About the blog

This blog is a continuation of  www.vindicatemj.wordpress.com

For reasons which are widely known in the narrow circle of Michael’s supporters the above blog had to be shut it up for an indefinite time.

However the introductory text I wrote for the first blog remains relevant and now even more than ever. So here it is, together with a short comment on how the first blog started.

Vindicatemj  (Helena, Russia)

“Father, Forgive Them; They Don’t Know What They Are Doing…”

This piece by Johann Sebastian Bach is called “Air”. It is accompanied by a picture of  Moses who is desperate with his people who started praying to a Golden Calf while he was away carrying God’s commandments to them. The picture is dedicated to all those who also pray to the Golden Calf and are ready to lie about an innocent human being like Michael Jackson for money, fame, career or other reasons.

February 26, 2010

It is a complete shame I hadn’t been among Michael Jackson’s supporters before he died. When all those awful allegations against him reached my part of the world in mid-90s I couldn’t withstand the general wave of mistrust towards Michael and half-believed the horrible rumors about him saying to myself that “there couldn’t be smoke without fire” and “if so many people think that way they can’t be all wrong about it”.

However the thought of a nice guy like that being probably involved in such a terrible crime was so uneasy and disquieting that I preferred to thrust it into the very back of my mind and forget about the whole thing until after he died.

The news of Michael’s death brought a sudden feeling of sadness and a renewed interest in his personality while the strange circumstances of his tragic demise made me read and watch whatever there was to read and watch about him at the time. The result of this little research was quite unexpected – the more Michael’s videos I saw and the more of his speeches and interviews I read, the surer was a terrible guess creeping into my mind – he was completely innocent…. to an extent we can’t even imagine…. how could we be that wrong …. what a shame on all our heads…. it’s almost like some 2000 years ago with that old story repeating itself……nothing changed, nothing learned…. is there a way to make up for it?

The feeling of guilt, remorse and a terrible harm which cannot be undone has gripped me every since and is unbearable to live with. So now you know the reason for this blog – these posts are just a humble attempt to repent and make up for all the injustice I personally did to Michael Jackson by half-believing those nonstop lies about him told by the bloodthirsty, money-craving, small-minded and completely delirious media about the man whom they did not take the trouble to really know and whose little finger they are not worthy of.

Besides the attempt to vivisect lies about Michael and clear his name of all the dirt thrown at him in such a ruthless and shameless way this blog is also a kind of Michael’s memorabilia with all sorts of facts, evidences, testimonies, observations and opinions about him collected from various sources and provided by different people many of whom have come to appreciate this pure and innocent guy only after his untimely death.

The man we learned to admire and miss so late in our lives.

The history of the vindicatemj and vindicatemjj blogs:

The blog www.vindicatemj.wordpress.com started on November 20, 2009. This is how it came into being.

In November 2009 I received a message from a MJ fan called MJJmahal. She said she wanted to collect all my posts made on the MichaelJackson forum under the name of helena1247 and told me that she had opened a blog for me in the name of Vindicatemj.

She gave me this name due to the Vindicating Michael thread which I opened in the MJ forum soon after Michael’s death and was handling practically all alone until February 2010.

This is the note she left for the readers of the blog in November 2009:

November 21, 2009

These are helena1247’s posts from http://www.michaeljackson.com. I created a blog for them for my own selfish reasons.  Given my short attention span, I need a format with links that will allow me to access the articles with ease.


I sincerely thanked MJJmahal for this big and surprising gift but, to be frank with you and her, didn’t know what to do with the blog as I had not idea how to handle it and all my attention was focused on the forum anyway. However when some wellwishers deleted my ‘Vindicating Michael’ multi-post thread in the michaeljackson.com forum, there was no other alternative but continue writing in the new blog. This is when I wrote this short note to MJJmahal:

February 25, 2010

Thank you very much, dear MJJmahal. I’m taking over from you now and hope to be able to manage this blog myself or with those of my fellow-fans who are also willing to stand for Michael Jackson’s good name side by side with me. However the blog will first need a huge renovation. I am currently learning how to do that and hope to restart the updated version of this blog in a not too distant future.


You see that the blog was not planned and was quite spontaneous even for me. Since it started as a selfless gift from one Michael Jackson’s supporter to another one – which is truly in Michael’s spirit – I wanted to go on with this generous tradition and invited others who were also willing to do vindication work for Michael.

In August 2010 the blog was joined by David Edwards, Lynette Anderson, Deborah French and later by several other authors.

Beginning with the winter of 2012 some changes started taking place there which finally erupted into the need to close the blog at all. For some details of the above you can go to the “About the blog” page, however since it displays only a fraction of what happened the rest of it can be grasped only if you read the full of the blog together with its comments (which contain a huge part of valuable information).

Reading the whole of it together with the comments is what I urge everyone to do if they really want to make sure of Michael Jackson’s innonence as the blog has the overwhelming proof of it.

This follow-up to the first blog includes only my posts, i.e. those of Helena (Vindicatemj), the administrator of both blogs.

No new posts have yet been added to it and probably never will, however if there are any rumors that I have ceased to exist or abandoned Michael they are not true to life.

511 comments on “About the blog

  1. There is a greater tendency to over compensate when you are looking to compensate for a perceived fault
    in any given relationship. If you take this route you will give him a
    chance to get accustomed to the idea of being close to you without the pressure of feeling
    like he has to make a decision about whether or not to
    be your boyfriend right away. If your ex boyfriend perceives in your
    voice that you’re thriving as well as even better after
    the relationship ended, it will feel like a fast kick to
    their personality.

  2. Hi Helena firstly i’m sad that things didn’t work out and secondly i would like to thank you for your tremendous input you put into that other blog.


    • Thank you, Truth Prevail, for your words of support and the wishes!

      I am still in a big confusion and don’t know whether I will be able to do anything in this new blog. It is like balancing between the need to say a couple of things and inability to raise myself to do it. Don’t know yet which one will take the upper hand. Please give me some time.

  3. Guys, I am terribly sorry for having to be away. In a moment of crisis I began working on a new blog which is to be an addition to the present one. The crisis is over but the blog is already in the process of making, so I decided to go on with it – it will give our team more space to express our views on various subjects concerning MJ.

    I hope to be duplicating my posts here and there, but in the new blog will try to categorize things better (for easier search). Systematizing material turned out to be quite a problem, so please have some patience with me.

    Another thing is that it is almost impossible to manually copy all the 175 posts I’ve written here, and I am still waiting for the wordpress hosts to help with that. Unfortunately one thing depends on the other as categorizing posts depends on how soon they will help me with the copying process. While the posts are not there it is impossible to systematize them.

    I apologize to readers for starting a blog of my own – it is a sort of a hideout for me which I’ll occasionally use to touch upon subjects I wouldn’t think of raising here. All the rest of my studies will be fully posted here together with David’s and Lynette’s posts. This site was always meant to be a blog for different people standing up for Michael and I hope it will last even when its founders are gone.

    Vindicating Michael is a long process and undoing the harm done to him will probably take as long as it took the other side to smear him. Our goal is the opposite – we are working to clean his good name of all the dirt and restore it in its beauty and shine. However restoration is no easy process and is by far more difficult than demolishing something (or someone), as everyone knows.

    Please go on with the research. I will join you as soon as I can and hope it will be in the very near future. There is too much work for us to linger over it, isn’t there?

    P.S. I’ve just noticed that I first addressed my readers here exactly two years ago – on February 25, 2010. What an incredible coincidence! Similar to the one we had several months ago, on November 20, 2011 when David made a post about us hitting a 500,000 mark and a reader thought the post was about the blog’s foundation date and sent us birthday congratulations. David said no, it wasn’t our birthday, but when I checked up the date of the first post it turned out that it was! The first post was made on November 20, 2009, or exactly two years before that!

    Miracles seem to be happening in this blog and a two year period evidently has some cosmic meaning for us, so let us dream of the best miracle ever to take place for Michael in no longer than two years, okay?

  4. I feel this is directed at me. This you make me sound not genuine. Why are you treating me this way? It is a very strange manner. If I displease you you should say to me directly. I know Michael was innocent, I know some people want to change this view in society which makes the work here even more imoportant. There is no effect to attack people who are trying to help you.

    • “There is no effect to attack people who are trying to help you.”

      You are not helping me and I am not attacking you. I simply think that you are not a friend to Michael Jackson. This is my opinion and I think I have the right to have one.

      In any case the job of monitoring comments is not mine now – I’ve passed it over to my co-admins. Since I have absolutely no time for handling each and every comment and this is definitely not a forum but a BLOG, I would like to focus on posts instead.

      After long debates about whether to allow or forbid dubious things in the comments section I surrendered to the opinion of the majority. I myself am of a slightly different opinion and the reason for that is that I am curious about my opponents. I want to know who they are and why they are doing it. I also think that sometimes it is necessary to give them all the rope to hang themselves with.

      I really do want to know why Michael’s haters deny a good deal of truthful facts uncovered by us. There must be a reason for it. Of course I would prefer haters to tell us directly – without arranging all this theater, but for some reason they are not doing it (if you know any haters please ask them why they are denying the most obvious things and are harassing MJ even more viciously than ever).

      I expected an honest dialogue and hoped that one day it would take place, but instead I see only lies and dirt. Now I am told that Topix people are spreading lies that this blog is “recommending the NAMBLA book” and we just “erased” something incriminating, and they ask each other whether they made screen shots of it (?)

      All this is inconceivable. To tell you frankly I see similar things done against people only by the authorities of my country when they want to harass someone. This was also the method used against any kind of dissident opinion during the Soviet times.

      It is a total shock to me to find that similar things are taking place in your part of the world and on a mass scale too. What I see reminds me so much of our propaganda that I simply cannot believe my eyes. All media is speaking against Jackson as if in one voice! And the dirty tricks they use against innocent people!

      I don’t care whether they are doing it for Money only. Money is also ideology. Printing only those things which are “selling” – even if they are flat lies – is Money Ideology. Money decides what is truth and what is a lie and in Michael’s case it decided in favor of horrendous lies.

      And now that I’ve seen what it is like, I know for sure that this is what I don’t want for my country either.

  5. Guys, I’m going to ask everyone a simple request: can we all PLEASE stop commenting about those two books that were found in 1993? We have discussed and analyzed those books ad nauseum, and Helena has written multiple posts about what was really found in MJ’s art collection. Some of our enemies are monitoring this blog and taking screenshots and accusing us of being “pro-pedo” and other crap. Not only that, but there are some internal disagreements that are currently going on between some of us in private, and it is due to these recent comments on those books.

    So I would please ask everyone else to refrain from any future comments on those books. Thank you.

    • “there are some internal disagreements that are currently going on between some of us in private, and it is due to these recent comments on those books. So I would please ask everyone else to refrain from any future comments on those books. Thank you.”

      David, the matter was not in the books. None of us was deceived by our opponents’ manoeuvres around the picture (allegedly coming from that book) which they wanted to be displayed here by all means. And all their “look how innocent it is” sarcasm was not lost on us either. The photo is not innocent if taken by itself, but means nothing if it comes among hundreds of other photos in one book, found in a library containing thousands of books.

      So our disagreement wasn’t over that – it was over the matter of giving open or masked haters a free hand here.

      We have a lot to say to these people, but I agree that it takes very much time and distracts us from our work. Their primary purpose is to get us stuck over some matter and keep us busy over what they want us to do instead of our own plans. Sometimes it helps to clear up things to which we should have paid attention ourselves, but most of these dances with the wolves are counter-productive.

      That is why I need to make a public statement.

      To make things easier for everyone and not to have further debates with my co-admins I have given free hand to them (instead of our opponents). Now my co-admins can delete whatever comments they think fit and I will not be standing in the way. I hope it will restrain those who wanted to have a field day with all their masquerade here.

  6. And don’t forget that besides the 2005 jury, two Grand Juries in 1994 saw these books as well!

    The fact that the prosecution dangled around these two books (and haters emulating them) as the crown jewel of their case is very telling again about how non-existent their cases were. The irony is that the prosecution had to go back to 1993 and bring in two books from that house search to try to make a point, because they haven’t found anything in 2003-04. If someone has a sexual interest in that kind of material then he certainly won’t be satisfied with just two innocent books that he had some 10 years ago. Everything about these books (the inscriptions, the fact that they were a part of a large collection of art books on many, many subjects, and not part of a large collection of child porn) is a strong indication that Michael’s interest in these books wasn’t sexual. And if a hater thinks these are “erotic” pictures, those are just his thoughts, not Michael’s. One cannot project his own thoughts onto someone else and assume that other people think the same, and then judge that person based on what he projected onto him. If one does it then he basically condemns his own thoughts regarding the pictures, not Michael.

    • @Helena and Lynette
      I think you guys should use all of the info that you recently posted about those 2 books and make a new post out of it, or at least add it as an update to the previous posts you did on MJ’s art!

  7. What a picture means is in the eyes of the beholder. While haters may think of a picture of a naked boy sitting on a chair as “erotica” (they keep calling it that), we only need to read Michael’s inscription in the book the see through what kind of eyes he was looking at this pics.

  8. Here is an article that summarizes the two books that were taken in 1993. According to the testimony of Rosibel Smith they were found in the second closet of the master bedroom that is the one below the loft and without the jacuzzi in a locked filed cabinet in the 3rd drawer down from the top. The books were shown to the jury, they were used as evidence and the jurors still found him not guilty. I would guess that is all that needs to be said about the books from 1993.

    HighBeam Research
    Title: Jackson jury sees books featuring nude boys
    Date: April 30, 2005 Publication: The Record (Bergen County, NJ) Author: LINDA DEUTSCH, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    The Record (Bergen County, NJ)
    Jackson jury sees books featuring nude boys — Items seized in ’93 molestation probe
    Date: 04-30-2005, Saturday
    Section: NEWS
    Edtion: All Editions
    Biographical: MICHAEL JACKSON
    SANTA MARIA, Calif. – Prosecutors in Michael Jackson’s child molestation trial on Friday showed jurors two books seized from his bedroom in 1993 that include pictures of nude boys.
    The jury saw only the covers and front pages on which dedications were written, and heard a detective describe the content as boys in various states of undress, running, jumping and swimming.
    The books were seized by Los Angeles police during a molestation investigation involving a boy who received a multimillion-dollar settlement from Jackson in 1994.
    That probe never led to criminal charges against Jackson.
    Jurors have heard testimony relating to long-ago allegations against Jackson under a California law that permits evidence that may tend to show a defendant’s propensity toward child molestation.
    Jackson is accused of molesting a 13-year-old boy in 2003, giving him alcohol and conspiring to hold the accuser’s family captive to get them to rebut a documentary in which Jackson appeared with the boy and said he allowed children to sleep in his bed but that it was non-sexual.
    Jurors were shown the covers of the two books during questioning of Los Angeles police Detective Rosibel Smith, who found the items in a locked filing cabinet in Jackson’s master bedroom.
    One book, called “Boys Will Be Boys,” featured an image of fair-haired boys in swimsuits jumping into water.
    The book contained an inscription written by Jackson: “Look at the true spirit of happiness and joy in these boys’ faces, this is the spirit of boyhood, a life I’ve never had and will always dream of. This is the life I want for my children.”
    The jury also was shown the cover of a book called “The Boy: A Photographic Essay.” It also contained an inscription that said: “To Michael from your [heart symbol] fan, XXXOOO, ‘Rhonda.’-” The note was dated 1983.
    Smith said both books featured boys “playing, swimming, jumping.”
    Prosecutor Ron Zonen said earlier that one book was about 90 percent pictures of nude boys and the other about 10 percent.
    Prosecutors have previously introduced dozens of adult magazines featuring adult women as well as a few art books that featured nudes.

    Copyright 2005 Bergen Record Corp. All rights reserved.

    This material is published under license from the publisher through ProQuest Information and Learning Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

    This document provided by HighBeam Research at http://www.highbeam.com

    • “Jurors were shown the covers of the two books during questioning of Los Angeles police Detective Rosibel Smith”

      Lynette, now haters will say that the jury did not see the photos inside the book and could not judge. However fortunately in the year 2005 the same books were shown again and every page was scrutinized, and the jurors were still unimpressed – so that answers the questions which might still arise.

      We can even judge those books for ourselves without seeing them – if the photo sent to us by this Italian (?) reader “Amore” is the worst photo in the book, then it is indeed nothing. And again much depends on the eyes of the beholder, as Suzy put it.

      I see that you or David constantly erase the pictures of those nude African boys which I cited as an example of pictures similar to those in my Africa book of 1952. I don’t mind if you do – you know your people better and are evidently protecting this blog from the possibility of crazy allegations – but to me it shows that Americans are somewhat over-exaggerating the importance/danger of such ethnic images. This speaks to a certain slant in public perception as people are afraid of most usual and normal things, while horrendous crimes against children are taking place on a mass scale and no one (or at least the media) seems to care enough about it.

      They prefer to trash MJ forever instead of speaking about the real problem.

      P.S. Let me add that in my country we feel very strongly about real ped-les. Recently a law was adopted to have them chemically castrated if they want to be set free from prison (hopefully it will be applied only to those who deserve it – over here you never know). But the fact that it was adopted shows how strong the general disgust is. On the other hand the pictures like the one of African boys I’ve posted are very much allowed and no one (I think) is regarding it as a problem. I had never paid attention myself until this ped-lia subject was pressed on me.

      Unfortunately now my perception of these pictures has changed and is closer to that of Americans, as I also began to shudder when I see a picture of a naked boy. It makes me totally unhappy that now when I see it the fist thing that springs to my mind are problems of ped-lia – my previous, totally free-from-any dirt look was much, much better. I always tried to shield my mind from anything impure and cultivated clean thinking, so being taken in that direction is a nightmare and torture for me.

      I really don’t know how a pure person like Michael could have survived in the impossibly dirty atmosphere he had to live in. His body-guard said about MJ: “Mike was special, he was the chosen one. He was the one that God looked at and pointed His finger on. That’s how Mike survived everything he did. He was spiritually blessed.” ~ Marvin Butts

  9. Amore I was happy to read that you traveled all the way from Rome, Italy to see our Library of Congress. It must have been such a wonderful trip for you. Did you also go to see the White House and Capital Building while you were here. I know that it is hard to see everything.Did you also get a chance to see our Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, and The Emanicpation Proclamation at the National Archives? Those are really worth seeing when you visit our country. Which building was this book located in that you saw while in Washington D.C.? There are four buildings that make up the Library Of Congress and it is just curiosity that has me ask? I might be wrong about the origins of your country though because you have used a proven proxy server to log on and comment about the books that you viewed while at the Library of Congress.
    I have a suggestion, and it is of course just my opinion, but if you would like to go on discussing that book in particular you could start your own blog and discuss it on your own blog where you can be the administrator.This is of course only because we are discussing different aspects of The Michael Jackson Case at this time and it distracts from the most recent posts on the blog. These are our area of focus right now if you would like to join those discussions we would be happy to hear what you think of the latest post on Aphrodite Jones. We have already discussed these books in previous posts if you would like to add your comments under those posts feel free.

  10. I see you haven’t approved my comment yet.

    While this is your right, It saddens me, because it is making it look as if you think there is something wrong with Michael’s books when they are totally innocent!

    As I wrote, anybody can visit the Library of Congress in Washington and see these books for themselves, and see that they are full of happy smiling faces of boys (you aren’t suggesting there is anything wrong with that?).

    I am amazed that as a fan you are excluding me from this conversation. All we all wanting is to see Michael proven the innocent person he was.

    • “vindicatemj, I agree with you completely, that image was totally disrespectful towards MJ and you were right to delete that link. I can understand why the original poster wanted it to be seen though, it is a direct refutation of Thomas Sneddon’s lie that it proofed a “prurient interest in boys” on the part of MJ, a laughable statement for anybody who clicked on the link. Fortunately I have found an unsullied image http://goo.gl/ziJfk and yes, I was fortunate enough to visit the Library of Congress last week and sit down in the Jefferson Building Reading Room to scan through this book Boys Will Be Boys (fancy that, the Library of Congress has a copy of this book, does that mean all politicians are p..philes??) and I can indeed confirm that this image is contained therein! If anybody is disturbed by this image, they need to get help. It is a photo of a boy sitting in a chair for goodness sake!! Just more proofs that people project their own thoughts on to totally innocent things about MJ’s life. I hope this helps.”

      Amore, I appreciate your irony but have to say the following.

      1) The last time that sullied image was sent to us I clicked on it and afterwards had some trouble with my computer. So this time I didn’t open it until you forced me to. Hopefully you have not sent any viruses with it, have you?

      2) I didn’t like that photo, but not because the boy is naked, but because of the way he looks into the camera. However if it is one in a hundred other pictures and is a small size in the actual book, it doesn’t carry the weight it is carrying in this enlarged version, and can even go unnoticed.

      3) Even if that photo is from the book which was in MJ’s library it still does not mean anything. If I remember it right it was the book that was sent to Michael by Rhonda, correct? And Rhonda was in inverted commas, like ‘Rhonda’, right? I remember the prosecutors asking some witnesses about those inverted commas but no one could explain.

      My guess about this “Rhonda” is that it is not a woman, but a man (which explains the inverted commas) and he probably sent the book to Michael attaching some dirty meaning to it or implying that he was “one of them”.

      However Michael (like everyone else) did not understand those inverted commas and took it for what he thought it was – just a book with photos in it. Otherwise he would have probably thrown it away as he was a known puritan. Kit Culkin even called him a classical prim “Victorian old maid”.

      Michael had a huge library. And received thousands of presents, including books. And we do not even know whether he read them all. Or even opened.

      One photo of a naked boy sitting on a chair is not a porn photo and does not mean anything when it is found in a huge library of thousands of books. But it would have meant something if MJ had had, for example, a dozen books only and all of them were like that.

      But it wasn’t his case.

      To tell you frankly I also have a book containing the photos of naked children. It is called “Africa: the dream and the reality” and was published sometime in the 50s or 60s. The authors are famous Czech travellers Miroslav Zikmund and Jiří Hanzelka. This is the cover:

      And many of the photos are like this:
      Or like this:
      Or even this:

      This type of books may be in anyone’s home and it would be ridiculous to blame people of something dirty on their basis. Ped-les are not interested in this type of photos. What they are looking for is totally different. For example, the social worker who was recently arrested for having child porn pictures had “twelve images at Level Five, which can include scenes of torture and sadism”.

      “Police found 4,112 images on the laptop, including 120 at level four and 12 at level five, and 277 on the memory stick, including 28 at level four.” (http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Church-youth-protector-vilest-child-porn/story-13696928-detail/story.html)

    • Amore, and here is an interesting article about those who really had child pornography but were not even investigated (in contrast to Michael Jackson who never had it but was prosecuted for at least 10 years of his life):

      Pentagon declined to investigate hundreds of purchases of child pornography
      By John Cook | The Upshot – Fri, Sep 3, 2010

      A 2006 Immigration and Customs Enforcement investigation into the purchase of child pornography online turned up more than 250 civilian and military employees of the Defense Department — including some with the highest available security clearance — who used credit cards or PayPal to purchase images of children in sexual situations. But the Pentagon investigated only a handful of the cases, Defense Department records show.

      The cases turned up during a 2006 ICE inquiry, called Project Flicker, which targeted overseas processing of child-porn payments. As part of the probe, ICE investigators gained access to the names and credit card information of more than 5,000 Americans who had subscribed to websites offering images of child pornography. Many of those individuals provided military email addresses or physical addresses with Army or fleet ZIP codes when they purchased the subscriptions.

      In a related inquiry, the Pentagon’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS) cross-checked the ICE list against military databases to come up with a list of Defense employees and contractors who appeared to be guilty of purchasing child pornography. The names included staffers for the secretary of defense, contractors for the ultra-secretive National Security Agency, and a program manager at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. But the DCIS opened investigations into only 20 percent of the individuals identified, and succeeded in prosecuting just a handful.

      The Boston Globe first reported the Pentagon’s role in Project Flicker in July, citing DCIS investigative reports (PDF) showing that at least 30 Defense Department employees were investigated.

      But new Project Flicker investigative reports obtained by The Upshot through the Freedom of Information Act, which you can read here, show that DCIS investigators identified 264 Defense employees or contractors who had purchased child pornography online. Astonishingly, nine of those had “Top Secret Sensitive Compartmentalized Information” security clearances, meaning they had access to the nation’s most sensitive secrets. All told, 76 of the individuals had Secret or higher clearances.

      But DCIS investigated only 52 of the suspects, and just 10 were ever charged with viewing or purchasing child pornography. Without greater public disclosure of how these cases wound down, it’s impossible to know how or whether any of the names listed in the Project Flicker papers came in for additional scrutiny. It’s conceivable that some of them were picked up by local law enforcement, but it seems likely that most of the people flagged by the investigation did not have their military careers disrupted in the context of the DCIS inquiry.

      Among those charged were Gary Douglass Grant, a captain in the Army Reserves and a judge advocate general, or military prosecutor. After investigators executing a search warrant found child pornography on his computer, he pleaded guilty last year to state charges of possession of obscene matter of a minor in a sexual act in California. Others included contractors for the NSA with Top Secret clearances; one of them — a former contractor — fled the country after being indicted and is believed to be in Libya.

      But the vast majority of those investigated, including an active-duty lieutenant colonel in the Army and an official in the office of the secretary of defense, were never charged. On top of that, 212 people on ICE’s list were never investigated at all.

      According to the records, DCIS prioritized the investigations by focusing on people who had security clearances — since those who have a taste for child pornography can be vulnerable to blackmail and espionage. The documents show that the probe then concentrated on people who had been previously suspected of or convicted of sex crimes, or had access to children as part of their Defense Department duties. But at least some of the people on the Project Flicker list with security clearances were never pursued and could possibly remain on the job: DCIS only investigated 52 people, and 76 of those on the Project Flicker list had clearances.

      A DCIS spokesman didn’t return phone calls. But the agency’s own documents obtained via The Upshot’s FOIA request indicate that the decision to press investigations forward hinged largely on questions of the resources available to the investigators. “Due to DCIS headquarters’ direction and other DCIS investigative priorities, this investigation is cancelled” is a common summation in the files.

      A source familiar with the Project Flicker investigations — who requested anonymity because public disclosure could jeopardize this person’s job — confirmed that departmental resources, and priorities, were decisive factors in letting inquiries lapse.

      DCIS is primarily tasked with rooting out contractor fraud and investigating security breaches; its 400 staffers were already plenty busy before Project Flicker dropped 264 more names onto their caseloads. And child pornography investigations are difficult to prosecute. Many judges wouldn’t issue search warrants based on years-old evidence saying the targets subscribed to a kiddie porn website once.

      “We were stuck in a situation where we had some great information, but didn’t have the resources to run with it,” the source told The Upshot. Many of the investigative reports obtained by The Upshot end with a similar citation of scarce resources:

      Of course, other federal agencies, including ICE and the FBI, may have prosecuted some of the Project Flicker names the DCIS ignored. But that’s unlikely, given that some of the DCIS investigations were closed due to lack of cooperation from ICE.

      In one case, involving an Army Reserve corporal in the Pittsburgh area, a DCIS agent expressed exasperation after repeatedly trying to get ICE to collaborate with him on the investigation: “Based upon the complete non-responsiveness of ICE … it is recommended that [the] matter be closed.”

      As for the 212 Project Flicker names that DCIS didn’t investigate, the source familiar with the investigation said there was no systematic effort to inform their superiors or commanding officers of their suspected purchases of child pornography.

      Child pornography is not just “pictures” – these are real children being abused. So these people watched what was happening in real life. By purchasing child porn they are encouraging this horrendous “industry” to develop. Not to mention their own perverse inclinations and preferences. And see what happened in their cases several of which were confirmed.

      Nothing happened.

  11. vindicatemj, I agree with you completely, that image was totally disrespectful towards MJ and you were right to delete that link. I can understand why the original poster wanted it to be seen though, it is a direct refutation of Thomas Sneddon’s lie that it proofed a “prurient interest in boys” on the part of MJ, a laughable statement for anybody who clicked on the link. Fortunately I have found an unsullied image http://goo.gl/ziJfk and yes, I was fortunate enough to visit the Library of Congress last week and sit down in the Jefferson Building Reading Room to scan through this book Boys Will Be Boys (fancy that, the Library of Congress has a copy of this book, does that mean all politicians are p..philes??) and I can indeed confirm that this image is contained therein! If anybody is disturbed by this image, they need to get help. It is a photo of a boy sitting in a chair for goodness sake!! Just more proofs that people project their own thoughts on to totally innocent things about MJ’s life.

    I hope this helps.

  12. Thank you everyone for your input into the subject of Michael’s books. We all know they were totally innocent and if anything show how much he was interested in the human form for his own study into art. rather than any despicable reasons haters want to come up with. We should leave this link right here and if any haters want to give us any of there lies about MJ and cp we can just direct them to it.


    Anybody who thinks there is anything wrong with this photo is just projecting their own sick thoughts. Sadly there are some out there who would like to see this information hidden, we say to you we will stand firm! We will not censor information that proves Michael’s innocence!

    PS Thanks for the poster who clarified the Creative Commons license requirements. She who will not be named can’t bully us any more!

    PPS Admins, keep up the good work, we are right behind you!

    • We should leave this link right here and if any haters want to give us any of there lies about MJ and cp we can just direct them to it. (a collage of a naked boy with Michael’s picture attached to his genitalia). Anybody who thinks there is anything wrong with this photo is just projecting their own sick thoughts. Sadly there are some out there who would like to see this information hidden, we say to you we will stand firm! We will not censor information that proves Michael’s innocence! Admins, keep up the good work, we are right behind you!

      No, dear, we WILL censor this picture as this collage is a total insult to Michael Jackson.

      And please do not try to flatter us. I shudder at the thought about who you may be referring to by saying “we are right behind you”.

      Who are “we”?

  13. Here is an interview of Taj from 3T with an MJ fan forum: http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/threads/121238-MJJC-Exclusive-Q-amp-A-with-Taj-Jackson-Read-Taj-s-answers?s=1f8e5209d17ccd7d2e13098ecf64ec56&p=3592418#post3592418

    Unfortunately, there is a bit of bad news that he shared in the interview:

    MJJC: Did MJ ever record his own solo version of Why? If he did, what can you tell us about Michael’s original demo for WHY? Do you think it could see a release?

    Taj Jackson: No, unfortunately it doesn’t exist. There was only my uncle’s backgrounds on the demo. There is a Babyface version of Why with MJ backgrounds though.

    I always thought that an MJ solo version of “Why?” was recorded, but Taj just proved me wrong! :(

    • “My good friend LunaJo67 has uploaded over 30 videos for me to her account, and she created a new “Vindicate MJ” playlist! Many of the videos I have already added to certain posts, and here they are for your viewing pleasure! Stay tuned, because there are more coming soon! http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLD5992F8C28529341

      David, what a great present from LunaJo67 to the vindication cause! And all this is in addition to the great work she is doing on Youtube on a continuous basis! My HUGE THANKS TO HER!

  14. “A continuation of the Vaccaro interview and at 1:03 Vaccaro shows a file cabinet with Janet and Michael’s contracts in it, some sketches Michael made and stunning photographs of Katherine at 2:24. Vaccaro estimates that there are 3 boxes that contain only Michael’s belongings at 3:18. Bob Giraldi on the Pepsi accident at 4:41 and that MJ made $5 million for a year of endorsement deals with Pepsi at 5:27. Great footage of the Sultan of Brunei’s birthday bash at 9:24, in which he made $1 million for the night.”


    • “A continuation of the Vaccaro interview and at 1:03 Vaccaro shows a file cabinet with Janet and Michael’s contracts in it, some sketches Michael made and stunning photographs of Katherine at 2:24. Vaccaro estimates that there are 3 boxes that contain only Michael’s belongings at 3:18. Bob Giraldi on the Pepsi accident at 4:41 and that MJ made $5 million for a year of endorsement deals with Pepsi at 5:27. Great footage of the Sultan of Brunei’s birthday bash at 9:24, in which he made $1 million for the night.” http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/2011/02/more-on-vaccaro-and-michaels.html

      From the way it looks Vaccaro’s collection is probably worth a billion, not an estimated million as they say in the film.

      This documentary would be great if the author didn’t say Jacko every 5 minutes. One day it will be a marvellous document showing how lillyputs were trying to pull down a giant. Even now the author’s vivid attempt at belittling Michael already looks ridiculous. He wants to be ironic and condescending, but instead sounds like a nobody he is.

