In part 2 of our rebuttal, you'll hear some examples of bias, lack of context and misleading information in Think Twice that undermines their presumption of guilt. The focus of this episode is examining how Think Twice  handles the evidence in the first two sex abuse cases against Michael Jackson.

What sort of fact checking process have they used to check the claims of the Chandler and Arvizo allegations? What sources are they citing?  What sources are they leaving out? Who do they choose or not choose to interview?

Looking at what their reference pages leave out and looking at the people they selected to interview reveals the motive in Think Twice towards a predetermined narrative, versus a motive to finding the truth.  We argue that because of what they left out, Think Twice  can't cover these allegations with any degree of fairness.

For all our source material, please visit our website. You can reach out to us with any questions or comments through our website or on Twitter.

Website: www.michaeljacksoncaseforinnocence.com
Twitter: @Case4Innocence