Internal Memo: Case Against Jackson Unfounded

Posted by

DECEMBER 9–A confidential investigation by Los Angeles police and child welfare officials concluded earlier this year that allegations Michael Jackson sexually abused a cancer-stricken boy were [b]”unfounded,”[/b] according to an internal government memo obtained by The Smoking Gun. The probe’s findings were based, in large part, on interviews with the alleged victim, his two siblings, and the boy’s mother. According to the memo, when the child was questioned in February by a social worker assigned to the Sensitive Case Unit of L.A.’s Department of Children & Family Services (DCFS), he “denied any form of sexual abuse” by Jackson and said that he never “slept in the same bed as the entertainer.” While not specifically named in the DCFS memo, the 45-year-old Jackson is referred to repeatedly as “the entertainer.” The memo notes that the boy, now 14, and his 12-year-old brother–who also denied sexual abuse–expressed “a fondness for the entertainer and stated they enjoyed visiting his home, where they would often ride in the park, play video games, and watch movies.” The pair’s sister, now 17, told a social worker that she accompanied the boys on “sleepovers at the entertainers home,” but had “never seen anything sexually inappropriate between her brothers and the entertainer.” The children’s mother told investigators that Jackson was “like a father to the children and a part of her family.” While acknowledging that her son “has slept in the same room as the entertainer,” the woman claimed “they did not share a bed. The entertainer would sleep on the floor,” according to the November 26 memo. The joint probe by DCFS and the Los Angeles Police Department ran from February 14-27 and, the memo states, the “investigation by the Sensitive Case Unit concluded the allegations of neglect and sexual abuse to be unfounded both by the LAPD-Wilshire Division and the Department.” When an investigation is closed, child welfare officials can summarize their findings in one of three ways. If evidence is found to support abuse charges, the case is marked “substantiated.” A case is termed “not substantiated” when evidence discovered is not sufficient to support allegations (though the charges may, in fact, be true). [b]Finally, a matter is branded “unfounded” when officials determine there is no merit to the allegations.[/b] :4pinned[url=http://forum.mjeol.com/index.php?showtopic=11635]FULL STORY >>[/url] :4pinned[url=http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/dcfsmemo2.html]Photo of the Memo[/url]

Leave a Reply