint-sharp knives,
illuminated in gorgeous, changing hues.

No.

Their seductive invitations
and predatory smiles are
salaciously bold and droning.
The droning
burns our bellies,
dries our mouths,
stills our hearts, and
stupefies our souls.

We will not dine
on Michael’s bones.
We cannot touch the marrow spoons:
long and sharp and narrow,
like the fingernails of a
succubus.

We cannot eat his
beauty
sauced with our
shame.

Forgive us.

We will not sin,
although the dulcet music
soothes us
dizzies us.
It is the symphony of
his self-completion.

We will not trespass.

We will not feast
on the hostage of siege.
We will not –
no matter how famed the
abattoir,
titillating the lies
or,
sweet
the flesh.

We will not sin:
compound our sins
of ignorance,
indifference,
abandonment.

We will bear him up
gracefully,
gratefully,
gladly
our beautiful king, true friend;
and give him succor, safety
over our heads.

 

When they’re not throwing him under the bus, they are dining on Michael Jackson’s bones. And now with nothing left to give in this life, he continues teaching from the next. Perhaps that’s the whole point. Maybe the world’s best teachers come from the back of the bus or under it. And that’s another kind of love altogether.