Apparently Dan Reed wants to make a one-sided sequel to his documentary about the 2005 trial. He claims he's already touched base with the prosecution and others.
https://www.tvguide.com/news/leaving-neverland-director-michael-jackson-sequel/
“It isn’t often that you get the chance to make a positive change with a documentary film."
"The film I would really like to make following this one is the trial of Michael Jackson. I could only do that if the victim and his family participate," Reed explained to The Film Stage. "If Gavin Arvizo and his family would agree to participate, I would very much like to tell the story of that trial. I think it's fascinating and astonishing that Michael was acquitted."
Arvizo has previously avoided public attention and press inquiries. A long-time friend of Arvizo's told The Wrap in March,
"He doesn't really want to talk about it right now. He just wants to become a man and have a family and a career and not have this be the standout portion of who he is."
Allegations against Jackson arose in Arvizo's case shortly after he was seen holding hands with Arvizo and talking about sharing a bed with children in a 2003 documentary titled Living with Michael Jackson. The pop singer was subsequently charged with several counts of molestation, attempted molestation, conspiracy, and more, but after 18 months, a jury found him not guilty of all counts. (It wasn't the first time Jackson faced similar charges — he was previously sued in 1993 by the family of another 13-year-old boy who claimed the singer molested him.)
Reed did caution that he's not interested in focusing on Michael J
ackson stories for the rest of his career but said the trial and results in particular are worth pursuing in a future documentary. "The way that happened is an amazing story and one that should be told," the director explained.
Dan revealed he also has a number of interviews carried out with police and those who investigated the allegations against the ‘Bad’ singer that didn’t make the cut in ‘Finding Neverland’ because he felt it was more important to focus on the alleged victims.
He said:
“I shot interviews with LAPD and Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department who investigated. I had a great interview with the main prosecutor, the deputy DA from the 2005 trial.
“We hadn’t put those in because I had a strong feeling it needed to remain a claustrophobic story about two families.
“This was unseen and unheard and the first time Michael’s victims had really spoken out in any detail to the press about what happened.
“I thought that was an extraordinary new thing we have, and the other extraordinary thing we have is this sort of 360-degree insight into the family’s ordeal once the information about the abuse was disclosed. It becomes a drama…
“Four and 3/4 hours felt like a complete story and HBO agreed, and then it became a case of what do we take out and get it down to four hours, because we were all in agreement it shouldn’t be longer than four hours.”
