THREAD: In @BarryUniversity's latest issue of "Child & Family Law Journal," Dr. Limor Ezioni authored the opening essay: "The Crime of Grooming."

Ezioni proves she knows nothing about her topic given her repeated references to MJ & LN as supposed examples of undeniable grooming.

Ezioni touts herself as a well-educated lawyer and dean of a law school in Israel.

Barry Law's "Child & Family Law Journal" touts itself as featuring "distinguished authors in legal & interdisciplinary fields."

Yet both have instantly lost all credibility with Ezioni's paper.

Instead of detailing verifiable pedophilia cases in which the accused was convicted and/or confessed, Ezioni opts instead to make Michael Jackson the star of her 19-page paper.

She makes references to MJ/LWMJ/LN throughout & uses these materials across 18 different citations.

Starting on page 3, Ezioni cites LN as her footnote while describing grooming as "laying out the groundwork...to commit a sexual act...in the upcoming future."

She concedes that there's no evidence that abuse occurred but claims that MJ's faxes show that grooming took place.

By referencing the faxes to Wade as an example of grooming, Ezioni and her research assistant Shany Schvartz prove that they didn't pay attention to the actual narrative in LN.

If they had, they'd acknowledge that the circumstances Wade describes are entirely opposite her paper.

Ezioni: "The main idea behind grooming is to build a stable & reliable relationship...[to] wait patiently and take the time to build a strong connection & gain the victim’s trust."

But Wade admits no contact w/ MJ in 2+ years. It was Joy's family that pursued this relationship.

While the underlying theme of Ezioni's essay is how grooming involves "setting the stage" to abuse in which the groomer "diligently manipulates the victim, convincing him that a solid bond exists between them," Wade insists MJ began graphic abuse of him on his first visit ever.

Ezioni has the audacity to say MJ was "openly grooming" his "unsuspecting victims & their parents" in LWMJ—including by "holding hands & discussing sleepovers." She claims he would've been indicted for that alone if a grooming law existed.

Reality:

What Ezioni is also unaware of—given her inability to research the cases she cites—is how MJ was already distant from the Arvizos by Sept. 02 when LWMJ was filmed. They allege no MJ abuse in the YEARS PRIOR to LWMJ's filming & none until after it aired on TV the following year.

Back to Ezioni's contention that Wade's faxes/messages prove grooming, none of these materials existed when Wade alleges the sexual abuse began on their 1st visit. MJ sent similar to hundreds of friends and fans each year.

This negates her entire grooming narrative involving MJ.

Ezioni says LN also detailed "grooming of the entire family" & that MJ "mostly targeted lower-income families." (ignoring Culkin, Lewis, Feldman, etc.)

She again fails to acknowledge that it was not MJ but the Robsons who endlessly pursued their friendship even across the sea.

If Ezioni were to study the allegations she repeatedly cites in her essay, she'd also discover that not only was MJ not around to groom Wade at any moment prior to the alleged start of abuse, but that MJ was barely around the Robsons at all throughout Wade's entire childhood.

Ezioni endlessly attacks MJ & refers to his accusers as victims (including the Arvizos despite MJ being exonerated in court). Then she contends how "since MJ is no longer alive and was never convicted, the truth will remain a mystery unless evidence arises in the future." It has:

After just describing the imagined grooming by MJ, she suggests: "some may view this as done innocently with goodhearted intentions, while others may see it as a clear case of family grooming."

Even for that attempted neutral-sounding proposition, she only cites LN as a source.

In conclusion, Ezioni's error-riddled & prejudicial essay coupled with Barry Law's willingness to publish it unchecked is another example of why professors & academic institutes are no better at research or accountability than any sleazy media outlet these days.

It is shameful.