Leaving Neverland has split audiences since airing on TV recently.

In the HBO documentary, which is available to watch on All4 in the UK, Wade Robson and James Safechuck claim that the 'Thriller' singer emotionally manipulated them and engaged in sexual acts with them while they were underage.

Jackson consistently denied the allegations, while his estate has called them a "tabloid character assassination".

Now, director Dan Reed has responded to accusations from some fans that the two men only told their stories in an attempt to make money from Jackson's estate.

Amos Pictures Channel 4

Writing for The Guardian, Reed said: "In 2013, Wade (joined later by James in a separate, but similar case) launched a lawsuit against Jackson's estate, claiming that Jackson's business associates knew he was molesting little boys but turned a blind eye.

"Their cases were dismissed on technical grounds, but the judge made no ruling on the validity of the abuse claims. The cases have both gone to appeal."

Speaking about where Robson and Safechuck's 'gold' would come from, he continued: "The answer is that Wade and James would have to win it in a hotly contested court battle.

"A jury would have to weigh up evidence – of which there is plenty – and decide that their claims were valid. And damages would then be awarded against the Jackson estate. Some people would call that justice.

James Safechuck archive / AMOS P Channel 4

"The most extraordinary thing in all this is that no-one denies that Jackson took little boys to his bed, night after night, for many, many years. What did his family and business associates think he was doing with these little boys behind a locked door?

"Did they believe he was actually a child in the body of a man and therefore somehow needed to sleep with little boys? That makes no sense if you think about it for more than a second."

Reed also discussed criticism over Wade previously defending Jackson at his criminal trial in 2004 when he was accused of abusing Gavin Arvizo.

"Wade states in my film that he had perjured himself because he could not bear to see Jackson, the man he loved, go to jail," he said.

Getty Images

"Telling the truth was out of the question. He had never told a soul, not even his mother. So the Jackson camp now call him an admitted liar. This argument falls apart when you apply even the merest dusting of common sense. Was he lying then? Or is he lying now? You can't have it both ways.

"The evidence of perjury of course comes from Wade himself. Part two of the documentary leads all but the most hard-bitten fan to an understanding of why he lied then, and is telling the truth now."

Readers who are affected by the issues raised in this story are encouraged to contact the NSPCC on 0808 800 5000 (www.nspcc.org.uk). Readers in the US are encouraged to contact the Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline on (1-800-422-4453) or the American SPCC (www.americanspcc.org).

Want up-to-the-minute entertainment news and features? Just hit 'Like' on our Digital Spy Facebook page and 'Follow' on our @digitalspy Instagram and Twitter account.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io