    • “it’s about Vaccaro http://mjandjustice4some.blogspot.com/search?q=pellicano” – Shelly

      Guys, sorry for catching up so late with some of the comments. Well, Vaccaro wasn’t exactly Michael Jackson’s friend, was he? And see what he said to mjandjustice4some! We should remember his words if some haters say that Henry Vaccaro’s collection had something “incriminating” in it!

      By the way Tom Sneddon wanted to make use of some of its pieces and put some items (including female sex toys) in his proposed evidence list.

      Mjandjustice4some says:

      “Remember back in August when Anthony Pellicano, one-time private investigator for Michael Jackson was interviewed by Newsweek? In that article, Pellicano claimed that he “quit because (he) found out some truths…(Jackson) did something far worse to young boys than molest them.”

      This, coming from Anthony Pellicano, who is currently serving a 15 year prison stint for wiretapping, isn’t exactly what most people could call a credible witness. However, one of the rumors that I repeatedly keep hearing is that there was an item or two in the memorabilia storage that Henry Vaccaro bought, that were considered incriminating to Michael Jackson. I wondered if Pellicano used that rumor to spread more innuendo.

      I never believed that Jackson was guilty of child molestation, and when I read Pellicano’s story, I didn’t believe his story either. Yet, I decided to ask Henry Vaccaro. This is what Vaccaro had to say about it:

      “Absolutely not. This bum Pelicano (sic) is just trying to smear Micheal’s (sic) name. Michael had him fired he was involved in wiretapping threats and went to jail. He never worked directly for Michael but for the law firm Lavley and Singer. I will state for the record that there was nothing incriminatin on Michael in the storage facility. If this snake Pellicano had anthing on MJ I’m sure Tom Sneddon would have known.”

      I then thanked Mr. Vaccaro, and here was his response, “I thank you, I also want you to know that there was nothing in any warehouse linking Michael to any little boys.”

      Let me also remind you what Diane Dimond said about that collection. In addition to the disgraceful half an hour episode of her dangling someone’s trunks her comment will be another instance of the way she makes innuendoes out of literally nothing. If you previously doubted she is using some speech patterns deliberately, in order to create the impression of molestation where there was none, here is another example of the same:

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s his trunk. See this? It`s somebody`s white briefs that were soiled right here.

      DIMOND: Calvin Klein underwear.

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t know whose they are, and I`m not about to find out, but they`re soiled.

      DIMOND: How big are they?

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t know. I don`t want to…

      DIMOND: Mind if I check?

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go ahead.

      DIMOND: They`re a size 28.

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, they`re not mine.

      DIMOND: Henry, you know…

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They`re not mine.

      DIMOND: That might have some DNA on it.

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It probably does.

      This is a chemical compound, and it says skin bleaching agent.

      DIMOND: Skin bleaching agent.

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That`s what it says.

      DIMOND: But Michael Jackson…

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Prescription compound, and I`m not saying it`s Michael Jackson`s. I`m just saying it was found in his wardrobe trunk, which is this wardrobe trunk.

      DIMOND: Two tubes of it?

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Two tubes.

      DIMOND: And it clearly says skin bleaching agent.


      DIMOND: And it`s used.

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s used.

      DIMOND: Somebody used it.

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Somebody used it.

      DIMOND: This is his trunk.

      UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s his trunk.


      GRACE: Just hold that thought for a moment. Michael Jackson`s skin bleaching cream could be yours, all yours, if you attend this auction. Joining us right now, Diane Dimond, investigative reporter and author. Diane, a lot of controversial and personal items were allegedly in this auction. What were they? And did they make it to the auction block?

      DIMOND: Well, I presume that most of them did. Now, listen, this whole cache was a bunch of stuff from a lot of the Jacksons. I saw things from Tito and Jermaine and Janet and LaToya and the parents, so I don`t know what belonged to who.

      But we did see some sex toys. We saw some risque photographs. I know there was alleged to have been some drawings of nude boys in Michael Jackson`s hand, but I`ll tell you what, I never saw them. That would be a good story. I`d like to be able to tell you that, but that just didn`t happen.

      There was artwork of Michael`s of young boys, but beautiful profiles. He`s quite an artist, but I didn`t see anything where I looked at it and I said, “Oh, that`s illegal.”

      Do you remember Dimond recently repeating “I am NOT saying he was a p.”? And over here the same thing! NOTHING was found but she still makes it sound like something was, as her vocabulary tells the opposite story of what she is saying – ‘risque photographs, drawings of nude boys in “his” hand, young boys, something illegal’.

      NONE of it was there, so what’s the point of using all those unnecessary words? And some will say she is not doing it on purpose?

      And more of it:

      CALLER: My question is, has there been or could there be any DNA testing on the soiled clothing or any of the costumes?

      GRACE: You smart, smart girl. I`ve got just the person to answer that question. She asked it first, Diane Dimond.

      DIMOND: … in the wardrobe closet, I have to admit, it wasn`t my most shining moment as an investigative reporter, but I did note the underwear. And the Santa Barbara D.A.`s office did come and get it during the criminal trial, and I believe they did test it. They were Michael`s.”


      Did you notice another of her tricks?

      “I believe they did test it. They were his”.

      She is not quite sure whether they made those tests, but she nevertheless knows the result!

    • @Shelly Here it is:

      Statement of Declination: Statements from LA County and SB County (Sept 21 1994)



      September 21, 1994

      It became clear at the inception of the investigation into child molestation allegations against Michael Jackson that those allegations involved conduct that occurred in both Los Angeles and Santa Barbara Counties. Therefore, the Los Angeles Police Department, the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department, the Santa Barbara District Attorneys Office and the Los Angeles County District Attorneys Office participated in a joint investigation of those allegations.

      After approximately one year, the investigation is now concluded. During the course of the investigation, approximately four hundred witnesses were contacted (some more than once) and additional thirty witnesses were called before grand juries in Los Angeles and Santa Barbara. Hundreds of “clues” from the public were probed. Much time was spent pursing potentially exonerating evidence as well as inculpatory evidence. Several leads were explored which later turned out to be false.

      The first alleged victim who came forward and who was the catalyst for this criminal investigation is the same individual who filed and settled a civil lawsuit against Mr. Jackson. The factual allegations underlying the civil lawsuit are identical to those which would support a criminal prosecution.

      However, at the present time this alleged victim has chosen to assert his rights under Code of Civil Procedure section 1219 and has declined to testify. This decision was not communicated to either prosecutorial agency until July 6, 1994. Until that time, the alleged victim had indicated his possible willingness to testify and we continued with our investigation.

      During the last several months, investigatory efforts uncovered additional allegations of sexual molestation occurring between Mr. Jackson and a second boy. The particular events described occurred solely in Santa Barbara County. Therefore, any filing decision on those allegations would involve Santa Barbara.

      As to those particular allegations, Santa Barbara County declines to file at this time, because of the inability of law enforcement to interview the alleged victim, because that child is beyond the reach of the court process, and because of the child’s prior general denial of any wrongdoing.

      The investigation also revealed the existence of a third alleged victim who has been in psychological therapy since his disclosure to police in early November of 1993. He has alleged that Michael Jackson molested him on three occasions. Two of those occasions allegedly occurred in Los Angeles County beyond the statute of limitations, and the third occasion, within the statute, allegedly occurred in Santa Barbara County. In light of the primary alleged victim’s decision not to testify, and because of the third alleged victim’s reluctance to testify and in consideration of his psychological well-being, no charges relating to the third alleged victim will be pursued at this time.

      Another aspect of the investigation involved accounts from several witnesses who allegedly viewed Mr. Jackson inappropriately touching children other than the alleged victims mentioned above. At no time did any of the children named confirm that such conduct occurred, and the credibility of those third party accounts is compromised by the fact that some of the sources of these accounts profited monetarily by selling their stories to the media.

      In conclusion, we decline to file charges relating to any of the alleged victims at this time because of the legal unavailability of the primary alleged victim. We emphasize that our decision is not based on any issue of credibility of victims. Should circumstances change or should new evidence develop within the statute of limitations, this decision will be re-evaluated in light of the evidence available at such time.

  15. I just read that article about the Schaffel jury

    “So, the remaining 12 all swore Thursday to decide the case to the best of their impartial ability, but what can be expected from six women and six men who burst into laughter when another lady, a nurse who saw Jackson when he was hospitalized after suffering burns during a commercial shoot, commented that he was “wonderful with the kids”?

    To quote King, who told the court Wednesday that he was representing “the unfamous party” in this case:

    “Everyone knows who Michael Jackson is.”


    • “Everyone knows who Michael Jackson is.” http://fr.eonline.com/on/shows/chelsea/chelsea_lately/jackson_speaks_out_in_courton_camera/52710

      This article shows very well that the main tool in bringing Michael down was the MEDIA. The jury has just acquitted him on all counts but the public listens to what the media says, and not the law. If the media had been telling truth about Jackson, it would have been okay – but the media LIED about him, that’s the point!

      And once the media labeled Michael a criminal, his life turned into a vicious circle – now he could hardly get justice in the court of law either because it was impossible to find jurors who didn’t have “tons of opinion” about him.

      Anyone could blame Michael for whatever they liked, and winning those cases for him was a highly unlikely outcome. And some are wondering why he didn’t sue each of his offenders? This article is the best answer why.

      ..”Jackson is probably happy to miss out on the festivities, however, especially considering that 3 out of the 12 jurors who hold his financial fate in their hands may think that he’s a child molester.

      Either legal camp would be hard-pressed to find 12 individuals in Southern California who have not both heard a lot about Jackson’s recent troubles and have formed an opinion about them.

      Three out of four prospective jurors who raised their hands when Mundell asked if they thought Jackson was guilty of molestation, even though he was acquitted last year on all charges, were accepted on the panel.

      “I have lots of opinions about this man,” one of the three who was selected said. “How can you not? I read so much and I have tons of opinions.”
      Another man who said that Jackson possibly had a “character flaw” was dismissed.

      Other potentials were dismissed after saying that they couldn’t be fair to Jackson after learning about his behavior over the years.

      “I feel his actions as I have seen on TV were inexcusable,” one man said, recalling a past incident that was so talked about it inspired its own Law & Order episode. “Dangling the child is inexcusable. My feelings about Michael Jackson have been where there’s smoke there’s fire. I’ve been thinking about whether I can give him a fair trial and I’m not sure I can.”

      And still others were booted after saying they felt for the fallen pop idol.

      “I have a slight bias toward Mr. Jackson that maybe people were trying to extort him for money,” a media entertainment consultant told the court. “It happens to celebrities.”

      So, the remaining 12 all swore Thursday to decide the case to the best of their impartial ability, but what can be expected from six women and six men who burst into laughter when another lady, a nurse who saw Jackson when he was hospitalized after suffering burns during a commercial shoot, commented that he was “wonderful with the kids”?

      To quote King, who told the court Wednesday that he was representing “the unfamous party” in this case:
      “Everyone knows who Michael Jackson is.”

      (see the above link for the full text of the article)

    • I am reading Frank Cascio’s book now. It is a complete marvel. Join me.


      Just some random quotes:


      Anyway, back at the chalet, we sat rapt, listening for hours as Michael played DJ, saying, “You have to listen to this song. Now you have to hear this group.” We listened to Stevie Wonder and all of the Motown stars. He had us listen to the James Brown song “Papa Don’t Take No Mess” -all fourteen minutes of it. We listened to the Bee Gees song “How Deep Is Your Love?” (I still believe that it’s one of the greatest songs of all time.) Michael went on about Aaron Copland, whom he considered the greatest composer of the twentieth century. He introduced me to all types of music-country, folk, classical, funk, rock. He even turned me on to Barbra Streisand. I fell in love with her song “People.” Michael liked to go to sleep to classical music, especially the works of Claude Debussy.

      I remember him putting on a group called Bread. I didn’t pay much attention to the music-I was too busy making fun of the name. “Bread? What kind of name is that? Want some butter with your bread?” and that kind of nonsense. But when I settled down for a minute and really listened instead of making sarcastic remarks, they became one of my favorite groups. I wanted to know everything there was to know about Bread. Yes, Bread was my jam (bad pun intended).


      In addition to the assignments our school gave us, Michael insisted that we keep journals of our trip.

      “Document this trip,” he’d keep telling us, “because one day you’re going to love to look back on it.” In every country he had us take pictures of what we saw, do some research about the customs, and put what we’d seen and experienced in our books. We explored the different cultures. We visited orphanages and schools. Eddie and I started to have a greater awareness of our place in the big, wide world. Only later was I wise enough to be thankful to my parents for permitting us to have this experience. They recognized that education wasn’t just about reading, writing, and arithmetic. They understood that we would learn by living.


      THE YEAR 1993. THINK ABOUT ALL THE HORRIBLE things you heard about Michael Jackson around this time. Think about all the jokes on late-night talk shows, all the ugly rumors, all the accusations and all the names. Now think about being the person- the innocent person-toward whom all this hatred and ridicule and negative energy is being directed. Imagine the damage that it would cause even the strongest of men. Michael was a professional. And while his performances never suffered during this time of trial, he himself did. He’d said, “I have rhinoceros skin. I’m stronger than all of them,” but Eddie and I could see the truth behind the bravado. The accusations that Jordy’s father had leveled against Michael were a source of unrelenting anxiety to him.

      At night he would sometimes vent: “I don’t think you realize” -and we certainly didn’t- “I have the whole world thinking I’m a child molester. You don’t know what it feels like to be falsely accused, to be called ‘Wacko Jacko.’ Day in and day out, I have to get up on that stage and perform, pretending everything is perfect. I give everything I have, I give the performance that everyone wants to see. Meanwhile, my character and reputation are under constant attack. When I step off that stage, people look at me as if I were a criminal.”

      I think that without our knowing it, the support my brother Eddie and I gave Michael helped him continue that tour as long as he possibly could. Especially Eddie, who was only eleven. Michael was responsible for us. He couldn’t fall apart in front of children. He had to be strong for us, and in some small way, this helped keep him going.




      At night, as usual, Michael, Eddie, and I made beds of blankets and pillows on the floor of Michael’s bedroom. As a result of the accusations and the lawsuit, Michael’s innocent childlike qualities had been warped into something pathological and creepy in the public’s perception, but none of the talk had influenced our sleeping arrangements, and none of us had a moment’s pause about it.

      Everyone knew not to think about taking the space next to the fireplace. That was mine. We called those floor beds our “cages,” and if anyone came near mine, I’d say, “Hey. That’s my cage. Don’t think about stealing my cage.” I put on classical music and fell asleep to beautiful melodies and the cozy warmth of the fire. However, because I frequently had trouble sleeping, when the house was dark and quiet I often went into Michael’s bathroom to listen to music. That might sound odd, but the bathroom had an amazing, studio-quality sound system, with Tannoy speakers and everything. Michael had had the speakers installed because he liked to blast music while he was getting dressed and ready for the day, and he got plenty of use out of them: it took Michael a long, long time to get ready. Michael found it amusing that I rarely slept. He liked to suggest that I just move my bed right into the bathroom. But sometimes in the middle of the night he’d shuffle in and listen with me.

      In that bathroom, Michael kept a lot of his own music: demos of stuff he wanted to record or songs he was working on but had yet to finish. So at night, alone, that’s mostly what I played-music that Michael had never released or was still developing. I sometimes sat in that room for hours, listening to certain songs over and over again. It was like my very own private unplugged concert.


      The next morning was Christmas Day. It was the usual rush to open presents. Michael led the proceedings like an old pro, picking out gifts from under the tree and handing them out. Michael shared my offbeat sense of humor: as I’ve said, we were always playing jokes on each other. So for Christmas that year, he bought me ten presents. Ten! What could be in them? From a guy who gets you your own custom golf cart for no reason at all, what could ten Christmas gifts possibly be? I opened the first one. It was … a pocketknife. Okay, that one was a pretty good joke, since after all, in his company I had already bought all of the pocketknives in the town of Gstaad. We all had a good chuckle about it, and then Michael, who at this point was failing miserably at hiding a mischievous smile, told me to keep going. So I opened my second present: another pocketknife. And another. By the time I was done, I had ten identical pocketknives. We laughed from start to finish.

      Not to be outdone, I had a very special present ready for Michael. What do you get for a guy who can buy the world? I had taken a pile of garbage-toilet paper rolls, plastic bags, and empty candy wrappers-and wrapped each item carefully and put it in a box. Yep, I gave Michael a box of garbage for Christmas. When he opened it, he said with picture-perfect mock sincerity, “Oh, thank you so much. You shouldn’t have. You really shouldn’t have.” From then on, Michael always spent Christmas with my family, at Neverland or in New Jersey.




      Sometimes our pranks weren’t so elaborate. There was that time in the south of France, for example, when we went to see Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal and played Ping-Pong on a gold table. We were staying in a fancy hotel. Down there, the nightlife never stops. One night Michael and I were standing on the balcony of his hotel room, watching people eating dinner at three in the morning, when Michael said, “We should do a prank.” We filled a bucket with water and … splash! … dumped it off the balcony onto the unsuspecting diners below. We ducked our heads and scrambled back into the room before anyone could see us. Nobody ever figured out that we were the culprits.


      Aside from the extreme measures he felt he had to take, Michael was a thoughtful, attentive, loving parent, and his children grew to be the most intelligent and well-behaved children I have ever met. In Peter Pan, it is thinking happy thoughts that allows the children to fly. His children were the happiest part of Michael’s being.

      Seeing Michael’s sincere joy with his children made me realize that he hadn’t been happy in a long time. I don’t know when exactly -to my mind it started with the accusations in 1993-but it was dawning on me that Michael lived in a constant state of depression. If he was alone, he often forgot to eat. Sometimes he slept through the afternoon. He kept his room dimly lit at all times. Of course, he and I still had plenty of fun, but in the quieter moments it was clear to me that something was wrong.

      Michael had been born with a rare talent that drove an intense showbiz childhood. That kind of life takes a harsh toll on most children, and the world watches-as much in judgment as with fascination-as, one after another, they crash and burn. Michael fought his darkness in his own way. He didn’t party recklessly. He didn’t turn to recreational drugs. He didn’t act out his pain in the public arena. But that didn’t mean that he wasn’t suffering. All of this, however, seemed to change when he became a father. There was a renewed vibrancy to him, an energy that had been missing for years. An enthusiasm appeared, one that my whole family could see. For all his attempts at meditation, turning Neverland into a sanctuary of happiness, and freeing himself from his own demons, the best remedy turned out to be his children. They made him the happiest person in the world, and knowing Michael was building his family gave me the reassurance that he would keep fighting the darkness that hid below the surface of his day-to-day existence.


      During the Munich performance, he stepped onto a big bridge that spanned the front of the stage. It was raised up, lifting him fifty feet in the air, just as it had in Korea. It was supposed to descend gradually during the song. But this time, instead of coming down slowly, the bridge fell. It plummeted to the stage with a loud crash. This had not happened in Korea. What the fuck?

      Ever the showman, Michael never stopped singing, even as he fell. When the bridge landed, he was still standing. He later told us that he had jumped at the moment of impact, which may have saved him from more serious injury, but even so, he wasn’t in great shape. Instantly, without thinking, I ran onto the stage along with the security team. At the end of the song, the lights went out, and Michael collapsed into our arms. With security, I helped him off the bridge. The audience, who at first must have assumed the falling bridge was part of the show, saw us rush in and realized what they had witnessed. A worried murmur went through the crowd. A full-size tank rolled onstage, and a soldier emerged from it holding a gun. Offered a flower by a child, the soldier sank to his knees and wept. Michael finished the performance, at times bending over in pain. Afterward, backstage, he was clearly in a lot of pain, but continued the show.

      “My father told me no matter what, the show must go on,” he said.

      So he went back out, sat down on the edge of the stage, and sang his last song, “You Are Not Alone.” Security helped him off the stage.


      …my new position of power was readily apparent to those who wanted Michael as a partner. After another meeting at the Four Seasons, a businessman who was eager to make a deal with Michael handed me a briefcase full of money. He said, “This is for you. We really need Michael to be part of this company.”

      “Listen,” I said, “I don’t want your money. If a deal happens, it happens, but I can’t be a part of this.”

      Later I told Michael what had happened.

      “We can’t do business with these people,” I said without hesitation. “They just offered me cash. I turned it down, of course.” “Thank you,” Michael said. “If it was anyone else, they would have taken the money. You see what I deal with? This has been happening forever. Everyone takes kickbacks. I appreciate your honesty.”

      He said that it happened all the time, and named a few of his closest employees who had been taking kickbacks for years. I was shocked that this actually went on. It was criminal.

      … When I was a kid, the people I’d met in Michael’s organization were mostly the ones who helped him on a daily basis: security, drivers, makeup and wardrobe people, and so on. How the business of Michael Jackson was run was pretty much invisible to me. Now I started to see how complex the management was. Though I didn’t have formal business training, I came face-to-face with the infrastructure of Michael’s organization.

      There were lawyers, managers, accountants, and publicists. And it wasn’t just one lawyer or one manager. It was a team of lawyers and a team of managers. They were all involved in every deal, and at times they had different agendas. For example, if Michael wanted to invest in a company, the managers wanted to make sure the deal wouldn’t take away from his music commitments, the PR people wanted it to serve his public image, and the lawyers wanted to make sure the deal didn’t conflict with his other legal obligations.

      … During my childhood and adolescence, Michael had bred in me the notion that I could not trust anyone. At first I dismissed this as paranoia, but by the end of 1999, I came to see his lack of trust as an essential survival mechanism. The more time I spent with him, the more I saw that in his world, skepticism was a necessary defense. The problems went far beyond the negligence I’d seen in his Neverland staff. He lived in a world where everyone wanted something from him. They reacted to his fame and success with envy and greed. This was true even among his closest associates. It was a viper’s nest.


      Sometimes Michael invited members of his fan clubs to Neverland, and he occasionally formed a special relationship with one of the women. One time I was driving Michael into town. Someone was next to me in the passenger seat of the Bentley, and Michael was in the backseat, kissing one of his fans.

      “Easy back there,” I said. “Relax, calm down.”

      “Just keep driving,” Michael said, in a joking way. “Don’t worry about it, just keep driving.”

      Michael’s dalliances with fans were infrequent, and discreet, but they were hardly unheard of. He tended to like tall, slender women whom I’d describe as nerdy in a sexy way. Once, in London, I was in his suite when he brought a friend he’d known for years into his bedroom. They were in there for about an hour, and when he emerged, his pants were unbuttoned. I smirked at him.

      “Shut up, Frank,” he said, smiling sheepishly. The woman, equally sheepish, said good-bye and left.


      Creating a place of joy for children was a major reason why he built the ranch. Whenever he was on the road or on tour, he made a point of visiting children’s hospitals and orphanages, bringing gifts and talking to the children, listening to their stories. You don’t see many superstars doing this without any PR motive. Michael did it out of love. His connection with the kids he helped was often, though not always, personal. He took them into his heart. Many individual kids who suffered in one way or another came to Michael’s attention. He tried to help them as best he could, often spending time with ill children who asked to meet him. The story of his philanthropic efforts would fill a book of its own.

      But ever since the molestation allegations in 1993, he had tempered his genuine love for children with caution. His young visitors were always accompanied by an adult, and Michael was careful never to be alone with the kids: he always made sure another adult was around. It was easy for him to make this adjustment: spending time alone with children had never been particularly important to him. There is a widespread misconception that Michael rounded up small children to participate in sleepovers in his bedroom at Neverland. This was simply not the case. Families came to visit Neverland. Sometimes, depending on how far they had traveled, those families spent the night. These were close, intimate friends and families who’d known Michael for years. They stayed in the guest units.

      Michael’s suite, along with the kitchen at Neverland, was a natural gathering place for groups. The whole house was warm, but any house has places where people tend to congregate and there were two of those places at Neverland. On the first floor of Michael’s suite was a living room with a big fireplace, a piano, two bathrooms, and walk-in closets. Upstairs there was a small bedroom. Everyone hung out downstairs, treating the space like a family room. People-kids-often didn’t want the fun to end. So sometimes they slept over, as I did as a child, putting out blankets on the carpet around the fireplace of that family room. Michael himself slept there nine out of ten times. He always offered his bed to his guests.


      When we moved back to the Four Seasons in November 2000, the visits from the anesthesiologist stopped. But I came home one night to find that Michael had called the hotel doctor. He was going about his business-talking to Karen and making other business calls-but I could see that he was slightly disoriented. The next morning, I put my foot down.

      “You don’t want to end up like Elvis. Think about your children. Look at Lisa Marie and what she went through.” He didn’t brush off my concern. That would have convinced me that I was right. Instead, he looked straight into my eyes. “Frank,” he said with great sincerity, “I don’t have a problem. You don’t believe me? You don’t know what you’re talking about.” “It’s not that I don’t believe you-” I began, but then, before my very eyes, he dialed his dermatologist, Dr. Klein. He put the doctor on speaker and asked him to verify that the quantity of Demerol he was taking was safe and appropriate. Who was I to argue with the doctor who had been treating him for over fifteen years? Michael was right: I didn’t really know what I was talking about. Everyone’s body was different. Maybe he was so mentally strong that not even a drug could knock him out. And it was true that days went by without any visits from doctors. If he were a true addict, I asked myself, wouldn’t he need to take drugs every day? I was worried, but because I truly didn’t know how to judge the situation, there was no way for me to choose the right course of action.


      This had never happened before. Michael had never taken medicine right before a show. He never let it get in the way of his work. This was a sign that his dependency had not only returned, it had grown. It was now causing him to screw up his priorities. Somehow I had to bring his energy back, so I ordered gallons of Gatorade and some vitamin C pills from the concierge. Gradually, he seemed to return to normal, at which point I brought Karen in and she began to do his hair and makeup. I stood behind him as he was getting ready, finally able to relax and joke around with Karen. Because of the delay, the show would start over an hour late, but nobody questioned it. That’s entertainment.

      …At some point during the first part of the show, we all went backstage so Michael could get ready to appear with his brothers in the second half. Michael wasn’t remotely nervous, and there were no traces of the medicine’s effects. As usual, we stood in a circle and said a little prayer before he went out onstage. The prayer was pretty much the same every time: “God bless everyone up on that stage, and give us the energy to put on the best show.” Michael and his five brothers reunited for the first time in seventeen years to sing a medley of their hit songs. Then there was a brief intermission before Chris Tucker introduced Michael singing “Billie Jean.”

      That night, more than ever, I was impressed with Michael’s virtuosity. He was a natural, and the energy he was able to create was absolutely incredible. This guy made every single move look special, even just walking. Over the years, and in spite of all the mental and physical anguish he suffered, his talents hadn’t faded in the least. This was the heart of what we were here for, what we were celebrating: Michael’s massive talent and his years of complete dedication to his art. I watched him, as rapt as I had been during the Dangerous tour. So much had changed, but at this moment, this stunning moment, everything was suddenly remarkably familiar.


      I told Michael we had to talk. We sat in his room, and with a heavy heart, I told him that I needed a break.

      “You raised me,” I said emotionally, even a little teary-eyed. “You know everything about me. And I don’t want these people to come between us. I have no agenda here. My agenda is to make sure you’re not being fucked by these people. But I feel attacked and accused, and it’s affecting our friendship and our family. I think I need a break.”

      “Are you sure you want to do this?” Michael said. In truth, I didn’t know what I wanted to do. All I knew was that I needed time to think and be away from this ugly situation. For so long I had lived for Michael and his work. I put myself second. It wasn’t worth it anymore. I just wanted to walk away.

      “People around you can’t stand me, and you’re believing some of the things they’re saying.”

      “I always stand up for you,” Michael said. “I have your back. I don’t believe those people.”

      “But you did,” I said. It killed me to have my integrity challenged, and I knew it could and would happen again. “Well, you’re still here,” Michael said. “Nothing’s changed.” “I know,” I said, “but I need to do this right now.”

      “Listen, you have to do what’s best for you, what makes you happy.” Although Michael spoke calmly, I could see that he was distraught. We both were. But he understood and respected my decision, difficult as it was. Afterward we hung out, had dinner, and watched movies. A couple of days later I went back to New York. It was March 2002. I had been working for Michael for only three years, but it felt like a century. For the first time in my adult life, I took a break.


      Down in the cellar, we opened a bottle of white wine. I love my red wine, but Michael preferred white. That afternoon Michael and I spoke about the future, and what our goals for this next year were going to be. From the start, his words were bold and ambitious, but I could tell that he meant them.

      “I’m going to get myself out of this financial mess that everyone has made of my life,” he stated.

      This was the first time Michael had openly admitted to me or, as far as I knew, anyone, that he was in financial trouble. The fact that he was finally willing to face the music was astounding. “Yes, it’s their fault,” I replied. “But it’s your fault, too, for allowing it to happen.”

      “I needed to focus on being creative,” he said, with a hint of defensiveness in his voice. “You know, when I made Off the Wall and Thriller, I was the one who signed every single check that went out to anyone. Everything ran smoothly back then.”

      “What changed?” I asked, honestly wanting to know. “Why did you start letting other people handle your money?”

      “It got too big. It was too much for me to handle,” he said. While it may seem obvious, this admission was one of the only times I’d heard Michael accept responsibility for the situation he was in and for the dysfunction of his organization.


      For months, Michael had been saying that he had final approval over the content of the documentary. The plan, therefore, was that Martin Bashir would come to Miami to prescreen Living with Michael Jackson. But Bashir didn’t show up at the designated time, and then kept delaying his trip. By the time it was clear that he was giving us the runaround, it was too late. We tried to halt the interview from airing in the United States, but it was past the point of no return.

      Aldo and Marie Nicole, who were still in Miami, watched Living with Michael Jackson in his suite, but Michael refused to join them: he never liked seeing himself on TV. As my siblings watched, Michael popped in and out of the room asking them, “Are you sure you want to watch this? Why do you want to watch this?” Meanwhile, I watched the interview in my hotel room with Dr. Farshchian, feeling a mixture of dismay and resignation. The interview didn’t capture the Michael I knew, to say the least. That Michael was humble. He was a humanitarian. He was a talented musician. He put money and energy behind children’s causes. Bashir didn’t care about any of that. He was a sensationalist, interested only in the shallower elements of Michael’s life: shopping excesses and plastic surgery.

      All that was bad enough, but by far the most damaging part of the interview was the moment when Bashir spoke with Michael about his relationships with children. Michael had brought Gavin Arvizo into the documentary because he wanted to be understood, and sharing his efforts to help children in need would help bring about this understanding. Gavin was a prime example of this. In Bashir’s interview, Michael was shown holding Gavin’s hand and telling the world that kids slept in his bed. Anyone who knew Michael would recognize the honesty and innocent candor of what he was trying to communicate. But Bashir was determined to cast it in a different light.

      What Michael didn’t bother to explain, and what Bashir didn’t care to ask about, was that Michael’s suite at Neverland, as I’ve said before, was a gathering place, with a family room downstairs and a bedroom upstairs. Michael didn’t explain that people hung out there, and sometimes wanted to stay over. He didn’t explain that he always offered guests his bed, and for the most part slept on the floor in the family room below. But, perhaps most important, he didn’t explain that the guests were always close friends like us Cascios and his extended family.

      One of the biggest misconceptions about Michael, a story that plagued him for years following the Bashir documentary, was that he had an assortment of children sleeping in his room at any given time. The truth was that random children never came to Neverland and stayed in Michael’s room. Just as my brother Eddie and I had done when we were younger, the family and friends who did stay with Michael did so of their own volition. Michael just allowed it to happen because his friends and family liked to be around him.

      What Michael said on Bashir’s video was true: “You can have my bed if you want, sleep in it. I’ll sleep on the floor. It’s yours. Always give the best to the company, you know.” Michael had no hesitation about telling the truth because he had nothing to hide. He knew in his heart and mind that his actions were sincere, his motives pure, and his conscience clear. Michael, innocently and honestly, said, “Yes, I share my bed. There is nothing wrong with it.” The fact of the matter is, when he was “sharing” his bed, it meant he was offering his bed to whoever wanted to sleep in it. There may have been times when he slept up there as well, but he was usually on the floor next to his bed or downstairs sleeping on the floor. Although Bashir, for obvious reasons, kept harping on the bed, if you watch the full, uncut interview, it’s impossible not to understand what Michael was trying to make clear: when he said he shared his bed, he meant that he shared his life with the people he saw as family. Now, I know that most grown men don’t share their private quarters with children, and those who do so are almost always up to no good. But that wasn’t my experience with Michael. As one of those kids who, along with his brother, had any number of such sleepovers with Michael, I know better than anyone else what did happen and what didn’t happen. Was it normal to have children sleep over? No. But it’s also not considered especially normal for a grown man to play with Silly String or have water balloon fights, at least not with the enthusiasm Michael brought to the activities. It’s also not normal for a grown man to have an amusement park installed in his backyard. Do these things make such a man a pedophile?

      I’m quite sure that the answer is no.

      The bottom line: Michael’s interest in young boys had absolutely nothing to do with sex. I say this with the unassailable confidence of firsthand experience, the confidence of a young boy who slept in the same room as Michael hundreds of times, and with the absolute conviction of a man who saw Michael interact with thousands of kids. In all the years that I was close to him, I saw nothing that raised any red flags, not as a child and not as an adult. Michael may have been eccentric, but that didn’t make him criminal.

      The problem, though, was that this point of view wasn’t represented in the documentary. Listening to Michael talk, people who didn’t know him were disturbed by what he was saying, not only because his words were taken out of context but also because Bashir, the narrator, was telling them they should be disturbed. The journalist repeatedly suggested that Michael’s statements made him very uncomfortable. Michael was quirky enough without the machinations of a mercenary newshound, to be sure, but there’s no doubt that Bashir manipulated viewers for his own ends. His questions were leading, the editing misguiding. As I watched the broadcast, it seemed to me that Bashir’s plan all along had been to expose Michael in whatever way he could in order to win the highest ratings he could for his show.

      … He thought the interview would be something he could be proud of, something he would show to his children one day, a part of his legacy. Instead, for the second time in his life, the world took Michael’s greatest passion-helping kids-and accused him of doing the opposite-hurting kids. I thought this was beyond fucked up. It was horrible. I had known Michael for most of my life. He was the most magical person I had ever met. And the world had a completely distorted picture of him when it came to his relationship with children.


      Then came the night when Gavin and his brother Star pleaded with Michael to allow them to sleep with him.

      “Can we sleep in your room tonight? Can we sleep in your bed tonight?” the boys begged.

      “My mother said it’s okay, if it’s okay with you,” Gavin added. Michael, who always had a hard time saying no to kids, replied, “Sure, no problem.” But then he came to me.

      “She’s pushing her kids onto me,” he said, visibly concerned. He had a strange, uncomfortable feeling about it. “Frank, they can’t stay.” He was absolutely aware of the risks he ran in agreeing to share a room with these boys, especially because this was the very issue that had provoked such a furor in Bashir’s video.

      “No,” I said flatly, “they can’t stay. Their family’s crazy.”

      But Michael didn’t know how to say no to Gavin, so he asked me to handle the situation.

      I went to the kids and said, “Michael has to sleep. I’m sorry, you can’t stay in his room.”

      Gavin and Star kept begging, I kept saying no, and then Janet said to Michael, “They really want to stay with you. It’s okay with me.”

      Michael relented. He didn’t want to let the kids down. His heart got in the way, but he was fully aware of the risk. He said to me, “Frank, if they’re staying in my room, you’re staying with me. I don’t trust this mother. She’s fucked up.”

      I was totally against it, but I said, “All right. We do what we have to do.” Having me there as a witness would safeguard Michael against any shady ideas that the Arvizos might have been harboring. Or so we were both naive enough to think.


      One morning in January, I walked downstairs to get a coffee and cigarettes at the corner deli. I had long hair at the time, and I was wearing my usual sunglasses and a hoodie. A TV was on in the deli, playing a show called Celebrity Justice. As I waited to pay for my stuff, a picture of me came up on the screen. I watched in horror as the TV narrator made me out to be a mobster from New Jersey and alleged that I had attempted to kidnap Gavin Arvizo’s family and hold them hostage at Neverland. The press was even reporting that I’d attempted to kidnap the Arvizos and take them to Brazil, possibly to make them “disappear.” That would have made for a great movie. Back when I absorbed Michael’s advice to be like Jonathan Livingston Seagull, to lead an extraordinary life, being falsely accused of kidnapping wasn’t exactly what I had envisioned. A cute little old lady was in front of me in line.

      “I hope they get that bastard,” she said.

      “Me, too,” I said.


      That spring, before the indictment, Joe spoke to Tom Sneddon, the district attorney of Santa Barbara County.

      “Listen,” Sneddon said, “Frank’s on a sinking ship. He can take our lifeboat or go down with the ship.” He offered me immunity if I came into the DA’s office to testify against Michael. I know people who watch shows like Law & Order are used to thinking that the DAs are the good guys, but this time they were on the wrong side of the case. Even if I were to be completely honest, they would look for ways to use whatever I said against Michael.


      Michael invited my family to Bahrain to celebrate Christmas with him, but I didn’t go. I was negotiating with Russell Simmons, one of the founders of Def Jam, to do a tribute concert celebrating his contributions to hip-hop. I used that as an excuse not to go, but the real reason was that I was angry. As much as I wanted to put the past behind me, as much as I believed in being magnanimous, the fact was simply that I wasn’t. I still couldn’t believe that Michael had doubted me, doubted my unwavering loyalty to him, especially after all of the fear, anxiety, and depression that I’d been through since November 2003. I didn’t want to see him or speak to him. Part of me wanted to clear the air, but the years had made me stubborn…

      …Michael was a lot of things to me-boss, mentor, brother, father – but more than anything else, he was my oldest, closest friend. When he discarded me, I felt confused and lost. I’d seen him do this to so many other friends and colleagues, but I’d always thought the combination of my loyalty and our history made me exempt. Clearly, I was wrong.


      All the questions I’d kept buried for almost three years came pouring out, each one practically running over into the next. In the middle of this torrent I told Michael, “For the record, I have a clear conscience. I have done nothing wrong. I don’t regret anything that I did. I was one hundred percent there for you in every way anyone could ever be there for another person. You’ve told me how you’ve been betrayed by so many people. You taught me to be loyal, and I was. I always have been and I always will be. Where was your loyalty?”

      Michael was calm. “Well, I was told you didn’t want to testify. You weren’t going to testify in my time of need. That hurt me, after all I’ve done for you,” he replied.

      “Who told you that?” I asked angrily. “It’s not true. Your attorney, Tom, told my attorney, Joe, that they did not need me to testify.”

      “I don’t remember who told me. That’s what I was told.” “By whom?” I insisted.

      “I don’t remember. It was said.” As he spoke, Michael was lying down on the bed, feet up, chilling out while he let me vent. “By whom?” I repeated vehemently. It was driving me crazy. It had been for years. I tried to calm myself down and fought to keep my emotions in check, but it wasn’t easy.

      “You said this wasn’t going to happen,” I was finally able to say quietly. “From the first time I started working with you. Now you’re telling people that I betrayed you, that I didn’t stand by you.” I was pacing, like I do, back and forth in front of the bed. “That wasn’t the case. And you didn’t call me to find out the truth because you believed what you wanted to believe-that I betrayed you. You wanted to be the victim, to say you helped me and I fucked you over, but I never did that to you. What did I do to make you hate me so much? You have no idea how you hurt me. I know how you get. Why didn’t you just call and ask me for yourself instead of letting your imagination run away with you?”

      At this point I was feeling like my impassioned words were finally beginning to sink in. Michael got teary, stood up, and gave me a hug.

      “I’m sorry,” he said. “You know I love you like a son. I’m sorry that I made you feel this way. Let’s just move on from this. I could have gone anywhere in the world, but I’m here, with you and your family. I want to move on.”


      A GREAT BOOK! The best thing I’ve ever read about Michael. My deepest thanks to the jetzi site for the opportunity to get familiar with it. There is no question I will buy it when it is available here. It is more than precious.

    • Hey guys! Great news! Joe Vogel is now following me on Twitter! I feel honored! He only follows 94 people, and of those only a small handful are MJ fans & advocates. He obviously doesn’t follow people just for the sake of following them! He wants substance, and not someone who will only tweet loveletters to MJ all day, so I feel this is further validation of our blog, knowing that he’s following me! Here is what he said about a lot of fan sites in a recent article: http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=3979

      “I’ve always been fascinated with Michael Jackson’s music and given his cultural impact it is remarkable how little information about his body of work is available,” said Vogel, who categorizes most current literature about Jackson as fan adulation or tabloid “tell-alls.”

      I don’t think he’s trying to say that there is anything wrong with fan “adulation”, but there’s a time and place for everything, and too many fan engage in too much “adulation” and not enough RESEARCH AND INVESTIGATION! There should be 100 blogs like Vindicate MJ, but from my experience there are too many fans who are just TOO LAZY AND UNINTERESTED in doing the meticulous, diligent research that is required to truly vindicate MJ. By no means does this apply to all fans, but there are too many fans that have the mentality of “I already know he’s innocent, so I don’t need to know all of the details and do all of that boring research“. What a shame!

      Maybe he’ll start referring his students and fellow professors to Vindicate MJ? Who knows! I’m just glad to know that he’s reading this blog and respects our work!

      Here is the list of people he’s following: https://twitter.com/#!/JoeVogel1/following

      I added the screenshot of Vogel following me on Twitter to this post: http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2011/11/20/thank-you-to-all-of-the-readers-of-vindicate-mj/

  16. I would imagine then that he released the “worse” ones during that lawsuit. I have them. Nothing bad.

    Calling money french fries, something about sunscreen, telling Schaffel to get a breath mint.

  17. Yeah David i get what your saying i was on youtube once and there was this guy preaching MJ was a devil worshipper! he also said MJ Transformed himself to a women so he could be worshipped as a goddess (something along those lines) and he said MJ Worshipped Alistair Crowley and he said his proof was that crowley was on the cover of dangerous album when in fact i know who that bold guy was it wasnt crowley it was another guy he invented the circus or something right now i cant remember his name. And he also said We are the world was a satanic song and he didnt even provide convincing evidence other than he said it. what got me angry was not only was this guy BS but he chose the topic of MJ because mj just passed so wanted to make a buck off him.

    • @Truth Prevail
      I’ve seen that video too, and that is EXACTLY the person whose message I will be rebutting (among many others)! Part 1 will be posted on Christmas day! Stay tuned!

  18. David I Dont think People thinking MJ was a muslim convert is slanderous in anyway its jus an assumption by some people the same way some people think MJ was jewish because of his close freind Liz Taylor and because of this red string he wore on his wrist other people he was around like schumuley MJ has never said he Converted to any of these faiths there really just discussions between people guessing.

    • @Truth Prevail
      I see the point you’re trying to make, and for some people it doesn’t matter what faith MJ practiced, but to the religious community, it DOES matter! After he died, there were some Christian websites that used the Muslim conversion rumors to slander MJ, and to make Christians feel guilty about mourning him. They’re “proof” that MJ had converted was the fact that his brother Jermaine had converted, and his being protected by the Nation of Islam bodyguards.

      It’s no different than the gay rumors: while it may not matter to most fans if he was gay or not, it certainly matters to the religious community! MJ has also been slandered by being called a “gay p…phile”, an “androgynous man-woman” and other false rumors, so these are topics that I’ll address in my next series.

  19. “Now they are writing to refute solely our blog. They single us out from the rest of Michael’s supporters (they name us just “fans”) and say that we “have a sinister agenda”

    You know you are doing something right when you are being rapidly attacked


  20. So now they try to rewrite history by claiming Jordan didn’t say MJ was circumcised? WOW! Haters are getting desperate.

    I found it pretty funny how they try to explain away the fact Larry Feldman tried to get those pics barred from court. If they were telling the truth they should have been sure that it was a match and content with anybody showing them in court. After all it could only help them, right? That is, IF they were telling the truth. Whichever way they put it, the fact Feldman wanted to get them barred from court is very telling.

    I actually clicked on that website after a long time again now and I honestly say I’m still higly unimpressed by them. I thought they would come up with something better by now, but they still fail to focus on the very facts of the two cases, instead they operate mainly with already refuted claims, tabloid info and (questionable) generalizations about p-les. That’s all they have.

    For example, they try to refute the fact that p-les tend to have many, many victims in a lifetime. (That’s because MJ didn’t have many accusers, of course.) But then what they talk about in that section is not how many victims p-les tend to have, but about articles which say that p-les carefully select their victims. Having many victims and carefully selecting them are NOT mutually exclusive things! P-les carefully select their victims, but that doesn’t mean they don’t tend to have many, many in a lifetime, especially if they have access to so many kids.

    And that hater website has a LOT of strawman arguments like this!

    I’d like to see these people focus on actual facts of the cases against MJ instead of mudding the water with generalizations and tabloid rumors and by omitting important facts from their “research”. For example, how would they explain the timelines of BOTH cases? (Evan already plotting against MJ BEFORE Jordan “confessed” to him, the Arvizos claiming Gavin was molested WHILE Sneddon and the DCFS were investigating MJ). Of course, they are not going there. LOL.

    @ Shelly

    “The smoking gun articles were based on the grand jury transcript, so yes they were factuals, everything they said was in the transcript and by the way Bill Bastone was very fair to MJ during the trial.”

    Quoted for emphasis. Thanks!

  21. The smoking gun articles were based on the grand jury transcript, so yes they were factuals, everything they said was in the transcript and by the way Bill Bastone was very fair to MJ during the trial.

  22. I would like to add something else as a thought. If Sneddon knew that they were a match as the one site suggests why did he added the special disclaimer “except those based on information and belief”. Like I said before and it is not mere speculation, the SBSD asked for a search and arrest warrant on Michael prior to the photos. They would have had to have an arrest warrant attached when they stipulated that if he refused the photos and video of his private parts he would be arrested. I am not sure why no one gets that! In order for the search to be legal it would have had to include an arrest warrant because the Police in this case above all others would not be able to make empty threats to Michael and his lawyers present were Johnny Cochran and Howard Weitzman, they would have insisted on it being completely legal. Now if he refused he was to be arrested and if it was a definitive match he would have been arrested as the evidence would have proved the allegations. Why is it that no one understands that?

    If they come out now and say that there was no arrest warrant attached to that search they are saying that they in fact violated Michael’s Miranda rights by forcing him to an unnecessary and humiliating search of his naked body. If they obtained those photos illegally they would not have been admissible evidence in any trial ever. Do they want to go there? No one should forget that Sneddon himself was in that house on that day, that is proof that he was there to charge Michael if the photos were a match. If someone doubts that Michael was forced to do that search they should ask themselves why he did it if he did not have to. If the photos would have been a definitive match, he would have been arrested because they would have had their evidence. If he refused he would have been arrested because his refusal was to be considered a consciousness of guilt.

    There has been plenty said about the spots which did not matter then and they sure don’t matter now. What kept Michael out of jail was the fact that not only did the spots not match but neither did the “form” or the fact that he was not circumcised. Now suddenly the haters want to bring it back to a spot when they think Sneddon’s word means something. Ask them then why he wasn’t willing to back that up by really putting himself in jeopardy of perjury? I read what the other site posted and there was a Grand Canyon size chasm of omitted information in that post.

    One question or statement on the other site says that those that ask why Michael was not arrested do not understand the rules of evidence. Their statement that the detectives and photographers would have had to testify to the chain of evidence is correct, but only at trial, not during the gathering of evidence for an arrest. This was still an investigation not a trial. The rules of evidence only apply when the evidence is used at trial not when they arrest someone. If I were to give evidence that this is true just look at the list of things, including a used tissue retrieved from a waste paper basket that they collected from Neverland. Are they going to tell me that someone blew their nose and that was somehow supposed to mean something? No the police collect all kinds of things in an investigation and then they go through it to see if it is evidence of the alleged crime. It is this person that does not understand.

    This person’s second talking point is Larry Feldman requesting a second set of photos. They say that it means nothing because it was a civil trial and this was a criminal investigation. That is not true. The judge granted the police access to whatever evidence and depositions were gathered in the civil trial. If he wanted them brought in as evidence all he would have had to do was petition the court for those to be brought in not left out.

    Their attempt at showing that the drawing included in the Victor Gutierrez book was not effective either considering they have not included the entire version that does have notes in the header and sidelines and footer. They used the one that does not show that someone was taking notes about how to describe Michael in the first place. The drawing or description that clearly states that Michael is circumcised and Brett is not. Now who is using trickery and omission to elude an unsuspecting public?

    Then I guess that someone just made a mistake at The Smoking Gun and that is why that site has the description as a light spot according to affidavit instead of a dark spot like Sneddon said that around about in the right place. They also hit in the fact that Michael’s lawyers wanted them returned in July of 1994 when they had the affidavit for the search warrant sealed. Of course that was not granted because the investigation did not end until September of 1994. They were still investigating the case for another 3 months because they did not inform Michael’s lawyers that Jordan told them he would not testify on July 6th 1994. Up until then they were holding them. The reason that they were sealed by a judge is because one of the DA’s in question wanted to use them if Jordan ever changed his mind. Does anyone wonder which DA it is that I am talking about?

    IN 2004, when Sneddon was faced with the possibility that he was in trouble for abuse of power for searching Brad Millers office himself, he petitioned the court for an order not to allow the search warrants to be given over in discovery to the defense. He said that it was still an ongoing investigation and if the affadavit was released to the defense attorney’s they would be given priviledged information. Some of the privildged information the cited was the 1993 affadavit so it had been opened and was open from at least November 16th 2003 until it was resealsed on January 24th, 2004. To this day the defense has not seen that affadavit. Why is that so important to the prosecution that no one know what is in that affadavit besides them? It isn’t like they were ever concerned for Michael’s right to a fair trial, because they had already leaked enough information for the jury pool to have a skewed view.

    I say it is because that affadavit says exactly what the article said in The Case of the Telltale Splotch and it is not a match. They knew it. It was just Sneddon hell bent on revenge that said differently. Apparently they do not know what a driving need for revenge can do to someone. I guess I will have to put all of these points together and just do a proper post in it so they can get the point one last time. I expect that it will be done sometime tomorrow.

  23. That is right. I personally believe that Sneddon over the years had taken a lot of heat over getting those photos. It was unprecedented and unnecessary to have done that to begin with. After that was when they started all the lies and innuendos about Michael’s behavior during the search in an effort to imply that he was guilty because, according to them he “threw a fit” so they did not get the pictures they needed. If that is the case the photos have no value whatsoever. Well they had an arrest warrant in the event he refused how do they explain that? It was Russell Birchim that said he saw the spot and he and Sneddon were/are friends outside of work. Then Birchim says in reality that he “thinks he saw” a dark spot. The photos should have been returned to Michael after that trial but Sneddon is going to have a very difficult time convincing me that he did not have a vendetta against Michael when he would not return them after the trial saying that they should keep them in case there is another case. That right there tells me that there is something seriously wrong with that man.
    I could give a very good argument as to why they should be and should have been returned at that time due to the fact they are of Michael Jackson’s person and therefore fall under his image copyrights. If they are ever released whoever does it should have to pay the Estate of Michael Jackson. If they do not they would be violating the copyright that they have to his image and likeness. That is another thing that has eluded the minds of some of the detractors out there. Michael Jackson was a commodity, a product. I know that sounds strange but he knew that. When they state that he in fact is something that he was proven not to be that is slander. How is that? Because he lives on in his marketability or his image. When they slander and defame him it still has current financial effects on his marketability.
    The photos should by all purposes at this point in time be taken to Katherine for destruction. The only purpose for the description was humiliation by Evan Chandler and not one but two law enforcement agencies went along with it. I think Tom Messereau should petition the court for the release of these photos and the destruction of the description. They are not going to have another case to hear so they might as well just get rid of them and leave Michael to rest in peace on this matter. They never did it in life, it is the least that they could do now. Evan Chandler is dead, Michael is dead, and still Sneddon will not release those photos. That is absurd. The photos only depict a certain time frame because of the always changing Vitiligo they would have meant nothing in 2005 and they sure don’t mean anything now.

    • Guys, it looks like we’ll have to do a post on Sneddon’s desire to get MJ’s photos admitted as evidence at the end of the trial! I don’t know if you guys have been monitoring the MJ Facts Info hater’s site, but they have added a substantial amount of information over the last few months, including a new post that “proves” that the Jordan’s description matched! I can tell that they’re reading our site and trying to debunk our theories and facts, as they practically use our talking points against us! (Without directly naming us.)

      Here is their post: http://www.mjfacts.info/the_telltale_splotch.php

      Not only that, but in this article a professor wrote an essay on MJ that will be released next year, and she wrongly asserted that the photos were shown at the trial as well! So this is starting to get out of hand, and we need to debunk this ASAP. I will start posting my series that refutes attacks on MJ from the religious community beginning on Dec. 25th, and it’ll be a 4 or 5 part series that will be finished by mid-January, so we have plenty of time to work on it.

      You can read the article on that professor, and my thoughts on that article, under this post: http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/04/20/all-you-wanted-to-know-about-it-but-were-afraid-to-ask-part-3/

    • “I don’t know if you guys have been monitoring the MJ Facts Info hater’s site, but they have added a substantial amount of information over the last few months”

      David, thanks for the update but may I suggest you don’t post links to their site here any more? It is only giving them unnecessary promotion. I also doubt that they post links to our blog on their site, so it will be only fair if we didn’t.

      Please send the links to the researchers only, while it would be just enough to inform readers about what this pedophilia lobby is doing to Michael. If any of the readers want to go to that site they are welcome to look for it themselves.

      Why I think that those writing there are a pedophilia lobby? Because I cannot imagine anyone else to be so persistent in their lies against Michael Jackson – no, these people are fighting for their own rights! And they still hope to have him among their ranks, this is why it is so crucial for them to prove that he was what he actually wasn’t.

      There are other reasons why I think these people have a special interest in Michael but I will not voice them at the moment as they are definitely reading us.

      As could be easily predicted now these people claim that no one really remembers Jordan Chandler saying that Michael was circumcised.


      Remember I warned you they would? And this is why they were erasing all traces of Jordan’s words from the media? And the fact that they have a chance to erase all mention of Jordan’s words shows how powerful these people are?

      Now they even ridicule us for using the Smoking Gun as the only source where this information is still contained, saying “what can you expect of those who believe tabloids?”

      No, my dear liars, it is very unfortunate news for you but the source you so much rely on, Victor Gutierrez, ALSO says that Jordan described Michael as circumcised.

      I haven’t read Ray Chandler’s book but it is highly probable that he mentioned it too. David, I think you’ve read it – could you inform us whether Ray Chandler quotes Jordan as saying that?

      But the thing that surprises me most about this site is that these people are so much dedicated to lying about Michael. They KNOW that Jordan said Michael was circumcised (everyone knows that because we simply remember the media screams), but they are ready to deny even the obvious.

      WHY SO?

      P.S. These people claim that we are selective in using tabloids’ information and say that if we believe some of the Smoking Gun lies we should believe the rest too. However the article used by us in this post http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/08/21/the-story-of-one-telltale-splotch-missing-from-the-smokin-gunpublic-eye/ is a very SPECIAL thing.

      It is the article which was first published but later disappeared from the Smoking Gun. So what was actually used by us was a retrieved ghost of it, which is now a totally unwelcome guest on its pages.

    • I’ve spent a substantial amount of time on their site and found that:

      1) Now they are writing to refute solely our blog. They single us out from the rest of Michael’s supporters (they name us just “fans”) and say that we “have a sinister agenda”.

      2) They do give a link to this blog calling us “the other side of the coin”. Therefore, for the sake of being fair, I will not delete the link to their site in David’s comment, though you understand that I am keeping it here totally despite my will.

      3) They do not have a comment section of their own and we cannot leave any of our facts and arguments in reply to their one-sided and often false statements. In their contact section they refer their readers to “topix” instead. They claim they are not part of it, but the connection between the two is more than clear.

      4) The authors of the site do not disclose who they are. If these people are really against pedophilia I can give them several links to pedophiles’ sites which do have a truly sinister agenda – only no one cares. The people working for those sites are numerous, so even from their number it is obvious that they present a heavy danger to the society. So if our adversaries are sincere, instead of fighting one dead man who can do no harm to anyone, they could do really useful work to rid the society of real pedophiles if they switched over to them – which I strongly suggest they do.

      5) Dear co-eds and Michael’s supporters, it turns out that our work for Michael and his legacy is far from finished. It is too early to say that the truth has prevailed and this isn’t the time for jubilations. Real work is only starting.

    • @Helena
      I’m sorry about leaving that link. I didn’t post it to “advertise” their site, but mostly to allow our readers to visit their site and educate themselves about what the MJ haters are doing to smear MJ. As advocates, we have to be one step ahead of them, and in order to effectively refute them, we have to know what they’re saying. I was going to point out to you that they have a link to our blog on their site, but you’ve already seen it.

      They are truly cowards for not allowing comments and not allowing anyone to email them directly. Personally, I’m flattered that they have added so much new content over the last few months, because it shows how effective we are at vindicating MJ! All of their arguments have more holes than swiss cheese, and can easily be refuted with logic. They like to omit important evidence and information to prove their point, such as not mentioning whatsoever the timeline of the allegations, or Evan’s desire to write a book and record an album. They try to paint the Chandlers as the victims of the MJ media machine, and of his crazy, rabid fans!

      I really, really think that our adversary is writing for them, as she is also included on their list of links, and she reached out to them last year to offer them research and ideas (remember how she thought that Charles Thomson was writing that blog because they used an email address that was very similar to his). I would consider doing another post to rebut them, but much of what they’re saying has already been refuted in our posts, and I’m starting to focus on finishing up my current projects, and getting ready to start summarizing the 2005 trial.

    • “I’m sorry about leaving that link. I didn’t post it to “advertise” their site, but mostly to allow our readers to visit their site and educate themselves about what the MJ haters are doing to smear MJ.”

      David, no need to apologize – I never ask for it. But posting a link to allow our readers to visit that site and educate themselves on what they do is exactly what I called advertising that blog (sorry if I chose the wrong word).

      “As advocates, we have to be one step ahead of them, and in order to effectively refute them, we have to know what they’re saying”

      This has been the idea all along. But it is our job, not the readers’, to see what haters say and do and refute their lies – we shouldn’t leave our readers one to one with these nasty allegations.

      “I would consider doing another post to rebut them, but much of what they’re saying has already been refuted in our posts, and I’m starting to focus on finishing up my current projects, and getting ready to start summarizing the 2005 trial.”

      Mentioning our adversaries’ ideas without disproving them is against our rules. The rule is universal for all of us here – if we mention someone’s lies about Michael we never leave them without a comment and provide our own arguments to disprove them. And if we do not intend to comment we don’t mention them at all until we have enough factual material to discuss that. Sorry I had to remind you of that.

      I think that your new planned series will have to be postponed at least until January because now that that site was brought to our attention we cannot leave the situation as it is. Lynette wanted to make a post and it seems that I will have to return to a couple of things.

    • @Helena
      I wasn’t trying to say that we shouldn’t refute them, but I was saying that I don’t think it’s an urgent matter at the moment because, as Suzy said, they’re using straw man arguments and cherry picking the information that they choose to present. Everything that they have written has already been rebutted on our site, and I worry that they may be trying to distract us again, the same way Desiree did when she wrote her “MJ Was Gay” posts earlier this year. The difference is that we were bombarded with emails and comments from readers asking us to rebut her, which we inevitably did. They don’t have any new, groundbreaking information that needs to be rebutted immediately, in my opinion; its just more of the same stuff that we’ve already heard before.

      The new series that I’m working on is called “Fact Checking Michael Jackson’s Christian Faith”, and it’s been something I’ve been researching for several months now. There are people in the religious community who have slandered MJ by calling him a gay child abuser, a devil worshipper, a Muslim, convert, a median who channels evil spirits to help him write songs, and other nonsense, and I wanted to publish the first part on Christmas day. If you or Lynette can write and publish a rebuttal to the hater’s site this week, that’s fine, but I don’t want to delay the start of my series. If you can’t have it finished this week, you can publish it in between my posts, as it will take me longer than usual to finish this series. It’ll be 4 or 5 parts, maybe more.

    • “If you or Lynette can write and publish a rebuttal to the hater’s site this week, that’s fine, but I don’t want to delay the start of my series.”

      Okay, I’ll try my best to make it quick.

  24. It’s from the judge

    ” THE COURT: I’m going to deny the request to

    19 bring in the evidence of the blemished penis. This

    20 is the reason: It’s twofold, really. And under a

    21 352 analysis, the Court agrees with the defense,

    22 that shyness really was not an issue of any

    23 proportion. I think you’ve reminded me — I knew

    24 there had been some statement somewhere in the trial

    25 about shyness, but the — I think you’ve reviewed

    26 that with me, and I think I agree with — my

    27 recollection now has been refreshed to exactly what

    28 that was. But I knew it was only a small thing to 12182

    1 start with, if anything. And you’re saying it was

    2 actually nothing.

    3 But the analysis there would be, even if

    4 shyness had been raised as an issue, the prejudicial

    5 effect would far outweigh the probative value of the

    6 shyness issue. And secondly, I think — even though

    7 your analysis is I think correct, I keep going

    8 through it, but I think it is not hearsay. I still

    9 think Crawford would apply to the ability to

    10 cross-examine the boy — or the — you know, Mr.

    11 Chandler. He’s not a boy anymore — on that issue,

    12 and that’s definitely not available, so that would

    13 be my reasoning for excluding that evidence.”

  25. This is from Zonen

    “24 it down in reports, and then they preserve that and

    25 the prosecution wants to bring it in, that violates

    26 the confrontation clause. You cannot do that.

    27 So you would have a violation of a federal

    28 constitutional right were this allowed in, in any 12180

    1 event, and so the Court can start at either end.

    2 Either just decide it on that and it’s over, or you

    3 look at the other end. It’s not proper rebuttal,

    4 because there was no evidence to rebut. And under

    5 the Carter case, it’s simply dramatic evidence that

    6 would be overwhelming at the end of the trial and

    7 really, in my opinion, and as we briefed, totally

    8 meaningless. There is no probative value. But if

    9 there was, by a stretch, it would be on a collateral

    10 matter.

    11 And so I think — I feel very strongly about

    12 this that this is absolutely inappropriate. And I

    13 will submit it, Your Honor. Thank you.

    14 THE COURT: Mr. Zonen?

    15 MR. ZONEN: Just briefly with regards to

    16 Crawford. This is not hearsay at all. It’s not an

    17 exception to hearsay. It’s not hearsay.

    18 The issue is whether or not this child had

    19 knowledge of the existence of that particular spot.

    20 And the evidence of his knowledge, certainly his

    21 ability to draw that picture, would be

    22 circumstantial evidence that he knew about it. It

    23 would be the equivalent of a child being able to say

    24 that a room was green. And he would only know that

    25 if he had been in the room. It’s not for the truth
    of the matter that the room is green. We can show

    27 that independently with the photograph as can we

    28 show the spot with the photograph. But the fact 12181

    1 that a child would know that the room was green

    2 would only be knowledge that the child would have

    3 circumstantially because he was there or because

    4 somebody told him.

    5 In this particular case, it’s the type of

    6 information that was not commonly available at the

    7 time, and circumstantially it would be relevant for

    8 the fact that he must have seen that particular

    9 spot, and therefore it’s not testimonial. It’s not

    10 communication in that regard. It would not fit

    11 within Crawford. It’s simply not hearsay.

    12 MR. SANGER: And if I may make just one

    13 comment on that — I know we shouldn’t go back and

    14 forth but —

    15 THE COURT: I’d really like you not to do

    16 that.

    17 MR. SANGER: Very well, Your Honor

  26. This is from the defense

    “MR. SANGER: I, once again, tried to keep

    25 the brief brief. I hope the Court —

    26 THE COURT: I appreciate you keeping your

    27 briefs brief.

    28 MR. SANGER: Yes. I don’t want a lack of 12176

    1 volume to suggest that this didn’t take well into

    2 the night to get done here. And I don’t want to

    3 repeat everything, but I think because it is such an

    4 important issue, we’re right at the end of the case,

    5 I feel compelled to speak about it just briefly, if

    6 I may.

    7 First of all, this seems to come directly

    8 within the California Supreme Court’s discussion in

    9 the Carter case, which basically says it’s not

    10 proper to bring in evidence that magnifies evidence

    11 that the opposition has not had a chance to meet

    12 squarely during the case-in-chief, which we haven’t,

    13 because this was not offered, it was not hinted at.

    14 It was not even in the original 1108 motion from

    15 which the Court made a cut and reduced what they had

    16 presented originally. So it wasn’t even in there.

    17 I mean, we had no notice to deal with these

    18 issues — with this issue at all. So there is

    19 certainly unfair surprise, as stated directly in the

    20 Carter case.
    21 And Carter also says that the Court is

    22 supposed to avoid dramatic evidence introduced late

    23 in the trial that’s going to have an undue effect.

    24 Now, as we pointed out, this was not

    25 offered. I mean, this is really a stretch to even

    26 come up with any kind of an argument as to why this

    27 should — why they could even ask to bring this in.

    28 And they’re not asking to bring it in as 1108 12177

    1 evidence. They’re asking to bring it in as 1101(b)

    2 evidence.

    3 And the idea is, I think they’ve said in

    4 their pleadings, that this goes to the issue of

    5 whether or not Mr. Jackson was shy or modest. Now,

    6 that’s not what Mr. Zonen just said when he got up

    7 here and argued. I think he shifted the argument a

    8 bit, if I’m not mistaken, and talked about things

    9 happening in the bedroom.

    10 They didn’t offer — I mean, we can’t just

    11 keep having a moving target here. They didn’t offer

    12 it in their moving papers. They didn’t offer it for

    13 that purpose. They offered it on the shy and modest

    14 purpose. So it would be 1101(b) evidence on kind of

    15 a collateral matter, if it ever happened. But it

    16 didn’t happen in this case in the defense.

    17 We went through and did a word search on the

    18 entire transcript, several different words, “shy,”

    19 “modest,” all sorts of things. We found one

    20 question that used the word “shy,” not even in this

    21 context. It had to do with whether or not a maid
    2 saw Mr. Jackson change his shirt. And the objection

    23 was sustained to that question. So it was never

    24 answered. So it didn’t happen.

    25 We also went through and — just to be sure,

    26 and read — we read all the testimony from the key

    27 witnesses in the defense who might have said

    28 something like that if anybody said it. And the 12178

    1 only thing we can come up with is an investigative

    2 report where the word — I think “shy” — it was

    3 either “shy” or “modest,” one of the two was used.

    4 We quoted it in there. And it turns out that that

    5 was never brought out from that witness on the

    6 stand.

    7 So it seemed to me that, when I was looking

    8 at this, this was a pocket brief the District

    9 Attorney had originally prepared in case somebody

    10 did this. It didn’t happen. Now they’re trying to

    11 bring it in by way of rebuttal, and it would just be

    12 absolutely inappropriate as 1101, because it doesn’t

    13 rebut anything, okay?

    14 What really they’re trying to do, and I

    15 think that’s what I heard Mr. Zonen just argue, is

    16 they’re trying to argue this is 1108. And it

    17 doesn’t meet the criteria for 1108. It doesn’t meet

    18 the criteria the Court set down that it would be

    19 somebody directly observing something. So it would

    20 have the prejudicial effect of the jury considering

    21 it, obviously, for 1108 purposes. Because it would

    22 be very shocking to see pictures of — anatomical
    23 pictures and all that sort of thing.

    24 So just from that standpoint, they’ve made

    25 no — show no basis. There’s no foundation to admit

    26 this as rebuttal, because there’s — they haven’t

    27 shown what they’re rebutting under 1101(b). And

    28 obviously, if they did that, the prejudice would be 12179

    1 so overwhelming, because it would go to the 1108 and

    2 it shouldn’t come in for that reason.

    3 And as we said before, 1108 — as the Court

    4 is well aware, 1108 is a very delicate kind of an

    5 issue. The jury is given tremendously prejudicial

    6 evidence, that is, prejudicial in the sense that it

    7 is propensity evidence, and that propensity

    8 evidence — under this weird law we have in

    9 California that doesn’t exist most other places,

    10 propensity evidence is allowed to come in, but the

    11 Court has to exercise discretion in limiting it, so

    12 it doesn’t overwhelm the trial. And the Court made

    13 those rulings. And to bring this in at this point

    14 and emphasize 1108 in rebuttal with something that

    15 isn’t even really 1108 evidence would be

    16 tremendously prejudicial.

    17 But when you get right down to it, the main

    18 reason that it has to stay out is it violates

    19 Crawford and the confrontation clause. It’s not

    20 admissible hearsay. It is testimonial directly

    21 under Crawford. This is the kind of stuff that

    22 Crawford is talking about, when police officers do

    23 interviews, and they get information and they write
    24 it down in reports, and then they preserve that and

    25 the prosecution wants to bring it in, that violates

    26 the confrontation clause. You cannot do that.

    27 So you would have a violation of a federal

    28 constitutional right were this allowed in, in any 12180

    1 event, and so the Court can start at either end.

    2 Either just decide it on that and it’s over, or you

    3 look at the other end. It’s not proper rebuttal,

    4 because there was no evidence to rebut. And under

    5 the Carter case, it’s simply dramatic evidence that

    6 would be overwhelming at the end of the trial and

    7 really, in my opinion, and as we briefed, totally

    8 meaningless. There is no probative value. But if

    9 there was, by a stretch, it would be on a collateral

    10 matter.

    11 And so I think — I feel very strongly about

    12 this that this is absolutely inappropriate. And I

    13 will submit it, Your Honor. Thank you.

    • Shelly, thank you for the document and the transcript – they will be helpful for studying things while I have limited access to Internet (if any at all) in the next few days. This will be a sort of homework for me.

      My first impression of Mr. Sanger’s words is that Sneddon not only violated Michael’s constitutional rights by trying to introduce those photos (without giving a chance to cross examine Jordan Chandler), but that it was also a totally illegal trick meant for emotional effect only.

      It was not on the 1108 list of “evidence” of “prior bad acts” and was to be sneaked into the 2005 trial under the pretext of showing Michael to be modest and shy – which he was – but what does it have to do with Sneddon bringing in the photos?

      When Sanger talked about a “moving” target they were forced to deal with, it again reminded me of Conrad Murray’s trial and the tactics used by Chernoff and Flanagan. It was the mirror image of the Arvizo case – Murray had the same slippery, chameleon and jelly-like case which was changing in the process of the trial as his defense was grasping at various straws that would occasionally stick out here and there.

      It is a method which does not even suppose that there is some truth lying in the basis of the case – it is just a combination of lies which are shuffled and reshuffled depending on how the events turn out.

      The same thing happened in 2005, only in reverse. There was no case – ‘molestation’ had to happen after the news about it was announced the worldwide; then a conspiracy charge emerged from nowhere aiming to explain the initial molestation nonsense; and when all that flopped, some highly dubious characters from the past were introduced to share their hearsay.

      And at the very end of it came the turn of some meaningless photos which do not explain anything because no one knows who said what about Michael’s genitalia before (how is it possible to compare things with something you know nothing of?) And all this is done in total disrespect for Law, in a stealthy manner and under some false pretexts that they are talking about Michael “being shy”.

      It is just the theatre of the absurd. Or a bad circus where a conjurer tries to pull a rabbit out of his hat at the last moment, but fails to do so because there is no rabbit, no hat and no knowledge how to do it.

      It is clear that Sneddon wanted those photos just to shock the jury by disclosing them Michael’s anatomy and humiliate Michael beyond any limit. And this failed drama gesture made for effect only is all Michael’s detractors have to produce to us as “proof” of their allegations.

  27. If the photos were such a match Sneddon would have wanted to use them as his Nr 1 and main evidence in the 1108 part of the trial. But he only tried to introduce them at the very end after all his witnesses have been destroyed on stand, as a desperate last attempt to prejudice the jury. And like Lynette said he would have used them with his own commentary of “believing” and “being told” they were a match, not with the description. It’s indeed interesting that whoever talked about those photos from the prosecution side they all said they were “told” they were a match. The doctor, Sneddon etc. So why did nobody knew anything definite? Why did they all have to be “told”? Didn’t they see both the photos and Jordan’s description? They surely did. The only explanation for using this type of language (being “told”, to “believe” etc.) is what Lynette gave that it would protect them from perjury.

    I can also imagine Sneddon knew well the judge wouldn’t allow him to bring in the photos in the last moment, but he did this request to throw in yet another innuendo about Michael in the last moment.

  28. What Sneddon wanted to do was introduce the photos without the affadavit and accompanying description or the affadavit without the photos. He did not want to introduce both of them. He wanted to be able to qualify the photos with his own statement that they were a match. He did not want the description to qualify the photos. Then in the same statement he qualifies it by using the legal term “based on information and belief”. So basically what that means is that he does not have first hand knowledge but he has been told what he says and he believes it. If you look up the term “information and belief in the legal dictionary it is just another way to say it is so because someone told me and I believe them. It wipes out the possibilty of perjury with that term because he is saying he believes what he is told, he is not saying it is the truth. If he was wrong he would just be considered stupid or gullible for believing it which is not a crime in a court of law. If you look at all of the Prosecutions filings you will find that term in many of them.

    information and belief n. a phrase often used in legal pleadings (complaints and answers in a lawsuit), declarations under penalty of perjury, and affidavits under oath, in which the person making the statement or allegation qualifies it. In effect, he/she says: “I am only stating what I have been told, and I believe it.” This makes clear about which statements he/she does not have sure-fire, personal knowledge (perhaps it is just hearsay or surmise), and protects the maker of the statement from claims of outright falsehood or perjury. The typical phraseology is: “Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon such information and belief alleges that defendant diverted the funds to his own use.”

    And Sneddon did ask the court on 9/2/04 if he could examine photos that were in the custody of Los Angeles Police. I don’t know if that was granted or not. That was before Auchincloss and Zonen went to NYC to talk to Jordan, it was 9/26/04 when he met with them and told them no. The interesting thing about him seeing the photos in September nine months before he made this statement is he would have known which color mark to say he saw but with out the affadavit to prove it the jury would have had to take his word for it that they were a match unless Michael allowed himself to be examined in court to prove otherwise. And guess what else, before he could unseal the affadavit or the defense to unseal it they would have had to have the Chandler’s approval or someone that represented them. When he said that it took 2 signature that would have been one from either side.
    However there was a window of opportunity for the affadavit from the body search to be leaked to the press. Jeff Klapakis had it attached to the November 18th 2003 search of Neverland to use it to bolster their probable cause for the search warrant. That portion was not redacted and return to seal until January 24th 2004. So there was a window of time for the Smoking Gun to get it and write The Story of the Telltale Splotch. It is entirely possible the truth is that Jordan said it was light and the spot Sneddon said he saw was dark. Suffice it to say that it was wrong either way. The Chandler’s didn’t care so much about it because they say that it could have changed in the few months that Michael was away anyway.Funny thing about their book is no one wants to go into detail about it yet they sure are willing to let the world know that there was this detail? The thing that exhonerated Michael was his foreskin. If they had a search warrant that did not allow him to refuse under threat of arrest that is an arrest warrant. That is why Sneddon was there when the search took place to get his picture taken when he arrested him, like a hunter with their kill. The truth is it probably did look like his arms which would not have been one spot but many spots.

    • Lynette, thank you very much for the detailed explanation and the documents! I need to study everything before summarizing at least the basic things about this subject. There is a very big need for such a summary.

  29. “In other words Tom Sneddon wanted to introduce Jordan Chandler into the picture without him being present in court.”

    He knew he coudln’t do that, there was a decision from the US Supreme Court taken a few months earlier which said that judges shouldn’t allow that because it would be a violation of the US constitution.

    • “In other words Tom Sneddon wanted to introduce Jordan Chandler into the picture without him being present in court.”-VMJ
      “He knew he coudln’t do that, there was a decision from the US Supreme Court taken a few months earlier which said that judges shouldn’t allow that because it would be a violation of the US constitution – Shelly

      Shelly, could you provide more detail about that decision from the US Supreme Court, please? A link to that decision and the essence of it, if possible? In simple language for those of us who are not very well versed on the subject?

      Oh, I see now that Lynette provided the Motion from Michael’s defense team explaining this point. I’ve only just started reading it, but the main idea there seems to be the notion of EX PARTE. The legal dictionary explains it as

      • A proceeding brought before a court by one party only, without notice to or challenge by the other side.

      So the essence of it is introducing something into court which the other side cannot challenge – not because it is “irrefutable” evidence, but because they are deprived of a chance to verify its credibility.

      And in this case the photos were not even a piece of evidence but what Tom Sneddon personally ‘believed’ about them. And there was no chance to cross-examine Jordan Chandler on the subject as Jordan flatly refused to testify in court and said he would even sue the authorities if they tried to force him to!

    • Guys, I’ve been sent this link and signed it too: http://www.change.org/petitions/protect-and-preserve-the-legacy-of-those-deceased-those-left-behind-can-still-be-hurt.

      Please join – what if it helps? It would be crazy just not to try!

      And we also have William Waneger’s documentary about Sneddon’s crimes towards Michael still to be made by the MJ Innocent Forever Foundation: http://www.mjjiff.org/

      It is a cause worthy of spending a couple of dollars on!

  30. Here is a petition that I would like our readers to read and sign. It is a petition to stop the online bullying that occurs on Topix. We all know that there are many comments that are beyond ugly about Michael on there but there are also innocent non celebrity people that are harrassed on there daily. If you read through the comments you will find that entire communities have been effected by what is posted there. It is time to make the CEO of Topix accountable for what he has allowed to go on for far too long. Here is a link to the petition.

    • Here is a petition that I would like our readers to read and sign. It is a petition to stop the online bullying that occurs on Topix. It is time to make the CEO of Topix accountable for what he has allowed to go on for far too long. Here is a link to the petition. http://www.thepetitionsite.com/8/help-stop-bullying/

      Lynette, I don’t know whether it will help but I’ve signed it. Surprisingly I’ve spent some time on Topix today studying what else they say about the photographs of Michael’s genitalia.

      Now they consider the fact that Sneddon wanted to introduce those photos into the 2005 trial as proof that Michael’s photos “matched the description” (earlier they did not and therefore didn’t convince two grand juries, and now all of a sudden they turn into a match?)

      To me it is only proves that Tom Sneddon was playing a very cunning game – by the year 2005 no one could clearly remember what Jordan had described 12 (!) years earlier. No traces were left in the media of his concrete words about “circumcision” and “the light splotch the color of his face”. Everyone by then had been talking only about how a boy could make such a “detailed” description, “that it was erect” and that Jordan “identified” a certain splotch.

      Actually it would be really surprising that after seeing the photos of Michael in ‘They don’t care about us’ made in the 90s, some of us would be unable to say that Michael was spotted in that part of his body too. So what prevented Jordan from saying that Michael was mottled in his genitalia? Nothing at all. And which spot out a dozen or probably hundred did Jordan allegedly identify? And why didn’t he notice the foreskin though he was supposed to be involved in masturbation?

      It is clear that 12 years later no one really remembered what Jordan originally said – his initial description would have been effectively erased from the public mind and new lies would have been substituted for it.

      An added advantage for Tom Sneddon was that if someone had asked for the original words Tom Sneddon would have provided some interviews without actually summoning Jordan to the witness stand.

      If we compare it with Murray’s trial it would be the same as introducing Murray’s lies from the documentary into the courtroom instead of his direct testimony to the jury, and disseminating Murray’s lies there without a chance for the other side to cross examine him.

      In other words Tom Sneddon wanted to introduce Jordan Chandler into the picture without him being present in court.

      Even from Sneddon’s own declaration we know that there was no match – there was no circumcision, the white splotch suddenly turned into a dark one (so the background turned its color to the opposite too) and the ‘exact’ location turned into a ‘relative’ one only.

      But Sneddon’s ultimate goal was to shock, confuse and bring in a wave of negative emotion from the past allegations. And it could have worked, if that false Murray’s documentary – sorry, those true photos of Michael’s genitalia – had indeed been introduced into the trial.

      Lynette, I remember you saying that Sneddon knew that the pictures could not be introduced at the 2005 trial, and that it was a mere provocation and a huge bluff on his part. Could you remind us what you said then, please?

      P.S. By the picture of Michael Jackson in the 90s I mean this one – can ANY of us imagine Michael being like that all over his body?

  31. Hey guys, this is the press release for a new book called “New Beginnings” which shows the parallels between MJ and President Obama! Here is an excerpt:

    In this book, readers will explore the journey of two icons and how history contributed to their success. Barack Hussein Obama, the first black president of the United States, and the life and death of Michael Jackson, undisputedly the best entertainer of all time.

    Readers will explore how the three C’s — Contradictions, Cycles and Choices — of their stories, paved a road map with hopes that they will inspire others to seek and achieve their true purpose in life.

    If readers find this information enriching and mentally stimulating, they are asked to please share it with others. If, in addition, readers would like to share their American history and have it included in the next book as a result of being inspired during this historic period, please feel free to email the information to secondyearinoffice@newbeginnings.com.

    285 pages in length, New Beginnings: The First Year in Office, The Parallel of Two Icons, Barack Obama and Michael Jackson is being aggressively promoted to appropriate markets with a focus on the 21st century history category. With U.S. wholesale distribution through Ingram and Baker & Taylor, and pervasive online availability through Amazon, Barnes & Noble and elsewhere, New Beginnings meets consumer demand through both retail and library markets with a suggested retail price of $17.95.


  32. Shelly,

    Thanks for the Gonzague Saint Bris video on Michael. It lead me on a quest for his book, which is only in French, but I have hopes of finding an E-reader that can translate into English. The book “Au paradis avec Michael Jackson” description found on the Amazon France site is intriguing.

  33. Guys, I recently joined twitter, and I added my account and Helena’s account to the blogroll, and to our descriptions above! I’m sure I’ll be tweeting more than Helena, so I’ll probably be the public spokesperson for the blog on Twitter.

  34. More good news! Raven is almost finished bringing back her “All For Love’ blog back to it’s original state! Here is a post from her FB page:

    Semi-good news to pass along! You can once again access Allforloveblog.com! A coupe of things to keep in mind, though; it is not-yet-a completely functional, 100% operating site again. I cannot add new content yet. You may be able to comment, but I cannot moderate/approve your comments (yet). But if you just want to browse the old articles, it’s al there and online.

    Now I can go back and finish reading her amazing 2 part series on MJ vs. Prince! LOL!

    And here’s a great post on MJ’s Native American ancestry!

  35. Good news! All For Love blog is back! Raven moved it to WordPress, and right now it’s still a work in progress. Eventually, the entire blog (starting from October 2009 through it’s haitus in February 2011) will be transferred, and she will have new posts coming soon.


  36. I watch the show and it was not that bad, it could have been far worse. It was nowhere near the calibre of a Jaques Perretti, or the VG – NBC special. Nancy Grace did the intro for the various clips, but she didn’t have much to say, nor was she nasty. It was a collection of the thoughts of the various people that have their own show on HLN, and clips from some others:

    Ryan Smith
    Jane Valez-Mitchell
    Vinnie Politan
    Dr. Drew
    Joy Bahar
    AJ Hammer
    Robin Mead
    T Mez
    Randy Phillips

    What I liked about it was everyone pretty much agreed that the molestation cases hastened MJ’s death.

    Personally the worse of the lot was Joy Bahar, the woman is intentionally clueless and beyond repair. Followed by Jane Valez-Mitchell, who does know as much as she thinks she does.

  37. HLN devoted a whole show called The Death Of Michael Jackson with all of the people that were listed in the other article. Just on the eve of the trial they produce a show for their ratings and the sole purpose of it is to make Michael Jackson look guilty.

  38. I also think Sneddon rushed to get the law passed because he expected more accusers, but they never materialized. I don’t think he expected the 10 year wait.

  39. I think I may have left this link here before but just incase it was missed I will leave it again. It is to the SBSD from back in 2003-2005 where they have their press releases. If you click on the links to the press releases there are a couple that explain the 288 law and others. The first one is that the one from the Bashir documentary and the second one is where he explains his fiasco press conference. The Lewd Acts law 288 requires that certain criteria be met in regard to charging someone with that crime and it explains a lot . Oh and yes the Sheriff and Sneddon did have an open casting call out for more “victims”. We should copy them just in case that becomes an “urban myth” like the DD/VG case has.

  40. It was actually Jason Francia’s decision not to testify and it was their decision not to file a separate case against MJ. Here is an interview with Jim Thomas where he talks about the JF case (when he wasn’t supposed to) and in it he says that the charges were not as “harsh”. Even Paula Zahn was asking what he meant by that. I mean if you can charge someone with something in regard to this why not charge them. How bad does it have to be before you charge someone with a crime if one was committed? Do you only charge a person with the felonies and let the misdemeanor offenders go?
    And as for the peculiarities of the trust it is just that a peculiarity that makes no sense.

  41. About Jason Francia. I think his settlement was in 1995/6, and Sneddon’s law would apply IF there was going to a criminal case. To the best of my knowledge I see no evidence that Sneddon intended on charging Michael with a crime against JF. He was using Francia’s testimony to bolster Chandler’s accusations, and correct me if I am wrong, but he never intended to file a separate case for Francia.

    Sneddon never believed the settlement prohibited Jordan’s testimony. Legally he knew if he had proceeded with a criminal case against MJ the Chandlers could never use the confidentiality of the settlement as a reason for not testifying. However, I think after he realized they had no intention of cooperating with the police after May he cited the settlement as a cause because they took the money. If a civil could only occur after a criminal trial then accusers would have no choice, but to go through the process before the civil. I believe that was part of his thinking.

    I don’t know the peculiarities surrounding a trust that makes it different from any other kind of settlement. Maybe it more difficult to get a law passed regarding it. IDK.

    • “Sneddon never believed the settlement prohibited Jordan’s testimony. Legally he knew if he had proceeded with a criminal case against MJ the Chandlers could never use the confidentiality of the settlement as a reason for not testifying”.

      Of course Sneddon never believed that the settlement was standing in the way to the Chandlers’ testifying – it was just the media version meant for the general public. Sneddon wanted the Chandlers to testify at the 2005 trial but they were so “eager” to do it that he managed to get only June Chandler out of the whole gang.

  42. Or better yet why didn’t he use this for the Francia settlement? Because he could have used it for that one couldn’t he? Was it only the price tag he was concerned about? Nothing he did made any sense including this law and then only using it when he wanted to which is a perfect example of his vendetta. Did anyone else in the state even use this thing? Oh, I forgot, Jason Francia would have been misdemeanor charges.

  43. Right but you have remember too that they had another young man that they thought would testify if Jordan did right up until he found out that he wouldn’t. Jason Francia.He was still sure that they would get someone else to come forward in that time frame.
    The whole thing comes down to why he believed for so many years that the settlement prohibited Jordan’s testimony.
    So why did he allow for a settlement just like the Chandler’s settlement to be excluded from consideration even in future lawsuits?That is the point I was making? It doesn’t make sense to exclude the very thing that you want to stop. Why did they add subsection c because that is exactly the kind of settlement it was? It was set up in a nonrevocable trust and Michael had nothing to say over it. So why exclude what he wanted to stop.

  44. It would be unconstitutional of Sneddon to apply his new law to the Chandler-Jackson settlement regardless of if the final payment was to be made in 1999 because at the time of the contract no such law existed. The law is not retroactive.

  45. @lynette

    Yes, I read section (a) and (c), but as I understand it, and the law it can only be enforce to prohibit potential settlements between plaintiff and defendant after September 1994. Example if an agreement were to made between 2 parties in October 1994 before criminal proceedings in September 1995 Sneddon would have reserved the right to make that contract void even though it was signed a year prior.

  46. It was written to be retroactive for up to one year if he chose to use it.It does not say that a settlement made in the last year could not be considered under this new law. In case someone else came forward in the first year after the settlement he could have asked for an injunction to stop future payments until the criminal trial was over to get Jordan to testify. Basically it was because he never closed the case and the settlement was not considered concluded until it was paid in full.I think you have misunderstood the point I was making. the point was that Sneddon specifically excluded the Chandler type of settlement when he had the thing written. That is that Sneddon had this law changed to stop a future settlement by anyone else but it clearly excludes the type of Settlement that the Chandler’s entered in January. He could use it in the future to have Jordan testify of another child came forward. The problem he had in 2003 was that the Statute of limitation had run out by the time the second case was filed. It ran out in August of 2003. Sneddon had asked for the maximum extension on the Statute of limitations for the case saying that it was because Michael had spent so much time out of the country.

  47. Yes, Lynette, but when the settlement was made this law did not exist yet. So to apply this law to the settlement would be retroactive, like Teva said.

  48. a)Any contract for the payment of money or other consideration to a minor who has been alleged to be the victim of an unlawful sex act, or to his or her legal representative, by the alleged perpetrator of that unlawful sex act, or his or her legal representative, entered into on or after the time of the alleged unlawful sex act, and providing for any payments to be made more than one year after the date of the execution of the contract, is void as contrary to public policy. A district attorney may bring an action or intervene in any action to enjoin enforcement of any contract which is in violation of this section.
    Because the payments were not complete until 1999.

  49. @Lynette

    I do not understand how he could void the Chandler settlement, the law is not retroactive. The settlement was concluded and signed by both parties in February 1994. According to your research Sneddon’s law came to be in September after the Chandler-Jackson settlement; hence, it would not be applicable to past transactions only going forward. Example you cannot serve time for a crime of 2 years, then the law changes and the same crime has a mandatory sentence of 4 years, the person(s) cannot be hauled back to jail to make up the remaining 2 years, only if the defendant recommitts would the new terms be enforced.

  50. The Prosecution knew in late September of 2004 that Jordan would not testify according to the FBI files. Then they deliberately held back the discovery on the 1993 case until October. They did not file to allow that case until December of 2004 substituting the testimony of Jordan with the Neverland Five, Blanca Francia, and Phillipe LeMarque for Jordan’s. We can now read in the Peoples Motion to Admit 1108 that they also say that they do not yet know if Jordan Chandler will be testifying when they file it in December.
    Another thing that I looked up is the law that Sneddon had changed in 1994 that prohibits a settlement in a child molest case here it is with a link. He spoke of having the law changed so he could intervene in a civil suit to keep Michael Jackson from settling money in the future. I looked up the date of this law being passed and it was in the First Extraordinary Session of the California Assembly Calendar which occurred on September 9th 1994. If you read the law it almost reads that Sneddon or Garcetti could have had the Settlement voided at that time in subsection a. However the law that Sneddon had written excludes the Chandler Settlement according to subsection c. So Sneddon could have had the law changed to not exclude the Chandler settlement and yet he didn’t. He could have gone in and said on September 10th ,1994 that the contract was illegal and demand that the Chandler’s submit to the criminal trial and leave the monies recovered from that civil suit pending except for subsection c. Considering that he was the one that asked for the law to be changed why would he do that? There is also the fact that the nonrevocable trust was opened in 1995 when Jordan filed for emancipation. Sneddon could have intervened then but he did not.
    Subsection b is also interesting because it allows for monetary compensation following the final judgement in a criminal case. So once the Chandler’s had testified theycould then have had all the money from the settlement recovered once the criminal case was concluded.

    You are here: California / Civil Code – CIV / TITLE 4. UNLAWFUL CONTRACTS [1667. – 1670.7.] / Section 1669.5.

    Section 1669.5. (Added by Stats. 1994, 1st Ex. Sess., Ch. 54, Sec. 1.)
    Cite as: Cal. Civil Code §1669.5.
    (a)Any contract for the payment of money or other consideration to a minor who has been alleged to be the victim of an unlawful sex act, or to his or her legal representative, by the alleged perpetrator of that unlawful sex act, or his or her legal representative, entered into on or after the time of the alleged unlawful sex act, and providing for any payments to be made more than one year after the date of the execution of the contract, is void as contrary to public policy. A district attorney may bring an action or intervene in any action to enjoin enforcement of any contract which is in violation of this section.
    (b)This section does not apply after the date of the final judgment in a criminal case against the alleged perpetrator for the unlawful sex act described in subdivision (a).
    (c)This section does not apply to a contract for the payment of money or other consideration made from a nonrevocable trust established for the benefit of the minor if the alleged perpetrator has no direct or indirect access to, or control over, the trust.
    (d)This section does not apply to an alleged perpetrator of an unlawful sex act against a minor to the extent he or she agrees to pay, or is required by court order to pay, child support for that minor upon a dissolution or legal separation.
    (e)For purposes of this section, “unlawful sex act,” means a felony sex offense committed against a minor.
    (f)Notwithstanding subdivision (a), any contract declared void as contrary to public policy under this section may still be enforced by a district attorney against the payor, and the proceeds thereof shall be deposited in the State Children’s Trust Fund pursuant to Section 18969 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.


  51. Prosecutors only seem to want to invoke the 1993 investigation when it’s convenient to them. They actually alleged in court during one of the pretrial hearings that they weren’t sure if they were going to use the ’93 investigation. And called it “irrelevant” when defense attorneys asked the judge to force prosecutors to hand-over discovery (information) from the ’93 investigation! We learned from court documents that the defense is hot on the prosecution’s tail in trying to get them to hand-over documents from the ’93 investigation every since Mark Geragos was Jackson’s attorney.


  52. “At first, during the course of this case followed closely by some “case” observers who have shared their opinions with MJEOL, the prosecution backed away from using the 1993 investigation. One point, prosecutors stood up in court and called the 1993 investigation “irrelevant” after the defense filed a Motion to Compel to force prosecutors to hand-over documents from that investigation.”

    Where did you got that?

  53. Does anyone know the specifics on this:

    At first, during the course of this case followed closely by some “case” observers who have shared their opinions with MJEOL, the prosecution backed away from using the 1993 investigation. One point, prosecutors stood up in court and called the 1993 investigation “irrelevant” after the defense filed a Motion to Compel to force prosecutors to hand-over documents from that investigation.

  54. Fans work to protect Jackson’s name on trial’s eve

    LOS ANGELES (AP) — Inside the compact, wood-paneled courtroom that will soon host the trial of Michael Jackson’s personal physician, many of the tabloid-worthy elements of the singer’s life will go unspoken.

    Outside, however, many Jackson fans say they expect a media free-for-all that will dredge up discredited allegations and salacious story lines, once again tarnishing the singer’s legacy.

    Jackson, they fear, will once again be on trial.

    Around the globe, the King of Pop’s supporters are already scanning headlines and airwaves for stories that contain inaccuracies about the singer’s life, brand him a pedophile or describe him by the dismissive moniker “Jacko.”

    The items quickly result in calls to editors, reporters, producers and a flurry of Facebook and Twitter posts to press for changes. In some instances, the references are removed.

    As the trial of Dr. Conrad Murray draws closer — jury selection resumes on Friday and opening statements are scheduled for Sept. 27 — concerns about Jackson’s portrayal are growing.

    “We don’t want Michael Jackson to be put up on a pedestal like he never made any mistakes,” said Erin Jacobs, a founder of the Southern California-based group Justice4MJ.

    But she said the focus should remain on Murray, who is charged with involuntary manslaughter and who authorities allege gave Jackson a lethal dose of the anesthetic propofol and other sedatives. The Houston-based cardiologist has pleaded not guilty.

    Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor has already limited what information Murray’s defense attorneys can introduce about Jackson during the trial, excluding any details from the singer’s 2005 child molestation trial, which ended in acquittal, his financial troubles, and witnesses who might describe the singer as a drug addict.

    The rulings have drawn praise from fans and court watchers alike, but may have limited effect in the era of blogs and social media.

    “For some salacious news organizations and the blogosphere, there won’t be a check on fairness,” said Ben Holden, director of the Reynolds National Center for the Courts and Media.

    Editors and producers have long acted similar to judges by deciding what details are necessary or irrelevant for news coverage, said Holden, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and attorney who attended Murray’s preliminary hearing.

    Blogs and social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook, which are now news sources, present new challenges.

    “It has always been the case that the juror’s neighbors had information that the juror didn’t have,” Holden said. Yet nowadays, the neighbor “doesn’t just get Walter Cronkite, he also gets Nancy Grace and TMZ.”

    Potentially skewed posts from fans also have to be considered, Holden said.

    Many fan groups have active Twitter profiles and Facebook pages, including those aimed at providing explanatory content on the trial.

    One such site, PositivelyMichael.com, has a forum focused on the Murray case and other aspects of Jackson’s death that has nearly 9,500 posts. Moderator Lynn Mathis said the site has become an international destination for updates on the case.

    “We have members all over the world,” Mathis said. “This trial will not be covered there the way it is here.”

    Similar to the efforts by U.S.-based fans, international groups are closely watching their domestic media for stories they feel treat the singer unfairly. One such group, MJ4Justice, has founders from three nations: the U.S., Ireland and Canada.

    Grace, who has been criticized for comments advocating the conviction of Florida mother Casey Anthony in her recent murder trial, is one of the television pundits Jackson fans say they are concerned about.

    A jury acquitted Anthony of killing her 2-year-old daughter earlier this year and Murray’s attorneys have cited Grace’s commentary as a primary reason jurors in Murray’s case should be sequestered. Pastor refused.

    HLN, which airs Grace’s show, is already offering significant coverage of the Jackson manslaughter trial. The network also airs a show hosted by commentator Dr. Drew Pinsky, who has devoted several segments to the trial and who Jacobs and other fans criticized for focusing on sensational aspects of Jackson’s life.

    “We don’t feel that it’s relevant that these talking heads like Nancy Grace and Dr. Drew get on every night and further degrade a dead man’s legacy,” Jacobs said.

    Pinsky addressed the fan reaction on a recent show: “Please, guys. I don’t have a strong feeling about this. I’m not trying to protect anybody. I’m just trying to make sense of it so we can all understand this case as we go through it.”

    The group Team Michael has distributed a press release calling for coverage of the Murray case that does not malign the pop superstar. “It is NOT Wacko Jacko, It is MICHAEL JACKSON!” the release reads in part. “It is NOT Pedophile, It is Humanitarian!”

    Taaj Malik, who helped coordinate the release, said the point is to keep the media focused on what’s happening in Pastor’s courtroom. “It’s not Michael on trial, it’s Conrad Murray,” she said.

    In addition to fans wanting to protect Jackson’s memory, also potentially at stake is the image behind continued success of the singer’s posthumous marketability, which has generated more than $310 million since his death.

    Manny Medrano, an attorney and former television reporter who regularly comments on high-profile cases, said he expects most of the media overall to report Murray’s trial fairly. Despite the issues the Anthony case raised with punditry shaping public opinion of a trial, Murray’s case won’t be a repeat, he said.

    “This case is not of that level,” Medrano said, noting that prosecutors aren’t seeking a murder conviction against Murray and that despite Jackson’s international stardom, the singer is a different type of victim than young Caylee Anthony.

    Pastor’s rulings have limited Murray’s defense, but Medrano said that won’t mean that the portrait that emerges of Jackson is pristine. “There is negative evidence about this pop star that the jury is going to hear,” he said.

    A former federal prosecutor, Medrano now practices criminal defense and said the physician’s attorneys have an ethical obligation to raise any viable theory that may exonerate Murray. “They’re doing their job,” he said.

    That won’t make it any easier on Jackson’s supporters, or his family, who are expected to attend most of the proceedings.

    Jermaine Jackson told The Associated Press that he expects Murray’s attorney to try to smear his brother. “They are going to try that,” he said, adding that he penned his new book “You Are Not Alone” in part as a rebuttal to defense arguments that his brother was weakened by an addiction to the painkiller Demerol.

    “There may have been dependency on Demerol, which was for pain, but that’s not what killed Michael,” Jermaine Jackson said.

    Jackson fans have a similar mission, one they expect will lead to long hours of fact-checking reports in the coming weeks.

    “Michael’s not here to defend himself,” said Millie Freeman, the New York-based co-founder of the group MJ4Justice. “It’s up to his family and up to his fans.

    “This is a matter of the man’s legacy at this point,” she said. “It needs to be respected.”


  55. If Conrad Murray is convicted they will most likely say that MJ fans were on the jury. That maybe one of the reasons for the “lunatic” fan angle.

  56. She was talking about the conspiracy theories out there, and the “lunatic” fan gave one of them. I don’t think she is a certifiable loon, just a bit out of touch with reality. Latoya also gave her theory which was also reported on television.

    Jane will also have Seth Rigs on her show on Monday.

  57. I didn’t know where to place this comment, but…

    I just saw some tweets on twitter that HLN put some nutjob beLIEver on the Jane Valez Mitchell, saying that MJ was kidnapped via a zombi drug. O_o I mean seriously come on now. This is how the devil’s game works his tool is the parasite media. All these evil mistresses that spawned from CourtTV aka TruTV with tv platforms have lost what little mind they had left. They love nothing more to bypass the intelligent folks that support and represent MJ. Out all the millions of professional intelligent people they constantly go to the minority of the insane folks, to try and paint us all with a broad brush to keep dumbing down public that know no matter.

    • @ Gigi
      I recorded it, and it’s a slap in the face that we can’t get Aphrodite Jones and Dr. Treacy to give their analysis on HLN nonstop, but JVM let that lunatic go on and make MJ fans look like idiots! JVM also showed a youtube clip of what she said was MJ escaping from the ambulance at the hospital! What garbage!

  58. He said MJ wanted to be alone in the Chapel because of his huge passion he had for Michelangelo. He said after libreville they went to the Ogoue river and to the Fang Forest where they saw the pygmy who knew who MJ was. He said they stayed in a hotel and they started speaking about painting about Poussin, Degas and MJ told him that Diana Ross introduce him to painting.

    He said that MJ was fun and asked lots of questions, like Is it true that louis XIV lost all his hair when he was 20. Gonzagues answered yyes but ho do you know that? He said that MJ loved the french culture and wanted to buy a french castle when Prince was born.

  59. I don’t where to post that video.

    It’s in french the author is Gonzague St Bris, a journalist and a writer (he wrote books about Henry IV, Lafayette, Da Vinci) and he wrote the book Au paradis avec Michael.

    In that video he explained that he met MJ in Africa in 1992 when MJ wanted to make a movie called Back To Africa back to Eden

    MJ wanted to meet him in Libreville because he saw him in Good morning America speaking about Lafayette. They started speaking about Michel Angelo and Da Vinci. He saoid that MJ asked the Pope if he could be
    could stayed toalone in the Sistine CChapel

  60. Guys, let me bring to your attention this “Open Letter On Behalf of Michael Jackson Fans to the Mainstream Media” from MJJJusticeProject and Justice4some. Our blog fully supports it and would also like to be added to the list!

    Posted on September 15, 2011 by MJJJusticeProject
    For 20+ years, Michael Jackson has been constantly assaulted by the media. They have labeled him with a multitude of names, none of which, correctly indentified the person that existed in reality. The upcoming trial of Murray has seemed to heightened the need of some in even the mainstream media to denigrade and dehumanize and diminish Michael Jackson by utilizing the tabloid word “Jacko” – A prominent Michael Jackson vindication warrior has penned an Open Letter to Media and she is requesting Logos from organized groups to be added to the letter. If you are tired of bully tactics by the media to present Michael, who is the victim in a manslaughter trial, as something less than human,then we URGE you to demonstrate your suppport. – MJJJP Inc.

    From- AndJustice4Some

    Hi everyone,

    Here is an updated alphabetical list of all the FAN SITES and BLOGGERS who are willing to post their name and logo to the Open Letter on Behalf of Michael Jackson Fans to the Worldwide Media. If you are an individual, we ask that you sign your name on the petition, link is HERE. Fan groups, bloggers, please do the following:

    1. Help promote by spreading the petition site to all your members/followers.

    2. If you are in contact with other fan sites, bloggers, PLEASE ASK THEM TO ADD THEIR NAME TO THE COMMENTS BELOW. I can usually find a logo.


    Below is a list of MJ fan sites/bloggers, I have ALL logos:

    • Arrest Conrad Murray Campaign
    • Cali MJ Fan
    • Dr. Patrick Treacy
    • Fans United for Michael Jackson’s Legacy
    • In Defense of a King
    • Insanity X Lives
    • It’s All For Love Forum
    • Joe Vogel
    • Love Survives
    • Major Love Prayer
    • Michael Jackson Fans Ireland
    • Michael Jackson Fans of Canada
    • Michael Jackson Fans of New York City
    • Michael Jackson Stranger in Moscow Forum
    • Michael Jackson Tribute Portrait
    • Michael Jackson: And Justice For Some
    • MJ Invincible Campaign
    • MJ4Justice
    • MJDreams.net
    • MJJ Justice Project
    • MJJC
    • MJ’s Blog of Shadows
    • MJ’s Soldiers of Love
    • MuzikFactoryTwo
    • The Applehead House
    • The Michael Jackson Cafe
    • The Michael Jackson Fan Club
    • The Sisterhood of Michael Jackson
    • Tributo MJ

    UPDATE: Newly added are ClearMJ’sName, MJJ777.com, Matt Semino, journalist for Huffington Post and attorney, Truth4MJ and A Place in Your Heart.

    If you know of other sites who want their logo added to the open letter, please have them send a logo or their site link to andjusticeforsome@ymail.com. Thank you to EVERYONE….the response has been INCREDIBLE!!


    * * *

    There is no question we should join in if it helps to bring the media to their senses. They don’t even understand how low they have fallen. Let us do everything to help them wake up and detoxify themselves.

    Please remember to sign it individually:

  61. old question:

    “On page 14 it says the police were called back in to re-search the house after the family had alerted them that tar heroin had been found.

    but it ISN’T the final document stating that it was found there! Am I missing something here?


    on page 10 you can found it.

    but I don’t think they are mj’s
    I don’t even think family members called

    on page 14 said:
    “During the course of the investigation family member notified los angeles county coroner’s assistance chief winter……”

    according to autopsy report: chief winter arrived 1910 hours and 2020 hours returned.

    but,I remembered latoya is the first into mj’s home at about 2300 hours even later

    and In latoya new book also said, we were not allowed to go to the house until the detectives said it was okey. at about 11:30 pm Randy, Jeffre, I and Ron boyd, a police officer and a family friend arrived at the Carolwood house.

    so from 1910 hours to 2020 who called it?

    and there is a police with them,why the “family member” called chief winter ,and chief winter reported PLAD?

    In fact I don’t think family member called.

    this is only they(PLAD) need a reason to searched MJ’s bedroom!

  62. I am just reading the Montgomery testimony and I found that, it’s cross examination

    Q. To your knowledge, has Mr. Schaffel been

    23 involved in any efforts to sell that videotape or

    24 audiotape?

    25 A. Not to my knowledge.

    26 Mr. Mesereau, I don’t believe there’s audio.

  63. “Frye Recalls Magical Jacuzzi Day With Jackson

    Actress Soleil Moon Frye once shared a jacuzzi with Michael Jackson when she was eight.

    The former Punky Brewster star grew up with the Jacksons and spent one magical afternoon and evening at Michael’s home in California after her parents asked him if he could babysit their daughter.

    Frye can still vividly remember the magical day she spent with Michael.

    She tells Access Hollywood Live, “I had gone to this awesome concert with him, a Bruce Springsteen concert… and then he invited us over to the house and so my mum came over and then I stayed with the family there and then they wound up having to leave and I wound up staying. It was awesome.

    “It was before Neverland, he had a place in the (California) Valley… We watched Willy Wonka (& The Chocolate Factory) and we did wind up in a jacuzzi… It was actually a really fun highlight in my life. Nothing weird happened; he was totally sweet.

    “He had all these animals; he had, like, a llama.”


    She obviously meant nothing bad with her jacuzzi comment.

  64. This one case which haunts me. It highlights how our system can be manipulated according to whim. A Judge who says recanting witnesses are not credible to review this case and another who allows recanting witnesses to make a case in 2005. I spoke of Troy Davis earlier this year. He was sentenced to die on Jun 23, 2011, but the outcry stayed the hand of the execution, because the courts could not bear the glare of the public eye…….THEN

    “We’ve just received terrible news: The state of Georgia has set Troy Davis’s execution date for midnight on September 21st, just two weeks from today.

    This is our justice system at its very worst, and we are alive to witness it. There is just too much doubt.

    Even though seven out of nine witnesses have recanted their statements, a judge labeled his own ruling as “not ironclad” and the original prosecutor has voiced reservations about Davis’s guilt, the state of Georgia is set to execute Troy anyway.

    Time is running out, and this is truly Troy’s last chance for life.

    But through the frustration and the tears, there is one thing to remain focused on: We are now Troy Davis’s only hope. And I know we won’t let him down.

    There are three steps you can take to help Troy:

    1. Send a message of support to Troy as he fights for justice on what may be the final days of his life:


    2. Sign the name wall, if you haven’t already. And if you have, send it to your friends and family. Each name means a more united front for justice:


    3. Make sure everyone knows about this injustice. Spread the word on Facebook and Twitter (using the hashtag #TooMuchDoubt) so that Troy Davis’s story can be heard. We still have a chance to save his life, but only if people are willing to speak out against injustice.

    Today, the state of Georgia has declared their intention to execute a man even though the majority of the people who put him on the row now say he is innocent and many implicate one of the other witnesses as the actual killer. Now that a date has been set, we cannot relent. We must redouble our efforts.

    Thank you. Please act quickly and forward this message to all who believe the justice system defeats itself when it allows a man to be executed amid so much doubt.”


    Benjamin Todd Jealous
    President and CEO

    • Here is a new MJ blog that I recently discovered, and it’s excellent! I added it to the blog roll. It is authored by Willa Stillwater, Ph.D., an English professor who wrote the eBook “M Poetica: Michael Jackson’s Art of Connection and Defiance”, and Joie Collins, one of the founding members of the Michael Jackson Fan Club!


      There is a lot of amazing and critical analysis of MJ’s music and art, and his impact on pop culture, so check it out! Make sure you read the post “Re-reading Michael Jackson” and check out the chronological facial analysis that she used to PROVE that he didn’t “destroy his face” with plastic surgery!

    • Here is a new MJ blog that I recently discovered, and it’s excellent! I added it to the blog roll. http://dancingwiththeelephant.wordpress.com/ It is authored by Willa Stillwater, Ph.D., an English professor who wrote the eBook “M Poetica: Michael Jackson’s Art of Connection and Defiance”, and Joie Collins, one of the founding members of the Michael Jackson Fan Club!”

      Good! We need professors speaking up for Michael.

    • David, thank you for adding “Dancing with the elephants” to our blog roll: http://dancingwiththeelephant.wordpress.com/

      Firstly, the name is great, and secondly, they discuss serious matters in an easy, novel and fantastic way. Here is an excerpt from one of their posts for everyone to enjoy:

      “I have a White college friend who grew up with a Black housekeeper. One day the housekeeper was working in the kitchen and cut her hand, and my friend, who was just a child at the time, was shocked to see that her blood was red. Before that, she had assumed her blood was dark – as dark as her skin. My friend told me this story several times, generally with a laugh at how silly she’d been. But despite her laughter, I could tell this story was very important to her. It was one of those rare “Ah ha!” moments when your perceptions flip upside down and you’re suddenly forced to question things you thought you knew to be true.

      When Michael Jackson’s skin changed from dark to light, I think he created an “Ah ha!” moment like that on a global scale. He had told us repeatedly through his music and his videos that we are all one people, regardless of skin color, and now he had a chance to prove it artistically. He could prove in a way that cannot be denied that our bodies are essentially the same, and he could do it in a way that even a child could understand.”

      He created an “Ah ha!” moment like that on a global scale! Yes, absolutely! Many of us will agree that we have also experienced the same sensation – a momentary leap in time and space into some new reality and new perception of things and people around us.

  65. Can any of the admins translate Polish?

    I found a news video of MJ visiting in 1996 going to toy shop talking to fans. Looks god but it needs subtitles.
    Oh and Michael is performing TWYMMF in the gold pants doing his pelvic hip roll. LOL. Well that’s what i’ll call it. Not quite a thrust more rhytmic roll of hips.

  66. After using “Breaking News” story titles like “the Jackson Trial” the Media is now moving towards the Judge’s sentiment which is the accused is Murray not Michael. The Judge is saying this trial will not be about anything other than Murray’s involvement in the death of Michael. I am afraid to believe in this man, in the past two plus years I’ve discovered so many who say one thing and do something else when the trial comes.

    I am especially grateful Mr. Mesereau will be around to provide factual and knowledgeable information on the attorney’s motions and judge’s decisions.

  67. Hello Helena: first of all let me tell you that for me the story was very similar..
    being here in Venezuela where I had really no news almost or the wrong one about Michael for many years.. I was living like in other world.. I really didnt knew so much about him except for his music.Going back in time.. when I heard about the alegations even not knowing so much about , my first thought was: “he can maybe be different.. but no way he could have done a harm to any child”.. and that was all I knew.. The years passed and I had no more further information about him. My whole world changed upside down after June 25 when like you , I started to see and read all that came across about the man, I was interested to know more about him.. and the more I knew and learned the sadder I became thinking : why ? why I wasnt there before? how is that possible that I never knew all this facts about him? .. I felt the shame and the impotence for not being aware of his existence before June 25th. So I can tell you I feel so related to you in this feeling. Thanks again for all the important and deep information you all provide at this blog. Excuse my english I try to express myself the best I can. Sincerely.Gisela

    • “My whole world changed upside down after June 25 when like you”

      Giselamj, it seems that many of us underwent the same changes. It is good that it happened, but is awful that Michael had to die for our eyes to open at last.

      Some visitors to this blog think that we’ve been die-hard fans for Michael for decades – unfortunately we weren’t! Only two years ago everything was different and the desire to vindicate Michael arose when we began studying facts. And when we did look in, the whole new world of Michael Jackson opened to us.

      I am very happy to be part of it now. Welcome to the MJ family, giselamj.

  68. Good news:

    MJJCommunity Special Announcement – MJJC Conrad Murray Trial Coverage – Exclusive Partnership with Larry Nimmer

    Friday, 26 August 2011 22:50

    In our quest to bring most current news and commentary from the Conrad Murray trial, MJJC is proud to announce an exclusive partnership with Larry Nimmer. This partnership aims to bring daily videos from the court as well interviews ranging from legal experts including Thomas Mesereau to fans. Watch MJJC for further announcements and details.


  69. From what I gather at this point in time is that in the trial they will go for DRUGS.Then it is of utmost importance to remind the jury that the LAST DRUG given to Michael was PROPOFOL by Dr MURRAY and that he concealed this fact to the paramedics,the emergency room physicians and (?)to the police.

  70. Deborah, yes the insurance will pay for ACCIDENT only.Lets see if they will manipulate the show so cause of death will be accident.Also they wanted murray´s medical notes on Michael since 2006, Michael wasn´t even in US that year, only the last week and then he attended a funereral.
    And it was no accident, murray committed gross
    malpractice and negligence over and over.Also they have already manipulated the jurors by giving misleading information about Propofol.Claiming it is a prescription drug.Just go and ask your doctor for a prescription and he/she will think you may be contemplating murder.It has been used for murder, and I am not speaking about Michael.
    That dr Drew Pinski has been active now that the trial is coming. He calls it ;The Michael Jackson case!.You that dr D.P. and what he is, will do anything for money.

  71. Yes he did act freely. This was very commonplace in Michael’s world. F.Marc Schaffel did it from 2001-2004. He continued to write checks on an account that Michael had funded for the What More Can I Give project and 2 other corporations that were set up by him. It was true that someone had forged his signature on those documents.It was part of Rudy Provencio’s and David LeGrands testimony and went to the heart of that conspiracy charge
    .Dr. Myong Ho Lee of the MO “blood bath” article fame did the very same thing saying that Michael had signed the contract in Los Angeles on September 14th 2001. Michael had been in NYC on 9/11/01 following his 30th Anniversary special. There was no airfllight to be had anywhere in the US in the following three- four days after the Twin Towers Attack. Yet he tried. He took it to court where a settlement was reached in which he got nothing and was probably threatened with forgery if he continued to pursue it. It is not that hard to believe that they would be able to forge his signature. He was/is one of the most famous people on the planet so how many autographs of his are out there for an example of his handwriting.

  72. Thome-Thome is extremely evil and obscure. He was in the hospital almost immediately if not before Michael died.He has been out of the limelight, has not given interviews. On 26/6 2009 or there about was the last video where he spoke of how much he LOVES Michael and so on.
    Still he allegedly said he did not believe Michael would do even one concert.
    There was something very odd re his office address.More was said about him when the discussion was about the contract. Thome-Thome and Randy Phillips were in constant contact re the concerts.Phone calls, later made up to written communications with faxed and false signatures of Michael. I thought Lloyds of LondoN was suing AEG and not the other way round.-He continued to act freely after Michael had fired him.

  73. @ Kaarin yeah i meant i was so tired that i made the mistake.

    @ Lynande Did you know that TT international was set up in California 6 days before january 26th contract. They must have changed that contract in those last few days otherwise surely it couldn’t of been put on as it wasn’t legally registered.

    My initial point was I heard i think Latoya say Tohme had fired every1 at the house and replace security before they got to the house. How did he manage that and Why? Then again it is Latoya so I would like a 2nd confirmation.

    You also said Tohme found Murray. Could you explain? According to Joe Jackson’s suit (which is full of mistakes must be said) Paul Gongaware gave Dileo Murrays number. I find it interesting considering what Dileo was saying in part 4 of his Raffles youtube interview. Lie after Lie after Lie.

  74. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/arts-and-life/entertainment/celebrities/michael-jackson-estate-suing-insurers-127996778.html

    The Estate is taking Michael’s insurance company Lloyd’s to court to demand a $17.5 million payment. Lloyd’s insists the policy “was restricted to losses resulting from accident only” and point out Michael’s official cause of death is listed as “homicide”.

    Please note the term “accident” relates to its usage in insurance terms:

    “Accidental death is one that’s is NOT designed or anticipated by the insured.”

    It’s a reference to CA insurance law, itself based on ‘Health and Accident Insurance law.’

  75. @Lynande51

    So am I. Tohme did everything he could not to be called as a witness in this trial, and for some reason whenever one picks up the trail of auctions, documents apparently signed against Michael’s will — all roads invariably lead to Tohme.

  76. @kaarin and chris: I know that feeling of writing when you are that tired lol. I have worked 12 hour shifts for the last 12 days. But you do raise a good question about Tohme. Isn’t he from Las Vegas? How did he get there so fast as to be at the hospital with Jermaine? And why was he even called about it when he had been fired 6 weeks before June 25th? Why would the family invite him to speak about it?I have seen the letter online somewhere where Michael fires him and I believe it was early May. So why was he even in LA? I am more suspicious of his involvement than almost anyone elses. Especially since he was the one that set up the deal with AEG and found Murray for Michael.

  77. lol i was definately tired after 11 12 hour shifts in 12 days. I meant Tohme.. Where the hell did sneddon come from lol.

    Sorry Kaarin.

  78. Chris, I don´t really know.But what business would it have been for
    Sneddon going into Michaels home after his death.The place was not declared a crimescene even, thanks to murrays lies.Can the DA go to anyones home who just has died? I don´t think so.But then ofcourse Sneddon has done pretty much what he feels like when it comes to Michael.

  79. She was there in the courtroom too:

    “During breaks at the courthouse, reporters would pour into an area at the back to file stories and grab something to eat. One time I overheard two of them criticizing the prosecution team and calling the case a farce. Those same reporters went on TV that night praising the prosecution case and saying a conviction seemed inevitable. The same thing happened repeatedly as news gave way to biased and false opinion that sought to satisfy a perceived appetite for sensationalism at the expense of all else.

    In May I spoke with a young female reporter from a British newspaper. She told me she’d been busy filing stories during the first part of the trial (when the prosecution presents their case) but had nothing to do now because the newspaper’s editor was interested only in scandal and controversy – and not in reporting the evidence being presented that proved Michael’s innocence. I said, isn’t that very unethical? She shrugged and said, yes, it probably was.

    One day in June the lead prosecutor made a racist remark towards a celebrity defense witness. Everyone in the courtroom gasped. I expected this to be headline news the next day. It wasn’t even mentioned. Had it been a defense lawyer who’d made the remark (not that that would ever have happened), you can bet every reporter in the country would have been up in arms.

    Twist and turn

    We seem to live in a 1984-type society (referring to George Orwell’s book of that name), where you can rewrite history on a daily basis, contradicting things you’ve said in the past and ignoring cold hard facts. Just because somebody says something doesn’t make it true. But that doesn’t stop the media printing empty claims (even those that are exposed a moment later as the ranting of a lunatic and a fraudster) as headlines, giving them a weight they don’t warrant.

    The truth is immutable, constant and consistent. Lies are fluid. They twist and turn, changing as needs be. There was only one truth presented at the trial, which was proven beyond doubt. There were a million lies, many given a false sense of credibility by the media while being exposed in the courtroom as utterly baseless.

    Those who spread lies would do well to remember that ANYbody’s life can be destroyed by the word of a liar. It happened to him. It could happen to you or to anyone you love. Once an accusation has been made, the damage is done. No matter how vehemently you deny it or what evidence you present in your defense, the seed of doubt has been planted. Lies destroy lives.”


  80. This is a new webiste by a fan called Thalita, who met Michael several times (he invited her to his home, limo etc.). She has some nice stories of Michael:


    For example:

    On the night of 5 September 2008, Michael called me and we spoke for a long time. While speaking about the trial, he said (as I wrote it down the next day):

    “What I went through, it just showed me that there’s so much evil in the world but there’s also so much beauty. You were there for me. I wrote a song about you, the fans, how you were there for me in my darkest hour, in my deepest despair…”

    He went on to say:

    “My mother always told me, Katherine always told me that. She used to look at me across the room and say, ‘You’re just like me. You’re going to get hurt. You’re going to get used. There are people who are going to use you.’ I didn’t know there were people in the world like that, so evil. I thought that was just in the movies. I didn’t know they existed in real life. I trust people. I always see the best in people. I can be so naïve. So during the trial, there were evil people but there were also so many beautiful people that came out, beautiful people like you.”

  81. If marijuana had been found it would have been listed as marijuana in the Search Warrant return. It was not. I think it was LaToya that identified it as tar heroin and really old marijuana does not look like tar heroin it looks the same as marijuana just old and dry ( I confiscate the stuff as contraband everyday). Is the media rehashing this old story. It died about a week after Michael why is it being brought up again? Good old LaToya she sure does get a lot of exercise jumping to all those conclusions she jumps to.Right now there is an empty cup on my table that is smarter than she is.

  82. The family was very quick sending trucks and moving vans to empty the house of Michaels belongings.They were desperate to find the money ,1mln?,that Michael allegedly kept hidden in the house.That was not found.Did they think that police doing a more careful search (for drugs as cover) would have found it.It is difficult to understand their eagerness for drugs.Are they so unable to admit that they may have been wrong?If they are not sure about the matter they should just keep their mouths shut.
    A bit off topic;murray benefitted enormously from his lies to police.That way there was a delay cordoning the place off as crime scene.

  83. @rockforeveron – don’t you think that Oxman was the person Mesereau was referring to when he stated that there were people who were trying to undermine him and get to Michael just to keep Michael stirred up? I think that’s exactly who he meant and I think that’s exactly why Mesereau fired Oxman. I think Oxman is the biggest buffoon on the planet and it should be embarrassing for Joe Jackson to associate with this man. But Joe has always surrounded himself with shady people and Michael would have to clean up the mess. Look at the Mexico depositions Michael gave in the 90’s — the people suing Michael were brought around by Joe. LaToya’s husband was brought into her life by Joe. I remember reading Michael being upset during the Victory tour that he was upset because Joe hired Don King to manage the tour.

  84. Brian Oxman was taped during the trial claiming that Michael had told him that he wanted TMez fired, some of the transcript of that tape:

    “Michael wanted to can [INAUDIBLE] a week before the opening statement. He said, “Brian, please, I want to fire him.”

    “This is going to get intolerable. There is going to be harmony, or there is going to be shi*t.”

    “Make your choice. Which is it? Bottom line, he will be fired; I will make sure of it.”

    “People treat one another with respect. I have no alliances; I want to be treated with respect. You can tell him that Brian is very upset. I didn’t yell at him.”

    “Susan Yu told me I wasn’t important enough to have a place to sleep. No one is going to pay for anything anymore, I guess.”

    “Is that how it works? It means that somebody has to pay the bills here. [INAUDIBLE] You know what I think? I’ll just go home. You figure out how to pay the bills.”

    “And the point is Bob, I will not sit here for six months as I feed everybody else really good stuff. I won’t do it.”

    • “And the point is Bob, I will not sit here for six months as I feed everybody else really good stuff. I won’t do it.”

      This is all the difference in the world between Oxman and real lawyers like Thomas Mesereau.
      Mesereau would have sat there as long as it was necessary. And not just “sat” but worked half the night before each new trial day.

  85. @vindicatemj — I see what you’re saying. I haven’t read the lawsuit filed on behalf of good ole Joe by Oxman. I did briefly read some of Leonard Rowe’s book on Jetzi and it stated that marijuana was found in Michael’s room; however, Rowe’s is a question mark to me as are most of the people surrounding Joe. What Imeant by the highlighted statement is that I had never heard any of the family members say anything about Michael using cocaine or heroin or anything of that magnatude.

    • “I did briefly read some of Leonard Rowe’s book on Jetzi and it stated that marijuana was found in Michael’s room”

      Julie, I see that all these people are capable of saying anything about MJ – but did the official document enumerating the medicines found in the house confirm it?

      And if some marijuana was indeed found as this LA Times article says: “The marijuana was found later in an unspecified area of the house” why should it necessarily belong to MJ? There were guards there and other numerous staff – so why only him?

      Especially if it was found in an unspecified area of the house? And was it found AT ALL?

      The same article says that the “the search warrant claimed that the “heroin” was found in his bedroom, an area that authorities said in the court papers was off-limits to anyone but Jackson and his children”.

      And later on two sources said that NONE WAS FOUND?

      How is it possible? How is it possible for some official document to say one thing and other official documents to say the opposite? The only way I can explain this discrepancy is that a search warrant states a probable cause for making a search, but does not state what was actually found. Otherwise we would have to say that out of the two documents one is a fake.

  86. I think its important that it was a rented house – whatever the stuff was, if it was there at all, could have been left there by a long gone tenant and most probably was. i know nothing about marijuana but i would imagine it would last a while?? in which case Michael hadn’t been at the house all that long and if it had been his at one time – which i don’t believe, he wouldn’t have used that because of the kids, – then he wouldn’t have packed it up and taken it to the new house.

    i think its weird the family told the police. i;’m a law abiding person and have no wish to obstruct the police, but i’m not sure i’d have told them it was there if it was my family and i thought he’d been uing it! i might have told them but i might have just let them find it or not but i don’t THINK i’d point it out. it is after all illegal, heroin as they thought it was, and there was no point, it was too late for knowledge to help treat him and the tests would have shown if they needed to look for that in the house. its almost like they wanted him to be labelled a drug addict.

    “Somewhere there is an article where he and a family member tried to convince Michael Tom was not working in his best interest and to fire him.” – can you remember who the family member was? and what they thought was not in his best interests?

  87. @vindicatemj — when the family was searching the home they found the baggy with the “sticky” substance in it and couldn’t determine what it was — so because of its appearance to whichever family member brought it to the police’s attention, it was stated they suspected it was black tar heroin only it was determined to be the really old marijuana. I didn’t see anything that indicated any family member continuously requested the LAPD to search for heroin unless I’m mssing something!

  88. Here is another link:


    Just as the Klein story that he was the children’s father was massaged into life by media repetition and their deliberate misinterpretation of the King interview, so too were the stories of what was found at Holmby Hills.

    There was no heroin found in then house so it is amazing it was listed on the original warrant. And as we all know marijuana is a standard substance used for ameliorative care for all kinds of conditions and certainly those Michael suffered from.

    • “Here is another link: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/08/heroin-marijuana-found-in-michael-jacksons-home.html
      Just as the Klein story that he was the children’s father was massaged into life by media repetition and their deliberate misinterpretation of the King interview, so too were the stories of what was found at Holmby Hills.”

      Deborah, thanks. Of course this misinterpretation of facts is absolutely deliberate. Even though the article ultimately says: “two sources familiar with the investigation told The Times that authorities tested the substance believed to be heroin and the tests came back negative” the result of such piece of “information” is still not positive for Michael.

      This is what I’ve been saying all along – when a certain word is repeated together with someone’s name they finally fuse together and it no longer matters that the substance was not actually found. What is important is that the word is regularly repeated with this name and even the particle “not” does not change anything. Michael and this, Michael and that – and here you are, a stable association is formed between the two.

      We have a sad joke about a similar thing – a woman leaves an opera theater with a scandal, her fur coat was stolen and everyone gossips: “What happened?” “Don’t know for sure, either her fur coat was stolen or she stole it.”. If you repeat it a dozen times – she and theft, theft and she – here you are, the victim starts looking like a criminal as a result.

      Let me repeat, such an effect is produced by a mere repetition of some words together with someone’s name. That is why I insist that words like p-le, m-r and now heroin should never be used in connection with Michael. MICHAEL IS INNOCENT – this is the new association we need to form.

  89. @rockforeveron – ok, so that’s the bag that was found and the family member thought that’s what it was but it turned out to be the rotting marijuana.

    • “On page 14 it says the police were called back in to re-search the house after the family had alerted them that tar heroin had been found.

      But it is still ONLY a search warrant based on the repeated requests of the family (who evidently wanted very much to have heroin or other narcotics found in Michael’s home) – but it ISN’T the final document stating that it was found there! Am I missing something here?

      They evidently gave their affidavits and stated that they “thought” it was there and kept sending the police to look for it. They evidently couldn’t believe that it wasn’t there.

      You know with such relatives I am not surprised Michael didn’t want to see the majority of them.

  90. @rockforeveron – thank you for the link to the search warrant. I may have missed it, but the only thing I saw was that the family indicated there may be other medications and/or narcotics to be found. I didn’t see anything about heroin. Did I miss it?

  91. @ Helena

    Larry King is considered a respectable journalist, but it seems even he loses his sense of boundaries when it comes to Michael. I mean why to press Klein on the paternity issue? Why do the media think they are owed an explanation about that very private matter?

    • “I mean why to press Klein on the paternity issue? Why do the media think they are owed an explanation about that very private matter?”

      All of them were drunk and even Larry King took a sip or two.

  92. @vindicatemj – of course you are making an excellent point! Once again, just because it is in print does not make the story true!

    I do remember back when the story came out in 2009 about the supposed black tar heroin being found in the home and then the next story that came out saying it was rotting or rancid marijuana. Doesn’t make it true by any means especially if it is not inventoried on any of the investigative documents.

    I would absolutely hate to believe and can’t find any articles that even hint that Joe, LaToya or any other family member said anything about Michael’s use of any type of street drug or that they confided the same to Brian Oxman. I personally feel that Oxman just pulls that garbage out on his own so that he can be called as some sort of family friend and/or expert.

    In researching the statement about Stacy Brown saying Michael was had a heroin addiction, I didn’t see anything (so far) that indicated he got the information from anyone. Stacy Brown is a liar. A link sent me to musikfactory’s site and there is some post about an interview that was conducted with Brown in more recent times where he attempts to shift the blame for everything that he said to some family member of his and then he throws Rebbie’s husband under the bus, etc. Once again, he could be making all of this crap up for his own gain without truly getting the information from anyone. If he’s talking, he’s lying — just like Diane Dimond and others of that same type.

    As I stated previously, the family stories are very conflicting about interventions, etc. Janet, Katherine and Rebbie eluded that there were more than one attempted family interventions. LaToya, in her book, recalled the one back in 2002 which concluded that Michael was fine. Jermaine has only stated that he knew Michael had sleeping issues and that he was taking medications for that and also stated that he never witnessed Michael acting as though he was on anything. I have not read or seen any statements by Jackie, Tito, Marlon or Randy regarding Michael having any type of issue with any type of drugs.

    • “I would absolutely hate to believe and can’t find any articles that even hint that Joe, LaToya or any other family member said anything about Michael’s use of any type of street drug or that they confided the same to Brian Oxman.”

      Julie, unfortunately that madman Joe Jackson states in his suit against Murray that they found marijuana there. He and Brian Oxman speak of it as if it were a fact, not fiction – but I doubt its presence there as otherwise it would have been mentioned in the police documents. They enumerate it together with Nystatin (a usual anti-fungal medicine accompanying antibiotics – I have it in my collection too) and Triamcinolone “which is a topical steroid used to treat skin inflammation” (must be for Michael’s lupus). But marijuana? Never heard of it.

  93. @vindicatemj –

    Source: ‘Tar Heroin’ Listed in Jackson Warrant Not Heroin
    http://www.etonline.com | discovered: Thursday, August 27, 2009 6:37:00 PM | published: Thursday, August 27, 2009 5:13:00 PM

    A source tells ET that the “tar heroin” found in Michael Jackson ‘s rented home, as listed in a search warrant, was not heroin — but was rancid marijuana. One newly unsealed warrant reports that “they had located a quantity of tar heroin in a bag i …

    It’s such an old story that it will no longer pull up.

  94. @ vindicatemj – I was responding to rockforeveron’s post which stated, “Oxman takes his cue from the Jacksons. Toya asked the police to look for any traces of heroin or any equipment to use heroin after Michael’s death. Randy got his friend Romonica Harris to shop Grace, saying she received drugs in the mail from someone. The Jacksons were so distant from Michael at the time of his death that I think they embraced every story on drug use, in fact I believe Randy and possibly Joe had been the sources of stories about it before when they had been trying to separate Michael from Grace, Evvy, Raymone. So when Mike died they wanted to seem as though they were informed and so they fully embraced the drug storyline.”

    I was just stating that I never saw one thing that said anything about the family asking for authorities to look for traces of heroin. I just wanted to make it clear that that was not the case and what the real story was regarding the bag found in Michael’s home. Once again, just because the bag was found does not mean it was Michael’s.

  95. Sorry my reason for posting about the heroin thing wasn’t to ever suggest MJ was ever on it, the whole thing reveals how out of touch anyone who could ever believe that was – just to show that it isn’t Oxman acting alone. The drug storyline has been fueled by his own family as a way to defend their own behaviour.

  96. @ rockforeveron,

    Here is where my years of Military service comes in handy. I can tell you unequivocally that Heroine/Hash business is BS, especially if one is a chronic user = addict, as stated by Brown. In the early 90’s blood tests would detect narcotics use up to 8 months back then. I helped process many who claimed a one time use out of service. The testing has become more sophisticated and in-depth, and with the advent of DNA testing from hair follicles for substance abuse almost impossible to avoid detection.

    Know someone who is a lab analyst at a testing facility. Checking for current information on testing for types of substances and length of possible detection.

    As for Oxman, his nose is out of joint and he is broke, can’t practice law and couldn’t make money off the European Fans with his planned round of talks on MJ. The US Fans hipped them to what he had said during the days/weeks after MJ died. Don’t think he ever forgave MJ for allowing T. Mes to fire him during the trial. Somewhere there is an article where he and a family member tried to convince Michael Tom was not working in his best interest and to fire him. Probably scared if Michael went to jail he would try and appoint Tom to oversee the Estate instead of them. It is no secret Mr. Mesereau does not hold some who were close to Michael in high esteem.

    • “Here is where my years of Military service comes in handy. I can tell you unequivocally that Heroine/Hash business is BS, especially if one is a chronic user = addict, as stated by Brown. In the early 90′s blood tests would detect narcotics use up to 8 months back then. I helped process many who claimed a one time use out of service. The testing has become more sophisticated and in-depth, and with the advent of DNA testing from hair follicles for substance abuse almost impossible to avoid detection.”

      Dial, you are more than right! Of course the hair shows it all – how could I forget? And I have no doubt that the forensic experts tested and retested Michael’s hair several times over and didn’t find any traces of narcotic drugs there (otherwise they would have stated it in the autopsy report – remember how long we waited for it?). And this proves again and again that his system was clear of narcotics.

      Here are a few quotes about such hair tests – hair “records’ information and how far back you can look depends on the length of the hair:

      “Hair follicles are the only place where cocaine tends to stay even for years. Usually cocaine can be detected in your hair strands for a period of 90 days since intake. However, unusually and rarely, the drug has been detected in hair strands of human beings even after 25 years since consumption.” http://howlongdoescocainestayinyoursystem.com/

      I see that science has made so much progress that it is possible now to make a hair test for some narcotics even at home:

      “The HairConfirm™ personal forensic hair analysis drug of abuse testing service is the only at home drug testing kit that provides a *history (up to several months) of current or previous drug use for the five most abused illicit drugs and drug categories: Methamphetamines including Ecstasy , Marijuana, Opiates, Cocaine and Phencyclidines (PCP) without the need for urine specimen collection. The only sample required is a small lock of the test subject’s hair (approximately the size of a shoelace tip) taken at the scalp line. Confidential and non-invasive, The HairConfirm™ drug test provides a qualitative determination of past drug use over a period of approximately three (3) months using forensic laboratory analysis. Online Sample tracking and report download direct from the Laboratory. The HairConfirm™ hair test is FDA cleared for professional and personal home use”.

  97. Exactly kaarin – there was no proof whatsoever that it was specifically Michael Jackson’s. It was just found at his house. I was just trying to get clarification regarding LaToya, Brian Oxman and heroin. I just couldn’t find anything to support that, but did find the article that the family had found what they suspected to be heroin and it turned out to be old marijuana.

  98. Just forget about any marihuana.It is detectable 6 weeks after use.
    Certainly the autopsy that took samples of various tissues, blood and urine would have detected it.Some guests of his may just have left some a long time ago at Michaels if it really was found there.

    • “Here is just one source. http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/32588613/ns/today-entertainment/t/warrant-reveals-marijuana-jacksons-home/

      Why all this talk about heroin and marijuana, guys? Are all these people crazy? No matter what some mad members of the family say, if those things had been found, they would have been stated as the major points in the list of drugs found in Michael’s home. That list was so detailed – up to a broken empty vial lying about in some closet and no mention was made their of marijuana or anything. And over here they speak of heroin!

      If this is something that is being said by Joe Jackson all it means that he is the same old abuser of his son as he was before. He didn’t know a thing about his son for several years and probably attributed Michael’s unwillingness to see his father to him ‘being a drug addict”. He needs a reason to explain why Michael didn’t want to see him – and here you are. Heroin!

      If this is what Joe Jackson is indeed saying he must be completely senile. Or a bastard who is ready to think the worst of his son. Some parents are like that – they are the ones who are the worst enemies to their children.

      The article to which you provided a link goes undated for some reason – so that you don’t know to what point in time it refers to – and says:

      “LOS ANGELES — Police who searched Michael Jackson’s home the day after he died were acting on information from family members who said they’d found a bag of heroin in his bedroom, but a person with knowledge of subsequent test results on the substance said it turned out not to be the drug.

      The search did, however, turn up a number of other drugs including marijuana, the generic form of Valium and other sedatives. [PROOF PLEASE!]

      A detective also indicated Jackson’s body showed signs of injections. [EVEN KLEIN SAYS THERE WERE NO SIGNS OF INJECTIONS – HE MADE A SPECIAL POINT OF IT IN HIS INTERVIEW WITH LARRY KING]

      The disclosure came in an affidavit [AN AFFIDAVIT IS ONLY A STATEMENT MADE TO POLICE BY SOME CRAZY GUY LIKE JOE JACKSON] supporting a search warrant that was executed June 26, three days earlier than any previously reported search of Jackson’s rented mansion in Bel-Air.

      Two warrants came to light Thursday after several media outlets including The Associated Press asked to unseal four search warrants Los Angeles police detectives served in the early days of the Jackson death probe. The judge ordered two of the documents to remain sealed. [A WARRANT ONLY AUTHORIZES A SEARCH BUT IS NOT THE LIST OF WHAT IS FOUND].

      The unsealed warrants provide a glimpse into how police were directing their investigation immediately after Jackson’s death. The warrant served at his rented Bel-Air mansion the day after he died lists “PC 187,” the California penal code for murder, in the box labeled “probable crime.”

      That warrant states family members told a coroner’s official “they had located a quantity of tar heroin in a bag in the decedent’s bedroom,” though the person with knowledge of tests on the substance said heroin was quickly ruled out. [THE WARRANT CAN SAY WHATEVER CRAZY SUSPICIONS SOME CRAZY PEOPLE HAVE, BUT IT IS NOT THE FINAL DOCUMENT] .

      The person was not authorized to speak to the media and asked for anonymity”.


  99. @Julie

    Why would Toya think that there was tar heroin in the house? If I found a weird bag, I’d just hand it to the cops, my mind wouldn’t immediately leap to the conclusion of heroin. Toya’s did.

    Interesting also that Stacy Brown told journalists that Michael was a known heroin addict after his death too.

    • “Why would Toya think that there was tar heroin in the house? If I found a weird bag, I’d just hand it to the cops, my mind wouldn’t immediately leap to the conclusion of heroin. Toya’s did.”

      It is the effect of recognition or thinking that you recognize it. Normal people would not recognize heroin because they have never seen it.

  100. @rockforeveron – where did you hear or read that about the family and heroin? The only thing I ever saw was that the family found a bag at the house that they suspected was black tar heroin, but it turned out to be rancid marijuana.

    I think Oxman forces himself on the Jackson family to try and stay in the spotlight and only because he files things pro bono for Joe, does he keep himself useful to the family. Randy came out after Michael’s death and stated that Oxman did not represent him; although to hear Oxman tell it, Randy called him the minute he got the news about Michael to come to the hospital. That was very suspect to me because when the coverage first began and Oxman’s face was on the screen 10 seconds after Michael was pronounced dead, he was already spouting about drug overdose. Yet, when one of the news stations he was speaking to asked what the family had to say — Oxman stated that he didn’t know anything yet, but they were all crying. What kind of an attorney would do that – get on TV and make speculations without knowing any facts? The kind that can’t keep his license from getting suspended!

  101. @Dialdancer

    Oxman takes his cue from the Jacksons. Toya asked the police to look for any traces of heroin or any equipment to use heroin after Michael’s death. Randy got his friend Romonica Harris to shop Grace, saying she received drugs in the mail from someone. The Jacksons were so distant from Michael at the time of his death that I think they embraced every story on drug use, in fact I believe Randy and possibly Joe had been the sources of stories about it before when they had been trying to separate Michael from Grace, Evvy, Raymone. So when Mike died they wanted to seem as though they were informed and so they fully embraced the drug storyline.

    • “Dr.Klein is not, though someties he has opened his mouth too much’.

      Kaarin, Dr. Klein has indeed opened his mouth too much, but when I read his interview with Larry King I experienced a kind of shock – there was practically nothing of what was attributed to him by the media there. He even didn’t claim his parentage though each of us heard about those allegations. Probably in some other interviews he said something different but over here NO – all he said is that he donated his sperm, and not even to Michael but to a sperm bank! And as far as he could judge he said he was no father to them. See for yourself:

      KING: Now, the Debbie Rowe part of the story. She was your nurse, right?

      KLEIN: Yes.

      KING: They met, I guess, in your office?

      KLEIN: Yes.

      KING: Was that a real love affair?

      KLEIN: I don’t know what love is in that sense of the imagination. I think that she loves him very much. She admired him very much. But if you think they’re riding off in a horse-drawn carriage, I mean we have to put — what is a normal relationship? We have to go back to Marie Bonaparte, who once said to Danny Kaye (ph) when he went to say, what do you have to tell me that’s different? And she didn’t even know who Danny Kaye was. She’s the first woman of royal heritage to undergo analysis. She said to Danny Kaye, the normal (inaudible) have to be found and be found cured. Which means, who of us are normal? What is normal? So I’m telling you, was that a love affair, you want to know. I think she really cared about his welfare.

      KING: It was not a sexual relationship?

      KLEIN: I think they did have sex.

      KING: You do?

      KLEIN: Yes, I really do, and I can’t guarantee that. I think they did have sex in their relationship.

      KING: You think Michael ever had sex to father the children?

      KLEIN: I don’t know that answer, because I would that that it’s possible that he did. You can’t guarantee that. You can only guarantee things you see. I don’t want to make any suppositions about anything in this interview, because I want this to be as truthful as possible.

      KING: Now, what about all the rumors about you and the fathering of those children?

      KLEIN: Here’s the most important thing. Michael loved those children as a father. Those children loved him as a father. As far as I am concerned, that’s the most important grouping that is.

      KING: That’s not answering the question.

      KLEIN: No, because I’m not going to answer it the way you want me to answer it, because…

      KING: Well, you can say no.

      KLEIN: I can say no, then. I will say no if that’s what you want to hear.

      KING: No, I want to hear what you know.

      KLEIN: What I will tell you is I think what’s most important thing about this whole thing, to end this thing, is that the most important thing in who the father is who the father is — who the children want their father to be.

      And I will tell you this, I will say no, because the most important person to these children is how Michael loved them and how he loved his children and how they loved him. Because they would never pass him without saying, I love you, daddy. He would say I love you. I’ve never seen such emotional care…


      KING: Earlier today, you said you couldn’t answer that one way or the other.

      KLEIN: I still can’t answer it absolutely one way or another.

      KING: So that means you donated sperm?

      KLEIN: I once donated sperm. I don’t know that you have to know…

      KING: You donated to him.

      KLEIN: No, absolutely not.

      KING: Oh, you donated sperm to a sperm bank.

      KLEIN: Once, to a sperm bank. But I don’t think I should go over my legal affairs, because I think to the best of my knowledge, I’m not the father. I want to tell you that this discussion, however, is between Michael, his children and this person. It’s not to be discussed who the father is over national television.

      KING: Or, it’s nobody’s business.

      KLEIN: It’s no one’s business.

      KING: Except it’s become the public’s business. Isn’t that a fact of life?

      KLEIN: Let me tell you something, there’s something called private lives. Noel Coward wrote about that. So can’t we leave this alone? Can’t we leave these children alone? These are brilliant, talented children. And forget this, and understand, this man loved these children. These children loved him.

      KING: You don’t feel you have to take a DNA test to prove anything?

      KLEIN: if they want me to take a DNA test, they can have my DNA. I don’t care at this point.

      KING: Your concern is the kids.

      KLEIN: My concern is his kids because I’ve never met children like this. These are the brightest children I’ve ever met, the best behaved children I’ve ever met. They come over my house, they behave wonderfully. I know how deeply he loved them and how deeply they loved him.

      KING: That’s obvious.

      KLEIN: I don’t want to destroy this relationship in any way, shape or form. I’ll tell you this, no matter what, I will protect these children.

      ….KING: The gut-wrenching moment at the memorial yesterday came at the end when Michael’s 11-year-old daughter Paris talked through her tears. We’ve seen it many times. We want to get Arnie’s reaction, watch.


      PARIS JACKSON, DAUGHTER OF MICHAEL JACKSON: Ever since I was born, daddy has been the best father you could ever imagine. And I just wanted to say I love him so much.


      KING: What do you feel when you look at that?

      KLEIN: I can’t, it’s difficult to look at that because here’s a man who changed the world. He enabled black people to do things they’ve never done before. We have the black caucus, we have a black president. He enabled so many things to do. He gave so many gifts to the world. He’s the finest entertainer we ever had. But that’s not unlike what they did to this poor Sarah Bernhardt. She died painless, except they had a big funeral for her. But now everybody wants all the gossip. The real gossip is, we’ve lost a greater entertainer of our life. We lost one of the greatest people, who was more generous of himself and of his heart than anybody I’ve ever known. And he’s produced three incredible children and this is the thing.

      How did the story, you think, surface about you and fatherhood? Where did that come from?

      KLEIN: I don’t have any idea whether it came from Debbie Rowe, I have no idea.

      KING: Could it have come from Debbie Rowe?

      KLEIN: Absolutely because I phoned her as soon as Michael passed away. My greatest concern was what was going to happen to the children. I told her that I didn’t want to see in three years, the children doing the next version of the Jackson 3, their intelligence dancing away because these children are bright. They’ve gone to film school.

      KING: Do you think she said something about it?

      KLEIN: I don’t know that, but all I told her was this. I want you to get active and be the mother, if she is the mother, of these children.

      KING: Do you think she should get custody?

      KLEIN: I don’t know if she should get custody. I’m very worried that the custody may go into a situation that is incorrect. I think the most important thing is there’s this woman Grace who was their nanny, who is incredible. She should remain their nanny and help raise the children. I worry about the Jackson family only because I worry slightly about the father from what Michael told me about that father.

      KING: In what way?

      KLEIN: That he was very difficult to deal with Michael. They announced his new record label at the memorial. And he seems more and more interested in making money than dealing with the —

      KING: What do you think of the rest of the family?

      KLEIN: I think Janet is wonderful who I happen to know. I know Randy. He seems nice to me. But I think they’re going to go on and put a performance on again because they want to do is they want to perform.

      KING: They’re performers.

      KLEIN: Yeah, they’re performers. But you heard some speeches yesterday from very controversial speakers. I think the most wonderful speech was the person I thought would be the least was Al Sharpton when he talked about Michael at his studio. Because Michael was having fights with Tommy Mottola, it’s not how he spoke, but he spoke really eloquently yesterday. So I just want to assure that Debbie Rowe or someone take good care of these kids.

      KING: Was Katherine the stronghold of the family?

      KLEIN: I think she is but she’s, how would old she now?

      KING: 79.

      KLEIN: Do you think it’s difficult for a 79-year-old to raise adolescent children? That would be my question. Also, Debbie Rowe has gained her rights back to the children. Now, you may not think she’s the best person in the world, but having worked with her for 25 years as a nurse, she can be a very loving person. So if she’s combined with Grace, it could be a wonderful combination. But you know what, I can’t make these decisions nor do I want to.


  102. Generally doctors who make themselves TV-personalities-doctors are considered kind of prostitutes.That does of course not include some who give appropriate serious opinions, but those who mostly advertice themselves in the process.

  103. Deborah,

    As far as Drew is concerned what do you expect from a man who makes a living out of turning the pain of an illness into entertainment, uses those who once had a type of public standing and are obviously broke enough to go along with such a barbaric act? On another thread I used the word “pimp”, when describing this man. Pimp is a word I am careful about using, because in my culture it is more than just a flesh peddler.

    I have yet to hear of anyone who says they were able to watch this program and come away with something positive they could use for themselves or another.

    Drew was brought in for one reason only. CNN is in a ratings decline, it needed a purveyor with credentials to give their sensationalizing believability.

    It is like taking a doorman from The Dorchester and attempting to pass him off as the Duke Windsor. He may be male and British, be able to mimic speech and mannerisms, but he is not the real deal.

    On Oxman, I still hold him responsible for law enforcement not initially taking proper action. Due to his mouthing on TV “he knew” MJ would O.D. within hours of his death it is my belief they took their cue from this no longer “insider” and failed to do their jobs properly. He is shitty when speaking of MJ with the Media and loving with the Fans.

  104. Helena,

    I agree it is wonderful news. Tom Mesereau is the one person who was apart of Michael’s life I totally believe in. Along with being a Criminal Defense Attorney, he is fair and honest. He will not give out false hope and will not give out false information concerning evidence and witnesses.

    I think it is because of his incredulous anger at what he witnessed done to Michael and experienced at the hands of the SB legal system and Media that he still is such a staunch defender of Michael’s innocence today. You can read it, almost feel it in his later 2004 and 2005 court documents. With all he’d seen defending the poor, minorities and wrongly accused I think Michael’s trial was a life altering event.

  105. *Special Announcement* PositivelyMichael Partners with Tom Mesereau

    “The staff of PositivelyMichael is pleased to announce that we will be partnering with Thomas Mesereau during Conrad Murray’s involuntary manslaughter trial. Tom was Michael Jackson’s lead defense attorney for the 2005 trial, and his vast knowledge of legal discourse and trial activities will be an amazing resource to help MJ fans and the greater community better understand the ins and outs of the coming legal proceedings.

    As fans, it is very important that we can all stand together in unity and raise our voices in support of Michael with accuracy and authority during the trial. With Tom’s help, we will all have an easier time fully understanding everything that is going on and hopefully limit the amount of mis-information that will undoubtedly be spread in the coming weeks.”

    Read the rest at: http://www.positivelymichael.com/forums/content.php?186-Announcement-PositivelyMichael%92s-Trial-Partnership-with-Tom-Mesereau&


    PositivelyMichael should be added to our blogroll.

  106. I forgot to mention Physics to the difficulties Desiree would encounter in premed.A major subject of study and requires good knowledge of math.
    Forget about your dreams for the future, mr desiree.

  107. Just checked on this Desiree´s blog.She/he claims to be a student or a major of microbiology.I have my doubts.He/she may be an agent or a front for murray´s firm for spreading lies and slander.Thinks she really should to be in premed.,says she is terrible in math and hates chemistry, but has an IQ of 135.Wants to be a psychiatrist when she grows up.Well she will never be.Already in premed she has to know math,knowledge of statistics is a must. Also inorganic chemistry,organic chemistry and pharmacology. Seems to have her head in the clouds.A very suspicious case.-And that is only premed.

  108. Dialdancer,Great, at last something good and optimistic re the upcoming trial!It has been mostly bad news so far,no doubt a result of the workings of the murray firm for spread of lies and slander.

  109. *Special Announcement* PositivelyMichael Partners with Tom Mesereau

    “The staff of PositivelyMichael is pleased to announce that we will be partnering with Thomas Mesereau during Conrad Murray’s involuntary manslaughter trial. Tom was Michael Jackson’s lead defense attorney for the 2005 trial, and his vast knowledge of legal discourse and trial activities will be an amazing resource to help MJ fans and the greater community better understand the ins and outs of the coming legal proceedings.

    As fans, it is very important that we can all stand together in unity and raise our voices in support of Michael with accuracy and authority during the trial. With Tom’s help, we will all have an easier time fully understanding everything that is going on and hopefully limit the amount of mis-information that will undoubtedly be spread in the coming weeks.”

    Read the rest at: http://www.positivelymichael.com/forums/content.php?186-Announcement-PositivelyMichael%92s-Trial-Partnership-with-Tom-Mesereau&

  110. David, Thanks for that link, i’ve been over there reading the article which is amazing. and i’m looking forwards to more. am also more angry than ever! who do these people think they are to say such disgusting things!? They are saying them as if they speak for God himself! They have clearly missed the part about GOD being the judge – OF ALL MEN and that includes themselves!
    when will you be posting your post?
    I’ve not read my Bible in a while but i’m gonna look out some references about judging other people and anything else that comes to mind. I am so mad!

    • Hey guys, Debbie Kunesh has migrated her Reflections on the Dance blog from Blogger to WordPress, and here is her new site! http://reflectionsonthedance.wordpress.com/

      Please check out the series “Debunking the Demonic Deception: The Story of Michael Jackson and The Truth”. This will be a 5 part series debunking many rumors and falsehoods about MJ, including the criticism from some religious leaders that he “worshipped Satan” or “channelled evil spirits”, among others. I helped her a lot with my research, and this is a prelude to my own post “Fact Checking Michael Jackson’s Christian Faith”, which is coming later this year.

    • “Debbie Kunesh has migrated her Reflections on the Dance blog from Blogger to WordPress, and here is her new site! http://reflectionsonthedance.wordpress.com/

      This is very welcome news, David. The blog is fantastic. I see that you’ve already added it to our blogroll. I’ve just been there and would like to repeat Michael’s words the blog is starting with:

      “Know, in the end, I’ll be vindicated, I pray, because I know the truth. I am an innocent person and I believe in God and love God.”

      For some reason I also know that Michael will be vindicated. It will take time but he will. And it is not even he who needs it – it is us who need it most, because his vindication is simultaneously a recovery for all of us.

  111. The coroner at the pre-trial too said he was healthy for his age. Of course, he had small problems here and there, but none of those were life threatening.

  112. Dr. Drew said he read the autopsy report and Michael Jackson was not a healthy person. I think Dr. Drew read the tabloid report DD was quoting from because the real report said he was healthy.

  113. The ever talkative Brian Oxman will be a guest on the Dr. Drew Show tonight to discuss the Murray trial.

    We don’t get this show in the UK. If anyone in the US watches this, I would very much like to know what he says. Oxman has a knack for making things worse.

    • @ Deborah
      I will record the Dr. Drew show tonight, and if the transcript is posted tonight I’ll send it to you.

      I wonder if Dr. Drew will disclose to his viewers that Oxman and his wife were recently disbarred from practicing law due to their misconduct? Probably not!

  114. Well my first question is what made this lady go interview Anthony Pelicano after all this time……right before murray trial……as for the molestation….i dont think he is implying that mj molested anybody but these few children are in deeper hot water, worse then ever just being molested..i suppose if you or your parent had involved organized crime in an attempt to extort mj and bring him down,you are stuck with these people for the rest of your life..as evan said , there was other people involved with him..
    .p treacy had said mj believed organized crime had a hand in this stuff..so who knows….
    he could just be another forgotten inmate by his famous clients and looking for some attn..i just think it interesting that here is this lady writing this story right before trial, diane dimond is subbing for nancy grace and commenting on this lady story also..look like the bottomfeeders are getting their ducks in a row to me.

  115. Well, I sent an e-mail. I explained bfriefly the purpose of this site andI basically just typed the “worse than molestation” quote and asked if he really said that or if it was taken out of context in some way. I kinda doubt I’ll get a reply or if it will even get to him, but hey, it’s worth a shot.

  116. I think everyone is falling into the trap of micromanagement here and on other blogs. Let me run down what is happening here. Since the Murray trial was postponed we have had to deal with one nasty story after another. Stupid stories that have nothing in fact but create negative group think in the jury pool.
    First we have the Aaron Carter story, how long were we focused on that? Too long and it took care of itself in less than 24 hours. Then comes the lawsuit against Klein that was brought by none other Jason Pfeiffer. It was a hot topic for about 15 second which is about how long that person should have any type of fame. We now have a story in a “credible” magazine. The writer wrote that Anthony Pellicano insinuated that there was something worse that Michael Jackson had done to young boys. Again we don’t have his confirmation that he did say this or in that context. I hope I don’t have to remind you of the Aaron Carter story and how if not everything is written or heard we have what is called a half truth or in fact a lie.
    Then surprisingly the 3rd comment on the article was Diane Dimond:

    18 Hours Ago
    Not mentioned here is the massive pleasure Pellicano derived from bullying people his wealthy clients didn’t like. Anita Busch was the most publicized, of course, but there were many more reporters terrorized by this man and his for-hire thugs.
    I know. I was one of them.
    As for a movie of his escapades….Gawd, I hope not. I’m tired of criminals being glorified

    Once I saw that I knew that the article had no credibility. She has had a hatred for Pellicano since 1993 when she says that he broke a window out in her car to take documents that she had. She of course never reported that theft since she wasn’t actually supposed to have the documents in the first place so we have nothing but her word that it even occurred. If it even happened the documents in question were probably the report to the DCFS by Jordan Chandler.
    And of course after that we have the hate filled drivel that tends to make us a little angry. We reply and it becomes a never ending cycle. We spend too much of our valuable time playing a game of Volleyball back and forth with these people.
    Does anyone notice that all of these have happened or occurred after that postponement? Do you think that it was asked for by the Murray defense for more than one reason? They said they needed more time to find a new expert. Have they been able to find that expert? I think they wanted more time to taint the jury pool by smearing Michael by any means necessary. Remember that he has a PR team. It also helps create a negative atmosphere of interest for the media about the trial.
    I ask everyone to stop before you respond to some of these articles. Wait to see if they are credible. Otherwise you are just playing into the hand of Murray’s defense and their latest love affair with the media.

  117. No because what he was convicted for had nothing to do with the Michael Jackson case. The big names they were hoping for were prominent people in Hollywood that are tied to organized crime i.e. the mafia. He will never compromise that. The time to “make a deal” is over that happens before you are convicted. If he were to do it now he would be seen as a jailhouse snitch by the people he is protecting. Michael never had any connection to organized crime period.
    Forgot something else an appeal has to be based on the evidence given in a trial or new exculpatory evidence. The defense has to prove a reversible error for an appeal so unless we know about his trial and the pleadings, the evidence presented and how it was used to find him guilty. Unless I see those papers I can’t really tell you what would be a reversible error. It definitely wouldn’t be Michael he had nothing to do with it.

  118. Oh he said this in the article….

    Pellicano is currently appealing his conviction, and if he’s successful, he could be out by 2013, six years before his eligible parole date. He’s pinning his hopes on an 86-page appeals brief that accuses the government of misconduct, misrepresentation, and constitutional violation. Among other things, the brief charges that the agents’ search of his office was illegal. The U.S. Attorney’s Office has until late September to respond to the brief.

    I don’t know anything about American legalities though.

    Another question…

    In the meantime, Pellicano has 30 civil lawsuits hanging over his head, including the one from Busch. Will Pellicano rat out anyone in the civil cases? Don’t count on it, says his attorney and friend Steven Gruel. “Everyone expected this to be the case that rocked Hollywood, and it didn’t happen, and it didn’t bring in the great names they hypothesized would happen,” the attorney says. “He wouldn’t buckle, and that is why he is in Big Spring, Texas, today.”

    If Pellicano had ratted out MJ or anyone else, would he have had a shorter sentence?

  119. I think Michael said it best:

    Peek in the shadow
    Come into the light
    You tell me I’m wrong
    Then you better prove you’re right
    You’re sellin’ out souls but
    I care about mine
    I’ve got to get stronger
    And I won’t give up the fight

    You try to cope with every lie they scrutinize

    Tired of you tellin’ the story your way
    It’s causin’ confusion
    You think it’s okay

    You tell me I’m wrong
    Then you better prove you’re right
    You’re sellin’ out souls but
    I care about mine
    I’ve got to get stronger
    And I won’t give up the fight

  120. Hi rockon, If you go to wwww.bop.gov you can search for an inmate. It will show you where they are housed, their registration number and release date. There is one from a federal sentence it is different than a state sentence. You have to be pardoned by the President for early release from a federal term.
    Also it might help you to know that he was already convicted of earlier charges involving explosives he had in his office. I am not sure which one came first I would have to research it more. I do know that he had been convicted in one case and an new one was brought just in time to stop his release he as been in prison on more than one charge since the whole thing started. The reason that the second one got so much attention is that the tapes found included a veiled threat about the reporter Anita Busch. She was investigating his clients ties with organized crime the client was Steven Segal.
    It is actually a pretty long story let me see if I can privide a link to some of it.

  121. I know we are trying all kinds of things out for size to explain that statement or fill in the blanks. Here is what we do know. Anthonly Pellicano resigned from the Michael Jackson case in November of 1993. He always maintained that Michael was innocent of the charges. In an article after the settlement he made a remark in answer to a question about the police not finding any evidence of extortion and his reply was “right and if you believe that I have some swamp land I’d like to sell you”‘. I don’t know about other parts of the world but here that means that your pretty gullible and would believe anything. He left because he never wanted MJ to settle. He wanted it to go to court. And like I said has that money ever done JC any good let alone his father who is now dead from a self inflicted bullet wound to the head.
    There is also the lawsuit against him and Bert Fields that Barry Rothman brought for the illegal wiretap and smearing him in public so he could not continue with the original suit that they were going to file. You know he missed out on a lot of money when he didn’t get the lions share of that settlement. Why would he go through all of that and suddenly in some obscure article 18 years later he decides to let the world know what he knows but not really.I think we have toget used to these kinds of things being done in the media because of how close we are to the Murray case. Remember that the media has a very good reason to be doing this stuff for Murray. If they do they won’t look like they were out to crucify an innocent man for ratings.
    The other thing is if he is creating interest in a future book he is starting too soon.A person incarcerated in the Federal Prison system cannot write a book. They cannot benefit from their crime. He could of course write a book after his release but there might be a problem with that. Who would be interested in it. His release date is 3/23/2019. He is 67 years old. He would be 75 brfore he can even start to write it or sell it. Who would remeber some cryptic statement he made about Michael Jackson 8 years before the book was written enough to want to buy it except one of us maybe. I for one don’t want to wait that long and buy a book that is going to have a paragraph or at best a chapter about the 1993 case.And I don’t want a book about him.
    I say write or email but ask him what we want to know the most he is going to do is ignore it.
    And of course we now have good old Desiree on the article link her blog and her favorite articles. Why am I not surprised. One comment from newswoman was interesting. We now have a new reason that Michael was found not guilty: His “followers” would have rioted? Somebody has to have more reason than that.

  122. NAMBLA was dying to have Michael.There is no way they could have succeded.But in their minds..can you think of anything better?
    Michael had access to a great number of children of both sexes and
    could have culled the best for the NAMBLA pool of children for pay.This is just a burst of my imaginination re NAMBLA,There is no way Michael would do anything of the sort. Just to calm your minds and not to misunderstand my statement.I hit upon this idea thinking what could be worse than molesting,of which he was innocent.

  123. Prisoner´s are allowed to correspond by letter.Ofcourse they will be checked and sensored if these have anything to do with his criminal activities. -Something worse than molesting children..? Maybe enrolling them in the NAMBLAS pool of available children for pay?
    I don´t believe this, it would have come out during the multiple
    investigations by different agencies and agents. Writing Pellicano a letter is a good idea. At worst it will not lead anywhere.And so there would be no ned to continue speculation at this time.

  124. I don’t know what Pellicano really said, but anyway, I don’t think he was stupid enough to tell Mitteager that MJ was guilty, if it was the truth.

  125. I found this on the LSA forum:

    – – – – – – – – – – –
    September 1994
    PELLICANO: You have to understand something. I have nine kids. Michael [Jackson] plays with my baby. They crawl all over him. They pull his hair. They pull his nose. Sometimes he wears a bandage across his face. If I let my own kids (unintelligible) do you think there’s a chance?
    MITTEAGER: Well, all things being equal, I would say, no.
    PELLICANO: Not only that. If you sat this kid [Jordie Chandler] down like I did, as a matter of fact, he couldn’t wait to get up and go play video games. I said, “you don’t understand how serious this is. Your dad [Evan Chandler] is going to accuse Michael of sexual molestation. He going to say all kinds of stuff.” He [Jordie] says, “Yeah, my dad’s trying to get money.” As a matter of fact, I (unintelligible) for 45 minutes. Then I tried tricking him. I mean, I want you to know, I’m a vegetarian. I picked this kid with a fine tooth comb. So we’re there (unintelligible) with this kid… and If you sat down and talked to this kid, there wouldn’t be any doubt in your mind either. And I said Michael is all upset. We went over and over. I tried to get him to sit down and he wants to play video games while I’m sitting there. I’m sitting there with the kid’s mother [June Chandler] and David Swartrz walks in and (unintelligible) what’s this all about? And [Barry] Rothman (unintelligible) asking questions. There is no question that Rothman (unintelligible) what this is all about.”

  126. In the interview Tuesday, Pellicano continued to stand behind Jackson.
    “In no way, shape or form does (my resignation) indicate that Michael Jackson is guilty,” Pellicano said. “Michael Jackson is not guilty, and all the things I said in the past I reaffirm.”
    Pellicano insisted that he pulled out of the case because it was taking too much of his time and because his investigation was essentially complete. “The investigation has all been done and is now in the hands of the lawyers,” he said.


  127. This is the sad thing about it all: people will only pick up the sensationalist soundbytes without investigating the whole case. And the media know it, that’s why they do it.

    Of course what Pellicano says (if he said it at all, which I’m not sure of, knowing how the media operate) doesn’t make any sense. Worse than molestation would be killing, but I hope he doesn’t want to suggest MJ killed children. Where are the victims then to whom worse things happened than molestation? And MJ did worse than molestation, but the FBI and the police still didn’t find anything on him in more than 10 years? C’mon now!

    Also AFTER Pellicano resigned from Jackson’s team he always maintained MJ was innocent. Why would he claim that if his resignation had to do with finding out he was guilty? Why didn’t he turn in his evidence to the police then?

    Something is really fishy about this article, I hope we can find out what. Lynette might be onto something, because indeed it is a very cryptic statement to make. But then, he might be trying to create interest and bid up prices for the book he’s writing. Michael was innocent and Pelicano knows this and until know he always maintained that. So what changed? Well, he’s in prison and he’s writing a book. We all know how that market operates. Publishers refuse books left and right if it doesn’t contain sensationalist claims about MJ. Michael’s ex bodyguards said they could have found a publisher for their book long time ago if they had been willing to write what publishers wanted them to write (sensationalist claims). This is how it works and if AP really said this I suspect it has to do with this fact.

  128. @GiGI

    Yeah, I was contemplating sending a letter instead. I imagine it can take a while to get to him and get a rely back though.

  129. What about writing him a regular letter? Since it is a federal prison they are typically a bit more lenient (or get better treatment, at least) so surely there is a way to get some sort of contact to him.

    Something is definitely wrong with this. This guy has what, 8 children? And he claimed he would have killed Michael himself if he found evidence he was molesting these children? Yet supposedly knows he did something WORSE yet defended him for years and won’t spill the beans now when that alone could made him face charges? We are not talking about an adult/consensual affair or weird fetishes here–this insinuation made appears to be referring to a CRIME. There is nothing to hold back now that Michael is gone. He sounds like the kind of guy who WOULD have killed him if he was hurting children in any form–especially given he is a father himself. He should have turned that evidence over to authorities and again, seems he would have–if such evidence existed. The FBI investigated for how many years and found nothing, literally “nothing” and they do stalk people and wiretap. Sneddon stalked Michael and all he could come up with was two psychotic families and a kid that claims he was traumatized by being tickled.

    I’m sorry but if Michael was really some sort of predator he’d been caught doing whatever. Anyone would have loved to catch him doing “something” so they could get a payout thought let’s face facts–people who face real abuse suffer from it forever. I see no one from Michael’s past that appears to have been a victim from being around him. Someone would have gotten him on tape or gotten him on film–he was a target. I swear, the Michael we saw was the real Michael–a child at heart. He had no ulterior motive.

  130. @Anna

    I was just thinking this site is provocative, and the prison wardens might not approve of something that can elicit strong emotions.

  131. @Teva

    I haven’t actually sent it yet, I’m proofreading it at the moment. lynande51 told me to send a link to the site if he wanted to check us out before responding…..

  132. @Anna

    Why did you link this site? Why not just ask a straightforward question? What if the wardons reject the email based on the content of this site? Just saying.

  133. @Ares

    You know, I just emailed a friend and said it feels like I am on this never ending merry-go-round, living in a carnival, or amusement park.

  134. Hmmm..,,,lets all keep in mind if my e-mail goes through and I link this site Anthony Pellicano might be reading our comments……….

  135. Oh my god there is no ending to this. What the hell? And is this guy for real “He did something far worse to young boys than molest them.” What, killed them and ate them because that is the worse thing besides molestation.Jesus, it feels as if someone has a schedule and every second month they pay someone to come up with allegations and claims against MJ.

  136. Okay so let me be sure what you guys are saying, do I send the e-mail to the prison facility and ask if Anthony Pelicano will accept it because I doubt they’ll give out his e-mail address to anyone in the public?

  137. @Anna

    You do not have to ask him what is worst than child molestation, just ask if he made that statement, or in the context in which it was given.

  138. He has to approve the email so you have to ask the prison first and then he will decide. Be sure to tell him who you are and what we are doing. Give him the blog address if he wants to check us out first. He might not have said that or your’e rightshe didn’t even ask or do we need to remind everyone about Daphne Barak that wasn’t that long ago.

  139. @lynande51 Found him but now what. E-mail the facility and see if he can recieve e-mail. I kind of doubt he’ll answer questions on what he finds worse than child molestation. If he wouldn’t tell the journalist. Then again…. did the journalist even ask?

  140. @lynande51 There was a blog talk radio interview all while back, I think Deborah and a few other bloggers were trying to figure out how to contact Anthony Pelicano. I don’t know if anyone figured out how yet.

  141. @lynande51

    I think you may be on to something because it does seem he’s making it clear that Michael wasn’t guilty of molestation. This is one of those times where I’d love to hear the audio tape of the interview and find out what he really said and if the journalist embellished on it……

  142. He spoke directly to her. He is also quoted in MO first article talking about how he interviewed JC when his parents were upstairs at the hideout and the interesting thing that he says is ” that kid is really smart, he is manipulating…”Maybe I am right maybe he thinks that settling that suit was worse than going to court and exposing his dad and him. It might not be a bad idea to at least contact the prison and write him to see if he will allow anyone to email him? The only question we need to have answered is what he thinks was worse.

  143. According to Fischer AP resigned in November 1993, but her articles have qoutes from P defending MJ. Does anyone know where those quotes come from, or did he speak directly to her?

  144. No those were his exact words in another article that was in the LA Times in 1993. He said he would kill him himself if he ever found out is was true.
    There is something criptic in that message. It implies that he did something worse yet does not say what that worse was making a person think whatever. What if he meant agreeing to settle and letting the kid get away with extortion? Has that settlement ever done JC any good?
    Don’t forget the settlement itself Pellicano is bound by that as well. It states specifically both former and present investigators and attorneys. Can he say anything in conjunction to that case?

  145. Wait I guess he didn’t say he kill him exactly. Sorry, the place where I read the article just had stars over that word so I didn’t know exactly what he said there, it still seems contradictory though, like, “so I just decided to quit”???? Not the same impassioned reaction….

  146. I see you guys have read the article too about Anthony Pelicano. My thought was the same too, what could possibly be worse than molestation? The statement before is even more contradictory because he apparently told Michael he’d kill him himself if he found out he was guilty. So he’d kill over molestation but not against whatever was apparently worse? Yeah, that makes alot of sense, this guy is clearly blowing smoke. Too bad all the brainwashed sheep in the public will eat it up without question. I’m hoping his words were just twisted but even so it’s now out there for the world to see.

  147. Re: The feds having his tapes does not mean anything, they couldn’t use them. Let’s say Anthony Pellicano (AP) had incriminating information about people on those tapes, legally I don’t think authorities could used them because they were obtained illegally, that is AP had no legit eavesdropping. Those tapes and transcripts would be fruits from the poisonous tree. At least that is how I reason it.

  148. I think it might be hard to send him a clipping or email him. He is in a Federal Prison and any mail that is sent to him must be approved by him and the prison. What could possibly be worse than molestation? That is what he will have to prove. You know he does get out someday and it would be of no benefit for him to say anything about Michael since he is dead.No one can do anything to him. That whole thing is just weird. I just checked. You have to be approved by staff at the prison to be on the inmates email list. So to do it someone would have to write him and then get approval by the time all that is done this will be long over. You know what he is going to be in prison until February of 2019. Let him talk go ahead let him talk. He better have evidence to back up his claim other wise he is commiting extortion with that one. Let’s not give it any time or attention. That is what the writer wants. Oh there is no appeal out of Federal Prison on his charges. The only way he gets out of there early is in a box or if the President pardons him and I seriously doubt it. We have other more pressing things and the feds have all his tapes so if there was evidence then they would have had it before Michael died. Oh and Federal Prison inmates can not do business while incarcerated. Do we think he said this for free? And do we think that this writer got the kind of money it would take to get him to say it? Too many questions the more we react the more attention some things get.Things that should not be getting attention at all.

  149. Instead of guessing why not send the clipping to Pelicano highlighting the MJ portion and asked if he said it in that context. You never know he might respond.

  150. Yes Jan, I just posted something about it on another blog and it’s disgusting. As I stated in that post, I’m not sure if Pellicano really said this because if he really found out something such as that surely he would not just turn his head and let it go. He would have turned Michael Jackson in and secondly what could possibly be worse than molesting a child? In any event, I was wondering if the female author of the piece might be using that to sensationalize her story and since Michael cannot refute it — she, like others in the disgusting media, are able to say what they want to without any repercussions. It was posted on the Daily Beast website. I attempted to logon and comment, but was not able to do so.

    • Here is an excerpt from JRT’s book “The Magic, The Madness, The Whole Story”, pages 278-279 about Pellicano:

      Then, in a few weeks, a Santa Barbara Grand Jury did begin hearing witnesses, so Bert Fields hadn’t been completely wrong. Furious with Howard Weitzman for making him look foolish, Bert resigned from the case, later calling the change of events ‘an outrage. It was a nightmare and I wanted to get the hell out of it as soon as possible.’

      At the same time, Anthony Pellicano, who had tired of the flak he had received for his aggressive tactics, resigned.

      When Michael heard about all of the upheaval on his team, he telephoned Elizabeth Taylor to tell her that he was ‘surrounded by people who don’t know what the hell they’re doing.’ He had lost all hope, he said, according to what Elizabeth later recalled to one of Jackson’s attorneys. ‘He’s threatening to kill himself,’ she said, dramatically. ‘And if he does, his blood will be on all of our hands.’ ‘Well, we’re doing all we can do,’ said one of Michael’s advisers. ‘What else can we do?’ ‘We can pray,’ answered Elizabeth Taylor. ‘At this point, I think that’s about it.’

      And here is an excerpt from “The King of Pop’s Darkest Hour” by Lisa Campbell, page 89:

      After returning home, Michael took more control over his defense and made some changes in his defense team. Pellicano and Fields were now off the case. While some reports said they were fired, Pellicano told USA Today that it was his decision to leave, that he had done all he could do. He added his departure should not be attributed to the merits of the case and that he firmly believes in Michael’s innocence. Fields was reported to have been replaced because of his blunder in court in November when he told a judge, and therefore the media and the whole world, that they expected an indictment very soon.

      There are numerous other sources from that time period which state, on the record, that Pellicano’s resignation was NOT in any way, shape, or form an indication of his belief in MJ’s guilt. It seems to me that his quote was either fabricated by the author, or he willingly lied for money. Either way, what he’s saying isn’t true and has no validity, and I guess we can officially forget about him fully exonerating MJ in any upcoming book that he writes.

  151. I just saw this by pellicano:


    “Later in the interview, Pellicano reveals that when he agreed to work for Jackson during the star’s 1993 child-molestation case, he warned Jackson that he’d better not be guilty. “I said, ‘You don’t have to worry about cops or lawyers. If I find out anything, I will f–k you over.’ ” The detective took the assignment, but says, “I quit because I found out some truths…He did something far worse to young boys than molest them.” But he refuses to say anything more about it. It’s as if Pellicano wants to send Hollywood a reminder: I know which closets hold the skeletons.”

    Has anyone else seen this!

  152. It’s what Raven posted on imdb

    “You’re not the only one, I miss it, too! Lol. Thanks for the compliment. With all the hundreds of MJ sites out there, I take that as a great honor.

    Well, it’s a long story but in a nutshell, what happened was that Allforlove was hosted on a home server computer. My boyfriend knew how to do that, and we had the capacity to run it from home. Of course, one of the downfalls of doing things that way is that if anything disrupts the home server computer (anything from a power outtage, to loss of internet or the computer itself going down) it means the website is offline. Last year, we kept having a problem with the server going down, until he switched out the hosting computer. After that, everything seemed fine but we had been discussing whether we wanted to move the site to a paid host server since traffic to the site had increased and was putting a big strain on the computers (not to mention the utility bill-we learned the hard way, home hosting really doesn’t save in the long run!).

    But before we could get to that step, things took a very ugly turn. I don’t want to go into all the details here. If you want to PM me, I’ll tell you. Just suffice it to say, my bf and I parted ways last month and we had a major problem, just as many couples who’ve been together awhile will have ‘custody” disputes-be it children, or pets, or personal possessions they both shared. In our case, the server computer belonged to him-but the data on it was mine! Well, he took the server computer! I did have a backup of the site, but I cannot access it because I don’t have the software I need to open it. I have been debating whether to start a new site (on a paid host server this time) or to wait and see if the old data can be retrieved. Obviously, having put as much work and dedication into the site as I did, I would PREFER to have the original site back online, with all of my postings from November 2009 to February 2011,so my logic for now is that it’s worth the wait if that can be done.

    The good news is that after several weeks, my bf and I have finally been communicating again. He told me that the website was safe (he hadn’t done anything crazy like selling the computer with the harddrive intact, which had been my worst fear!). He has only just recently had internet access again from where he is, and promised he will get the site back online for me, but I told him I want it on a paid host server this time, so that nothing like this can happen again. He promised to work on it and said he could have it online again “in a few days” but obviously, I’m still waiting. I doubt he’s changed his mind, but it could be that he’s run into some difficulty he didn’t anticipate-or maybe simply hasn’t had the time. He’s a mason, and work really picks up this time of year. I’m trying not to pressure him too much about the website right now, as we have bigger priorities (our relationship, for starters). But I am supposed to see him this weekend and will give him a nudge. If worst comes to worst, I at least know where the harddrive is and can retrieve that if I need to.

    So that has basically been the saga of what happened to AFLB. It has been very devastating but has also taught me a valuable lesson about being too reliant on someone else. I would gladly start a new site and cut him out of the picture altogether, except that, like I said, I don’t want to lose the site’s entire history-and to get that back, I unfortunately will have to be reliant on him to do it.


    • http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001391/board/thread/179864435?d=179924837&p=1#179924837

      What a saga! It is incredible what blogging about Michael sometimes depends on. I hope for a happy end for Raven (whatever it is).

      As to the blog I suggest she moves the content of it (when she gets it) to wordpress.com as it is absolutely free and does not have to be paid for. If her boyfriend turns out to be nasty enough to erase the content – then good riddance IMHO, it is better to part now than regret later that you’ve spent on a rascal half of your life….

      Looking for information, analyzing it and writing about it in the blog takes so much of your time, energy and ultimately life that erasing it is like killing part of you. I hope he understands that and will not go to extremes. But if it comes to the worst I have saved a couple of posts and can contribute them back. And we will make a call for other readers to bring in their ‘savings’ too.

  153. @ David
    Do you have a personal email i can contact you on. The thing I have seems legitimate but because who the source is makes me anxious to trust no matter what the authenticity may look like.
    I don’t wish to speak on here after watching peoples behaviour it would be irrisponcible of me to post peoples personal contact information.


  154. @ Ares
    Yes, we have made backups of the blog, and WordPress automatically backs up all of its blogs, so there’s no need to worry, but thanks for your concern!

    Speaking of WordPress, Sean Chai has recently started a 3rd MJ blog, and it’s now on WordPress! It’s aptly titled “Smoke Without Fire”, and it has been added to the blogroll: http://smokewithoutfiremichaeljackson.wordpress.com/

  155. Helena have you made a backup for the blog or created copies for the posts ? am seeing that a lot of MJ sites are going down and am getting worried. it would be very bad if the informations and the reseach that you have here got lost because they are priceless.

  156. -who then gave it to Taymoor Marmarchi, a friend of MJ, who then took LEGAL ACTION against Bonnie and emailed her a cease and desist letter, warning her to stop slandering Taymoor on her blog.-

    Hmmm, very interesting. So can someone take legal action for, say, other bloggers who write slandering things considering them and their relationship with MJ?

  157. @lcpledwards

    I did see that post where she tried to smear you again! I was wondering if you saw it, I’m glad you addressed it and cleared up her lies. I saw she wrote something about getting a cease and desist letter on twitter. Some other blogger’s were talking about how she could get herself in a heap of trouble will all the libel and defamation of character she spews on her blog. So I hopped on over to see what was going on and your name popped up. I haven’t visited her blog in months, I just can’t make it through her posts of paranoid delusions , mainly the ones in which she believes all MJ vindication bloggers are hired by Sony.


    I think she really does believe that Michael might be alive in the flesh. Months ago she wrote a post about how she thought AEG might be behind it Michael faking his death. She even was analyzing little Paris at the memorial. Whether or not Paris was crying real tears and saying she could see a glint of something coming from her ear that looked like an ear piece, (like someone was giving Paris the words to say). I was kind of flabbergasted to say the least. It’ safe to say that post is one of the many reasons I quit visiting her blog on a regular basis. At some point I shut her out blog out of mind completely until hearing about this latest post regarding impending legal troubles.

  158. Guys, in some miraculous way I’ve managed to add a TRANSLATOR to this blog. Now it comes after the comments section. You need to click on the corresponding language for the page to be translated into another language (I hope it works and the translation is not too bad).

    A search button has also been added and is now in the top part of the page for easier access.
    Please tell me I am a good girl!

    P.S. David, I am sorry to hear you’ve had such unfortunate experience with this delusional lady. Is it possible she thinks Michael is alive in the figurative meaning of the word?

  159. Did you guys see how I was attacked by Bonnie Cox? Let me tell you what happened: a friend of mine who I’ll call “Friend #1” asked me if I had Bonnie’s email address, and I said “no”, but offered to ask “Friend #2” if she had it. Friend #2 got suspicious, as you would expect, and asked Bonnie if it was ok if she gave me her email address, and Bonnie said “yes”, so that she could see “what I was up to”.

    So once I got Bonnie’s email, I gave it to Friend #1, who then gave it to Taymoor Marmarchi, a friend of MJ, who then took LEGAL ACTION against Bonnie and emailed her a cease and desist letter, warning her to stop slandering Taymoor on her blog. Good for him! It’s about time that Bonnie learned that her actions have consequences, and her worthless conspiracy theories will no longer be tolerated!

    She posted the C&D letter on her blog, and attacked me for being in cahoots with Branca, and for trying to set up an interview with her and Pearl Jr. The problem is that I have NEVER even met Pearl Jr.! Last year, I asked her if she would be willing to do an interview with Catherine Gross, not Pearl Jr.! I guess all black women look the same to her, huh? LOL!

    Here are some quotes from her post that will absolutely destroy what little credibility she has:

    But mostly I’ve been asked, “Do you still believe he is alive?

    The answer is YES. Because although I cannot explain someone elses lie, I know for sure that God does not lie.

    I believe Michael is alive but I have NEVER harassed any of his family about it and I would never bother them on Twitter about something so sensitive. Last night upset me. I do not like seeing Michael’s fans belittled for what they believe and I DO NOT AGREE with fighting lies with lies. I do not understand that at all. It HURTS PEOPLE.

    If Michael were dead . . . this TRIAL would have taken place MONTHS ago.

    If Michael were dead, Karen, Samantha and the rest of the TINI-Sonyshadows wouldn’t be so MILITANT about trying to control what people believe.

    Maybe she should just quit her blog and join Pearl Jr. in marketing her “Psuedo-cide” garbage documentary!!!


  160. To all.

    Rev Catherine Gross is returning on 13th of May next friday.
    Her guest is Joe Vogel which is great. I’m very glad she is back she has been missed.
    Something positive to speak about is also a refreshing break.

  161. New message from John McClain and John Branca regarding HTWF of April 22, 2011

    Source: http://www.legendarymichaeljackson.nl/?p=4904

    We have received the following message from John McClain and John Branca, co-executors of the Estate of Michael Jackson:

    Please let the fans know that we are aware of the many questions from the fan community regarding the recent settlement of the HTWF lawsuit. The Estate will need at least ninety days to gather information, as well as all of the property that will be coming back to the Estate from Melissa Johnson and the HTWF.

    We want the fans to rest assured that all decisions on the use of a charitable foundation or, as an alternative, making direct contributions to recipient charities, and any and all personnel decisions, will be made with complete regard to Michael’s wishes and Michael’s legacy, which we intend to honor and perpetuate. We also value the opinions of Michael’s fans who, above all, have shown unwavering support for Michael and his legacy.

    We therefore want to assure the fans that all actions being taken by the Estate, past, present and future, will be guided by the paramount objective of doing the right thing by Michael.

    John McClain and John Branca
    The Estate of Michael Jackson

    This message was preceded by the OFFICIAL STATEMENT of the Estate of Michael Jackson of April 19, 2011:

    Press reports on TMZ and other media sites regarding the settlement terms between the Michael Jackson Estate and the Heal the World defendants are wrong. The Estate is taking back the Heal the World Foundation and all of the Michael Jackson trademarks it allegedly owned. The Michael Jackson Estate owns the Heal the World name, and neither Melissa Johnson nor her companies will ever be able to use Michael Jackson’s name or the Heal the World name.

    The comments are great, so I’m posting them too:

    cawobeth says:
    April 22, 2011 at 5:18 am

    I’d like to mention that The MJ Estate really didn’t have to reach out to fans as they have, now did they ?
    It should be pretty obvious that The MJ Estate is pretty busy with a lot of responsibility.
    As of the fall of 2010, once they were able, they reached out to fans. The “Michael” release party was the grand beginning of a rapport between The Estate & MJ fans. I reported as per that event, “We were all truly family there.” And I meant that because I could feel it.
    Can this be ? Can we work together for a Michael Jackson legacy of of honor ? I believe we can as long as we always have Michael, Mrs. Jackson, Prince, Paris & Blanket in mind.
    Just think, in a few months everyone will be able to enlighten Michael’s dream for HTWF, without reservation. This is something to look forward to.

    cawobeth says:
    April 22, 2011 at 4:43 am

    Well, while The Estate is continuing their work on this, I think it would be nice if we can work to get along better amongst fans.
    There is more discord amongst fans than I would ever care for Michael to ever know about. OK, not everyone is going to get along all the time. That’s life. However, there is no doubt that people are capable of addressing others with unconditional love, like Michael.
    How often has it been suggested out here that we agree to disagree ? Many. Yet how often do we apply this ? My contention has been that if people are coming from a factual basis, there’s nothing much left to argue about.
    It’s pretty simple really because we have common ground here; love & admiration for Michael.
    Allow me to suggest something from my article here, “Taking a Stand for Michael”. All we need to do is ask ourselves three questions, is what I say “respectful to Michael ? Do I know for a fact that what I say is true? Is this in the light of love? ”
    It has been said that Michael Jackson fans are the greatest fans in the world. For this to be so, we need to live up to it, not have it be a mere cliche. We can as long, as we want to.

  162. Helena said:

    “Dial, you understand that I cannot be sure that it is them and that the whole thing is deliberate.”

    I know that is why I used the word….if. Do I believe all the Media or AEG is reading from this site and biting their collective nails fearing exposure by us? No. It could have been a software or server vulnerability which was tested for exploitation by troublemakers, but the timing feels too convenient.

    Speaking of Michael, he could have had a new career as a consultant or lecturer on attacks using the Media and internet as tools.

  163. I found this on a MJ board and i think it’s an amazing post.


    There is no end to the commentary concerning the death of Michael Jackson and mine certainly warrants no special attention: nevertheless, I am slightly embarrassed to say how much his death has affected me. I have been a great admirer of his talent since I was a child; as most of us, I grew up listening and watching him evolve as an artist and reach the heights of stardom that I believe will never be surpassed…we no longer have a culture (or an attention span) to allow even the most deserving of talents rise and remain at the top of their fields. Our standards in so many respects have declined to even expect mediocrity: we are relieved to see it, as most of the talent now falls so far below it…

    I have taken it upon myself to observe the collection of interviews, appearances, photographs, and other media on Michael Jackson during the course of his forty-five year career. What has struck me most about his personality (if, indeed, it can serve as insight to his character) is the alarming consistency of it. I say alarming only because most of us grow out of our childlike wonder at the world and the idealism in helping those in need, and making the world and its future better and brighter for others as well as ourselves. Mr. Jackson’s interviews as a child serve to show the influence of his family’s religion; as a Jehovah’s Witness, the strict beliefs that denied him holidays, birthdays, and the many forms of amusement such as television and movies and games that most children take for granted as their province. Being fully employed by the age of nine, Mr. Jackson had only his family, a large one, granted, but still a small cramped corner to grow up and cultivate a sense of self from: meanwhile, his exposure to the outside world of other people was distorted by fame, and the outrageous expectations that come with anxious and adoring crowds…how, indeed, does this shape the perspective of a child? I don’t wonder ever of his love for children and animals, undoubtedly the only company that never wanted or expected anything from him. I daresay it gave him a liberty from a repressive religion, suffocating family bond, a grueling work schedule, and a unruly mob of fans that held no end of comfort for him, even into his aging years…

    Michael Jackson’s battle with vitiligo and lupus has been confirmed: suffering from gradual de-pigmentation and joint inflammation in front of the world must have taken a great deal of confidence from him as a performer: it made him a public spectacle in a way he never wished to be seen and shown. Why after thirty years of being born and raised into unprecedented stardom as a Black man, Mr. Jackson would decide to “become White,“ has been accused, but never explained. Alas, heavy makeup, ornate dress to completely cover his body took more than a physical toll; it took an emotional one, as his appearance was ridiculed even as he made desperate attempts to prevent it. Mr. Jackson directed our attention to his performance, more singing, dancing, fireworks, all the glitter and glamour and sparkle he could muster until we didn’t believe what we saw, but we loved it…therein lies the real magic of his talent, I believe, he convinced us he was beauty and grace even as his skin spotted and his limbs crippled behind the curtain…

    Michael Jackson’s ordeal with accusations of child molestation are sad….I worked as a voluntary on three psych wards and have some indirect experience with pedophiles. He is certainly uncharacteristic of any I have spoken and dealt with outside of his love for children. A pedophile surrounded by children for four decades: two allegations surfaced with a nearly ten-year interval: the illogical sequence in the course of events should have been comical…should have been. The real argument is how many have allegations have not surfaced in the forty years….What will strike you about any repeat offender of such sex-related crimes is cunning: building an amusement park for thousands of children to run and play in; to openly admit you share your bed with them, to spend no less than twenty years of your life expressing how much children motivate and inspire you is no show of cunning, I can tell you. A pedophile would immediately open himself to suspicion under such candor. I believe Michael Jackson’s lack of exposure to our socially accepted hypocrisy failed to learn the rules of the games we play with one another. There is something pathetic about Michael Jackson’s statements and arguments: he seems to be genuinely telling the truth and expecting it to matter…the rest of us in the real world know better.

    You are not innocent before proven guilty; if acquitted, it doesn’t mean you cannot be condemned…individuality can only be expressed if it is in accordance to what everybody else would do and be…if you are a man, be “how all men are,” or you will be labeled a homosexual, and you know what that means: a freak of nature, which will open you up to all sorts of allegations and assumptions, particularly when it comes to your relations with children and the paternity of your own.

    The biggest star the world was beaten by a windfall of public scorn, a far more powerful weapon than any military force could wield…we pride ourselves on being able to say and do what we want, live and believe how we want: we indulge our delusions, don’t we? Try living in this world and this society where your love for nature, animals, children, family and friends made you a suspect; where your abstinence from drugs, alcohol, and sexual promiscuity made you a freak; where your compassion for the sick and the suffering, your aspirations for world peace and justice made you pathetic; where forgiving those who manipulated, exploited and wronged you made you deserving of being dragged through courts and drugged to keep the money-making machine oiled…in short, made you Michael Jackson.

    I don’t pretend to know the truth of this man’s life…I can only seek to know it. I have sought it through his own words and the words of those who knew him. I have sought it in his art, his music and performances. I believe Michael Jackson’s life and death have much to say about what our society has become, clouded in delusions of freedom and liberty, in our aberrations of what it means to be good and decent.

    Was Michael Jackson a good and decent man? I don’t know for certain; what I do know is, the qualities he was most ridiculed for are the ones we as a people are supposed to honor and celebrate in a human being, and his battles were something for which we are supposed to show compassion and understanding…

    I believe Michael Jackson’s decade-span give a baleful testimony of American society.

    We saw Michael Jackson through the years from our own eyes…

    What we see is what we look like…

    Thank you for taking the time to read.


  164. Helena,

    I am sorry to here of this. I started saving all the articles a couple months ago. If this is a deliberate attack on this site and you rather than a software vulnerability that is shameful. It says since the persons who do not want you publicizing the truth cannot harass you into shutting down then they will try and shut you down using other deceptive means.

    If this is due to detractors then once again it demonstrates a desperation. All the posts littered throughout this site claiming we are lying, delusional and will fail in our efforts would be understandable if they believed their claims and set out to prove it by legitimate means. These computer/email attacks if that is what is going on is just the other side of their coin; posting false documents, publishing false/severally altered information and pretending to be Jackson Fans to sow discord within the community. The only way they can vindicate the accusers and thereby themselves is with deception and destruction.

    • “since the persons who do not want you publicizing the truth cannot harass you into shutting down then they will try and shut you down using other deceptive means.”

      Dial, you understand that I cannot be sure that it is them and that the whole thing is deliberate. It may be pure coincidence that when I took up AEG’s so-called contract our computer troubles started and some enthusiasts began posting comments in our names as if we were pedo-lia supporters.

      Similar but much graver coincidences regularly occurred in Michael’s life (like the police raid of Neverland arranged on the day of his No. Ones Album release). So when some coincidences begin happening to you, you realize that these things are a totally indispensable element in life of every Michael’s supporter.


    Yesterday night when I was posting part 5 about AEG’s “business” with Michael Jackson, my computer was attacked.

    This is the second major attempt to break into my computer and our blog for the past month.

    Fortunately both times the computer was restored after its major system failures. However this may not be the case if it happens the third time.

    That is why I am approaching all those who like our posts with a request:

    PLEASE COPY OUR POSTS TO YOUR COMPUTERS. This will be a preventive measure in case something is lost here.

    The major goal of our haters is to break ties between this blog and search engines so that our posts are no longer picked up by them. If you post them (in our name please) in your blogs, forums or other places this will be a way to still see them in the Internet.

    Thank you very much for your help.

    P.S. In case you doubt that the recent attack was really serious, here is an official announcement from wordpress.com which was made public today:

    Security Incident
    by Matt

    Tough note to communicate today: Automattic had a low-level (root) break-in to several of our servers, and potentially anything on those servers could have been revealed.

    We have been diligently reviewing logs and records about the break-in to determine the extent of the information exposed, and re-securing avenues used to gain access. We presume our source code was exposed and copied. While much of our code is Open Source, there are sensitive bits of our and our partners’ code. Beyond that, however, it appears information disclosed was limited.

    Our investigation into this matter is ongoing and will take time to complete. As I said above, we’ve taken comprehensive steps to prevent an incident like this from occurring again. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a comment below or contact our support.

  166. Guys, besides the Veritas Project do you have here the 1993 case as it is written in the mjcase.com website (The Michael Jackson Case) ? I think you should include that part of the site too because in my opinion the 1993 allegations are those who still trouble people rather than the 2005 case.And having read some of the comments here, i have the feeling that there are people who still haven’t understand completely the 1993 case. Can you include that part of the site also? I think it is very well written and easy for people to understand the 1993 case even thought it was very complicated. Thank you.

  167. I guess that means all the suggestions of having the Supreme Court look at Michael’s case for final vindication is out. If they aren’t willing to acknowledge Prosecutorial wrong doing in a case where a man came within days of execution then they surely aren’t going to look at a case where the man was found innocent in the court of law and guilty in public opinion due to Prosecutorial Misconduct.

    While this was going before the Supreme Court the LameStream Media was bombarding us with the on going adventures of Sheen, Lohan and cheating spouses.

    Thanks Ares

  168. I found this very interesting story. It doesn’t consern MJ but it reminds me of his trial story.
    Apparently Sneddon ,Zonen , judge Melvile etc are not the only one who are corrupted. They actually have rivals

    -Supreme Court rejects damages for innocent man who spent 14 years on death row-

    A bitterly divided Supreme Court on Tuesday tossed out a jury verdict won by a New Orleans man who spent 14 years on death row and came within weeks of execution because prosecutors had hidden a blood test and other evidence that would have proven his innocence.

    The 5-4 decision delivered by Justice Clarence Thomas shielded the New Orleans district attorney’s office from being held liable for the mistakes of its prosecutors. The evidence of their misconduct did not prove “deliberate indifference” on the part of then-Dist. Atty. Harry Connick Sr., Thomas said.

    Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg emphasized her disapproval by reading her dissent in the courtroom, saying the court was shielding a city and its prosecutors from “flagrant” misconduct that nearly cost an innocent man his life.

    “John Thompson spent 14 years isolated on death row before the truth came to light,” she said. He was innocent of the crimes that sent him to prison and prosecutors had “dishonored” their obligation to present the true facts to the jury, she said.

    In the past, the high court has absolved trial prosecutors from any and all liability for the cases they bring to court. The key issue in the case of Connick vs. John Thompson was whether the district attorney could be held liable for a pattern of wrongdoing in his office and for his failure to see to it that his prosecutors followed the law.

    In 1999, when all his appeals had failed on his conviction for the murder of a hotel executive, Thompson was scheduled to be put to death. But a private investigator hired by his lawyer found a blood test in the police lab that showed the man wanted for a related carjacking had type B blood, while Thompson’s was type O.

    Thompson had been charged with and convicted of an attempted carjacking near the Superdome as a prelude to charging him with the unsolved murder of a hotel executive.

    The newly revealed blood test spared Thompson’s life, and a judge ordered a new trial on the murder charge that had sent him to death row. His new defense lawyers found other evidence that had been hidden, including eyewitnesses reports. Bystanders reported seeing a man who was 6 feet tall with close-cropped hair running away holding a gun. Thompson was 5 feet 8 and had a bushy Afro.

    With the new eyewitness reports and other evidence that pointed to another man as the killer, Thompson was quickly acquitted of all the charges in a second trial. He won $14 million in damages in a civil suit against the district attorney.

    In rejecting the judgment, Justice Thomas described the case as a “single incident” in which mistakes were made. He said Thompson did not prove a pattern of similar violations that would justify holding the city’s government liable for the wrongdoing. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined to form the majority.

    However, Thompson’s lawyers showed that at least four prosecutors knew about the hidden blood test. They also showed evidence of other, similar cases in New Orleans in which key evidence was concealed from defense lawyers.

  169. Sadly it doesn’t look good for Frank Dileo. This is from Twitter from his niece and from his neighbour:

    Anna Marie Drago

    he’s not doing very well, but we still have hope!

    I can’t lose my uncle, he is one of the most important people in my life.. I love him so much

    after his surgery he went into cardiac arrest and had to get double the anesthetic and hasn’t woke up since Tuesday :'( 26 Mar

    My uncle Tookie still hasn’t woke up :'(
    26 Mar

    His neighbour:

    @heartofthegreen Heart of the Green
    Two weeks ago my next door neighbor and the late Michael Jackson’s manager Frank Dileo had bypass surgery and has not woken up.
    16 hours ago

  170. Guys,
    I will ask that we don’t engage the haters in any conversation. The admins will trash the hater’s comments (as soon as we see them), but it may take a while to do so, so while they are up, please don’t respond to them. It only encourages them to post more comments.

    Thank you.

  171. I really hope is only talking Helena.I visited the forum but i didn’t searched further because i was afraid of what i could find or see. My stomach is not that strong. I understand what you are saying though.

  172. I don’t believe they’re sticking pedophile supporters here, they talk and act exactly the same way the people who supposedly hate Michael do. The other IP address from “LMAO” was from England, this IP address they’re now using is from a proxy in England.

    I believe you guys really hit home with exposing Desiree and exposing Victor and exposing MJFacts.

    It’s so sad about Dileo, it doesn’t look good. I really hope he pulls through.

  173. Does anyone know how can we report those sites/forum connected to pedophilia to authorities? This sites needs to be investigated.That boychat forum that i visited was obviously a place for those people. If that is the case ,then this thing is serious and it doesn’t concern only Mike.

    • “That boychat forum that i visited was obviously a place for those people. If that is the case ,then this thing is serious and it doesn’t concern only Mike.”

      Ares, as far as I understand, the problem with these guys is that while they just “talk” and don’t act on their words it is considered to be “their civil right” or something like that. None of them want to be exposed personally of course, but on the web they are incognito and feel more or less safe (unfortunately). The only thing we could probably do is provide the FBI with the ready-made list of these sites as we’ve compiled quite a collection of them through their numerous comments.

  174. In other news: Frank Dileo has been hospitalized. He had a bypass operation and according to reports he is not doing very well (actually this report claims he is “fighting for his life”): http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2011/03/exclusive-michael-jacksons-ex-manager-frank-dileo-hospitalized-fighting-his-life

    I hope he recovers. I will never forget the fact he always believed in Michael’s innocence and was very vocal about it during the trial, even though he wasn’t employed by Michael at the time.

    • “I hope Frank Dileo recovers. I will never forget the fact he always believed in Michael’s innocence and was very vocal about it during the trial, even though he wasn’t employed by Michael at the time.”

      HE SHOULD RECOVER! Heavens cannot take him before he tells the truth – he wanted to write a book about Michael! FRANK, STAY WITH US!

    • “Vindicate, maybe you should try to contact WordPress about that”.

      Shelly, there might come a time for that, but we haven’t exhausted our own resources yet.

      Dear co-eds, may I ask you not to take away the haters’ comments from the trash? We might need them for proving our point to wordpress hosts. It would also be advisable to make a photo of those texts complete with the email addresses (if you can).

  175. Oh dear, censorship.
    VMJ: For people like you – YESS!

    This is the kind of thing Mike fought against, he wouldn’t be very proud of you at all.
    VMJ: I know he is

    Why the fear? Mike had a lot of love, and you are denying it. How sad for you.
    VMJ: We don’t fear you and don’t need your kind of love

    I’ll ask you the same question – What was the difference between Mike’s behaviour and boylovers’ behaviour?
    VMJ: You say that children are ripe for ADULT love, and Michael prayed to babies’ INNOCENCE as if to God – they were the only heavenly power on earth which supported him in this evil world of yours. Your intentions and his are like black and white.

    Obviously you don’t have an answer and prefer to stick your fingers in your ears and yell “LALALA” at the top of your lungs.
    VMJ: We have all the answers we need. But we don’t want to have anything to do with people like you. This is why you’ve been blocked. Links to your numerous sites were deleted.



      Shouldn’t that be:
      “The attitude of the public towards Michael Jackson’s friendships with boys is so crucial for understanding what happened to Michael that looking into it cannot be put off any longer.
      Please prepare yourself for a top serious discussion.”
      Why ignore the elephant in the room? Scared?

      THIS COMMENT IS TOP IMPORTANT. It may show the reason WHY pedophiles suddenly flooded this blog. This cannot be a mere coincidence.
      They started to be really annoyed by us when David began his series about the haters’ site. But when I touched upon the ‘sacred’ subject of AEG they went completely MAD! The above quote has been taken from my first post about AEG and was adjusted to their means.



  176. @ Leanne

    What do you mean by “boylover” then? This term is usually what those men who are sexually attracted to male children use referring to themselves. Like Anna said there is a BIG difference between love as in a friendship and “love” as in sexual attraction. There is nothing wrong with the former and everything is wrong with the latter. Your attempt to blur the line between the two is rather telling. Also if your brother (though I suspect this “brother” is actually you) just loves children in a friendly, and not sexual way (which in itself would be nothing wrong) then I can’t see why you (or he) associates with p-les by advocating p-lia and by calling himself a “boylover” which is the term p-les and c. molesters use to refer to themselves.

  177. @ Leanne (I will use this name though I know you are male)

    So Michael would be sad to see me asking you a simple question? Wow.

    Since you made the bold claim “it was proven” that Michael was a proud member of your community and even had friends from your community, I’m asking you again to show where and when and how it was proven.

    @ Anna

    Indeed it’s very telling about these people. It seems like the vast majority of these people who still continue to spread lies about Michael are indeed p-les. Just one more reason for me to hate them even more and fight a p-le whenever I see one. These people are indeed the scum of the Earth! They destroy children and they destroyed Michael Jackson.

  178. @Suzy

    Both excellent questions! It doesn’t look like your going to get an answer to either of them which doesn’t surprise me quite frankly.

    Correct me if I’m wrong but why would our detractors be attacking our site by sticking p. supporters on us? They supposedly hate MJ because they believe he was a p. and that he was guilty of allegations. If that’s the case shouldn’t they be hating on these folks too? Instead they team up with them to try and defeat this site? Yes, very telling indeed!

  179. It was proven, however, that he was a proud boylover and identified with the boylover community (and indeed, had friends within the community).

    Where is that “proof”?

  180. @Leanne

    If you’d been around here long enough you’d have seen my comment about all the people I’ve worked with and known who have been inspired by their love for children, childcare workers, a pediatric psychiatrist and religious missionaries, they were inspired the same way Michael was. A platonic love for children that is, so I don’t find it that strange that Michael’s platonic love for children would inspire his greatest works, particular works like “We are the Wolrd” and “Heal the World” etc..

    I don’t know how your choosing to use the term “boylover” but if you using it to say that Michael was p-file or CM than you have come to the wrong site and if you surf through the site you’ll see clear evidence to the contrary.

  181. Ok, now if these haters have indeed posted p. site links here on VindicateMJ which is all about getting the truth of Michael’s innocence to the public & fighting against this filth. They need to be reported so the authorities can track them down. This is down right evil and beyond ridiculous. Time to nip this in the bud & report their IP’s to the FBI.

    • “They need to be reported so the authorities can track them down. This is down right evil and beyond ridiculous. Time to nip this in the bud & report their IP’s to the FBI.’

      Gigi, here are their IP addresses – actually it is one and the same person AGAIN:

      link to site deleted

      link to site deleted

      link to site deleted

      link to site deleted

      link to site deleted

      I have deleted links to the five sites (all were different – so you can imagine how many of them are there!) and the IP was blocked.

  182. @Suzy

    Clearly that’s what happening. They can’t beat us with facts because the facts are on our side so they stick sick p. supporters on us.

    @Leane and your ilk. There is a difference between being a friend to someone and being a lover. Platonic love vs. sexual love….need I say more? If you and your ilk cant see that difference I pity you but we can see the difference so your arguments won’t work.

  183. @ Helena

    I think what happened was that the hater from MJinfo (maybe a p. himself) linked us to p. websites by posting links here to p. websites and now these p. scumbags are invading us with their disgusting and sick p. propaganda.

    • “I think what happened was that the hater from MJinfo (maybe a p. himself) linked us to p. websites by posting links here to p. websites and now these p. scumbags are invading us with their disgusting and sick p. propaganda. “

      Suzy, maybe – which shows who the people behind the MJinfo site are. I’ve deleted all their posts. This is no place for p. propaganda.
      We’ve written so many posts against these people that I hoped they would never have the nerve to show their faces here.

      Michael prayed to children’s INNOCENCE and this is their right for which Michael’s followers should FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL.


  184. @ David,

    That is very good new about Floacist. Maybe some of MJ’s supporters who are currently absent are in the same position as Helena needing uninterrupted time to work on projects, but not fortunate enough to have others to cover their sites and keep things going.

  185. Guys, I hope that my yesterday’s post convinced you that rumors of my leaving the blog are highly exaggerated.

    I never made it a secret that one day would have to go for natural reasons. Haters are so numerous and inventive and the job of Michael’s vindication is so mammoth (because of their never-ending effort to smear him) that now I realize that it will probably take generations to clean Michael’s name of all the dirt they are throwing at him.

    So you should be ready to take over from us one day.

    All I wanted to do at the moment was to refrain from too much everyday discussion and leave it to the other co-eds so that it would be possible for me to focus on AEG.

    The fraudulent way AEG and Tohme forced on Michael absolutely slavery terms is clear even from my first post about them, but it remains to be seen what they wanted to get as a result of this deal.

    This is a very difficult job and I need a lot of time and some privacy to be able to do that.

    However haters are not giving us a moment of quiet. Now they have started creating false email addresses with our names attached to “boychat” groups!

    I hope the behavior of Michael’s haters will tell you more about them than any of our words. If these people have used all their arguments of his alleged “guilt” and are now resorting to such incredible methods it means that they have NOTHING MORE TO SAY.

    Michael was innocent and they are proving it themselves with each coming day.

    Join us in our struggle against this dirt!


      The first three comments I’ve seen today were made by a hater of this blog (and consequently a hater of Michael Jackson) who – attention please – poses as or actually is a boy lover. He posted here three different texts about the benefits of this “love” which I didn’t even take the trouble to read to the end before removing them.

      The most incredible thing about his comments is that he is posting them as “Helena” and “David” (and Elizabeth too), evidently implying that it is me and David who are writing all this filth. In reality it is one and the same person who is pretending to be us.

      To show you who this person really is I have to disclose his IP address (it seems that he is in the UK):




      To say that I am amazed is to say nothing at all.

      If haters have no other arguments against Michael except these dirty tricks than we can probably consider our task fulfilled and the job done. They don’t know what other lies to tell about him and since all their old lies have been refuted Michael is proven innocent.

      If haters are so terribly argumentative, articulate and sound so genuine in speaking in favour of man-boy love we can say now for sure that at least part of all the hatred for Michael is coming from pedophile circles. This might be a quite a revelation for the “usual” type of haters but this is the bitter truth of it.

      The Heavens often choose unusual ways to show what the real truth is….

      Join us in fighting this filth!

  186. My heart goes out to Elzabeth’s family, friends and countless admirers for their loss today. We are all in my thoughts and prayers.
    Michael always felt infinitely blessed to have been a part of her life and she said if it was not for Michael she would have gone insane in this world. I am sure that in her passing he was there to greet her with the laughter and love that they shared when they were together and today heaven is an even more joyous place as they are now there together.

  187. They’re both in Heaven now. :smile: Together again. It’s sad she had to suffer from so many illnesses during her life span, but she’s now free.

    Rest in peace Elizabeth and Michael.

  188. I took this from a forum:

    “BTW Today Show just mentioned Elizabeth’s friendship with Michael. Editor for People magazine said that when Michael’s problems / accusations started people told Elizabeth to not associate with /distance herself from Michael and that she refused. Al Rooker mentioned a quote from Elizabeth “you learn who your real friends are when there’s a scandal” and mentioned Elizabeth’s loyalty.”

  189. I would like to Thank all of the people who contribute information on Michael here. It is very refreshing to hear all of the positive things that Michael did in his lifetime as well as all the wonderful things He stood for and tried so hard to accomplish. Its nice to have a place that is dedicated to His Memory as well as His Legacy as an Artist.

    True, Michael was not Christ. But he was Christ-like in every part of his being. His message to the world was a simple one – LOVE. He expressed it in words, by acts, and through his music and dance. He cared deeply for the human race as a whole, for the planet itself, for all of wildlife, and everything else. He was a humble, God fearing person who desperately in vain to change the world and the people in it for the better.

    But there are far too many haters out there – who prefer to dwell on the negative things that happened to him and believe these things to be true. They do not bother to read or investigate the truth of these things to see how innocent he truly was, and how trusting he was of all the wrong people near him. What a shame, that they are so foolish as not to learn the truth.

  190. Helena said:

    “Gigi, this is simply unheard of! If they are going to be that good in their job at the trial I am growing terribly apprehensive of it!”

    Join the club. It was after I learned there was no real effort to track Murray down during the missing 1 1/2 – 2 days and that they delayed closing the house even after it was reported there were suspicious about his death and the fact they had a witness who had to get his attorney involved to “make an appointment” that apprehension set in and thoughts of people not wiling to get justice for Michael began grow. We had a group of MJ Supporters on another site that was in contact with one of the Detectives or his boss. They continuously told us that they were hard at work and that they would not allow the name Michael Jackson to prejudice their actions or investigation. Kept us “pacified” with information that upon reflection looks different now that what was given.

  191. No wonder a greater percentage of Japanese and Chinese believe in Michael’s innocence than any other group. Their calm and rational thought and civilized behavior speaks volumes. No riots, no pillaging of abandon homes, no hoarding of survival supplies, no selfish and greedy politicians acting in a manner that is contrary to good order of the country, and the safety of all their people and no Japanese Media using fear tactics exploiting the personal deviation of others for air time. Would that just observing Japan and its people was enough for the rest of us.

    • “No wonder a greater percentage of Japanese and Chinese believe in Michael’s innocence than any other group. Their calm and rational thought and civilized behavior speaks volumes. Would that just observing Japan and its people was enough for the rest of us.”

      Yes, Dial, the way the Japanese people are handling this triple earthquake-tsunami-nuclear tragedy inspires the deepest possible respect for them. While they are struggling with it in such a noble way it seems that the rest of us are just being taught a great lesson to learn from them.

  192. Hello everyone. I hope this isn’t being out of place in me asking this, but happened to the Allforloveblog? It hasn’t been up for quite lengthy amount of time.
    Anyway Ideas?

    • @ Ares
      Do you mean this blog? http://edgymatters.blogspot.com/

      Unfortunately, I don’t know who the creator is, and he/she hasn’t updated since August 2005, so I don’t think they’ll ever update it again. But it’s an EXCELLENT blog that accurately reports what happened before, during, and after the trial, and everyone should read through it whenever they get the chance!

  193. I’m just going to post something things in this post that I found out today via twitter.

    1. Jermaine posted today that he is writing his memoirs about his brother Michael. (I’m hmming that one)

    2. The surveillance footage from MJ’s LA home has been ‘deleted’ http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/story/michael-jackson-surveillance-footage-deleted_1207585

    I find it strange that LAPD only copyied 4 minutes of the surveillance footage. Why stop copying after 4 minutes? I mean they had the tapes why not copy all the footage before handing them back? smh

    • “The surveillance footage from MJ’s LA home has been ‘deleted’ http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/story/michael-jackson-surveillance-footage-deleted_1207585
      I find it strange that LAPD only copyied 4 minutes of the surveillance footage. Why stop copying after 4 minutes? I mean they had the tapes why not copy all the footage before handing them back?”

      Gigi, this is simply unheard of! If they are going to be that good in their job at the trial I am growing terribly apprehensive of it!

      This is the story of their incredible negligence from the above link:

      Michael Jackson – Michael Jackson Surveillance Footage ‘Deleted’16 March 2011 12:17

      Surveillance footage from Michael Jackson’s home on the day he died has reportedly been lost forever after police officers allegedly failed to make a full copy.
      The pop superstar passed away on 25 June, 2009 after suffering a drug overdose and his personal doctor, Conrad Murray, is facing trial over allegations he administered the fatal dose of Propofol.
      Murray, who has denied a charge of involuntary manslaughter, will face the courts in May (11) and his legal team is reportedly set to ask officers from the Los Angeles Police Department (Lapd) to hand over 24 hours of surveillance footage from Jackson’s home covering the day he died.
      Shortly after the King of Pop’s passing, cops were said to be desperately searching for the Cctv tapes from Jackson’s Los Angeles mansion which could provide clues as to what happened on the day he died, but a new report suggests the film will never be found.

  194. I have been watching the news and i am now begining to catch up with the latest information. If someone here is or lives in the areas that were striked from the earthquake and the tsunami, i hope you are all ok. Our thoughts are with you

    • “I have been watching the news and i am now begining to catch up with the latest information. If someone here is or lives in the areas that were striked from the earthquake and the tsunami, i hope you are all ok. Our thoughts are with you”

      Guys, frankly it is difficult to speak of anything else when pictures of so much devastation are being shown from Japan. It is incredible that the powers of the Earth can throw us into a stone age within minutes – with no houses, roads, electricity or clean water. It all looks like the scenes of war. And the Japanese people are so stoic, so calm and so polite to each other even in a state of shock they are in now – they bow when they receive food as humanitarian aid. This nation will surely pull through but the moment is truly a tragic one. If there are any Japanese people here — our hearts are with you.

    • I might have surprised you by saying that all of us are to blame for what happened to Japan. Water memorizes all our aggression, hate and injustice to others and then throws it at those who are most vulnerable because they are in the middle of the ocean.

      Here is the proof of it – it is a video about what our thoughts can do to water. If thoughts are that powerful imagine what our words can do to the world:

      For more about a Japanese researcher Masaru Emoto and his findings please go to:



    • Apparently that Party monstrosity is going to be aired again. For more information http://www.mj-777.com/?p=7490. Michael can not win with the media after all. They have decided that that is they way in which people should remember him. Very disappointing

      Visitor, it is not only disappoining but it is also a call for our immediate action now! Peretti’s film is to be aired on March 2, 2011 and that leaves us no time at all.

      We have very many urgent issues at the moment – like Hann and Katherine, Murray, AEG, etc. – but Peretti’s film is on the top of this urgency list.

      What is clear is that haters are preparing the public for Dr. Murray’s trial and are planning to use the interest in the trial to their own means – to refresh all those lies about Michael in people’s memory and carve them in stone.

      Though their and our forces are totally unequal it would be a complete shame if we didn’t try to hamper them in their efforts.

      One of the ways to fight the film is to show the true face of those who contributed to its making – Diane Dimond and her best source VICTOR GUTIERREZ. Of couse very little work has been done in respect of Victor Gutierrez yet but we need to disclose whatever we’ve found to everyone.

      The two things we’ve found about him is that he is a pathological liar (for sure) and that he is most probably a pedophile himself (there are very many facts speaking to that).

      If the general public learns that Diane Dimond’s BEST source is a pedophile, it will be a very powerful weapon against both of them.

      Due to my present circumstances I will be able to attend to this problem only late in the evening here (in 6 hours or so) and will try to make a post collecting everything we’ve learned about VG by now – the information which should be spread immediately among Michael’s supporters.

      In the meantime please look up everything we have on Victor Gutierrez (there might be more as I could have ommitted something):

      *****First about Peretti’s film, Victor Gutierrez and their lies:



      *****Victor Gutierrez and his links with NAMBLA:


      *****The important information about Gutierrez which is found in the comments on those articles:

      October 12, 2010 6:39 am

      Of course VG working for the LAPD as an undercover in 1986 is an obvious lie. Why would the LAPD hire a no-name journalist, who just came to the US, for that job instead of sending one of their detectives? And like you said, Lynette, why wouldn’t there be arrests then? Victor was there, but because he is one of them. I’m sure of that from the way he is advocating p-lia when he talks in that Tageszeitung interview! And as a p. himself – or at least an obvious sympathizer – why would he go undercover for the police against his friends?

      October 13, 2010 5:28 pm

      Lynette, the post is great and the material is mind blowing. You’ve already discussed it so I would like to add just a couple of observations.
      That note about Victor Gutierrez helping Bashir with the documentary is completely sensational. It makes it all the more clear that Bashir’s film was a well planned provocation. It seems we should add to the Veritas scheme picturing the main players a lot more characters from this article including VG/Bashir’s link and all those ‘source maids’.
      I see no reason why we shouldn’t believe that VG-Bashir connection existed. Haters tend not to disclose materials which may be detrimental to themselves so if they published it they evidently couldn’t resist a little bragging about how thorough their investigation was so that their ‘best source’ was working on the documentary side by side with Bashir.
      However sometimes they get entangled in their own lies. What about this sentence that Gutierrez first went undercover with the LAPD? Am I correct in understanding that they mean to say that Gutierrez was sent by the police to a certain secret organization (evidently NAMBLA as they discussed MJ there) and continued his investigation all this time being on a mission from the police?
      But if it was a police mission why didn’t they take any action when Gutierrez sent them his book as a result of his investigation? It was a kind of a report of what he had found, wasn’t it? Then why does Gutierrez say that they didn’t pay attention to it as “he was a nobody. Just a Latino reporter”?

      So he was a nobody to the LAPD or was he on their mission? Which way is it?

      Another phrase which attracted my attention is that “unlike Jordan’s diary he couldn’t prove the existence of the video”. Sorry, but where is the proof that this diary ever existed?
      If it had it should have been provided to the police and judging by the things said about it the diary would have become the main incriminating evidence in both the Chandlers and Arvizo cases. They should have presented it to the Grand jury back in 1993/94 and would have surely obtained an indictment if it had been true and it should have been introduced into the 2005 trial on the very first day of it which would have immediately ended the trial with a guilty verdict without any further effort from the prosecution.
      So what I see about Gutierrez is that he is whistling his lies even without trying to introduce some links between them so that each lie is more or less credible when taken separately however when you put them together the whole story immediately falls into pieces.

      October 13, 2010 6:31 pm

      @ Helena
      VG obviously lies about why he was at that NAMBLA conference. It’s proven by the fact he changes his story about that. In the Tageszeitung they say he was sent by the newspaper he worked for. Or to be more precise they write this: “He quickly finds a job at a Spanish newspaper in L.A., he becomes police reporter (ie. a criminal reporter for the paper, not someone who works for the police, otherwise they would say he worked for the police. In this article however they don’t say he worked for the police.) In 1986 he reports from a congress of NAMBLA.”
      In GQ he claims he was sent by the LAPD. In the Tageszeitung it isn’t even mentioned.
      So which one is true? It’s clear he is not honest about that (among many things) and BTW both of his stories are BS.
      Like you pointed out with the help of this (http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20050217-2208-manboy-daily.html) article NAMBLA doesn’t welcome journalists to report from their congresses. And the GQ story is even more ridiculous. Why would the police send a no-name journalist to spy on NAMBLA? The police does such actions with their own, trained people, not with outsiders! (I have just seen a documentary the other day about how a detective went undercover within a motorcycle gang called “The Mongols”.) And obviously from his Tageszeitung interview VG has a big sympathy towards NAMBLA and the p. “case” so he would never spy on them for the police. The reason why he lies about why he was there is obvious: because he was there as a member. It’s not only clear from his lies, but also from the way he talks about “man-boy relationships” either in his book or in the Tageszeitung article and elsewhere.

      October 13, 2010 8:04 pm

      Suzy, I agree. The point you are making about why both of the versions are lies is hitting it on the nail. The only thing I noticed is that he is contradicting himself even within one and the same article – starting with one thing and finishing with another, but I completely overlooked the REASON for all his irregular movements and theories.
      And the reason is that he is trying to offer us this and that to explain why he was at that NAMBLA congress. He can’t admit that he was (or is) a member of it and is therefore freely experimenting with all these versions knowing that no one will ever compare them with what he said before.
      So what do we have here?
      1) the version of reporting a p. congress for a newspaper is no good as there is top secrecy around such conferences and no journalists are allowed there.
      The only information known is the city where they assemble. The venue is not disclosed to attendees until the last moment. Even if a journalist manages to overcome these barriers he will be able to see only the surface of what they show to the world. And on the surface they are a like a “trade conference” or scientific congress discussing “relationship between generations” – misunderstandings between father and son, problems of upbringing children and other innocent issues.
      But real talk begins when they break up into groups or dine together where they know each other personally.
      2) The version of being there undercover from the LAPD is no good either as up till now only professional detectives have been able to infiltrate the organization.
      Detectives say that “It’s just a well-run little organization,” “There is never anyone here who can take your calls,” and “the group discourages establishing local chapters to avoid police infiltration.”
      Source: http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20050217-2208-manboy-daily.html

      There is no doubt that Victor Gutierrez could not have gone there under cover as he himself sadly admits that he is not someone special for the police – on the contrary, they didn’t even pay attention to his book because he is “nobody” and is just “a Latino reporter” to them.

      So in what other capacity could Victor Gutierrez attend such a congress?
      Only as a member of it.

      P.S. And the book he has written about Michael is full of so many little “details” which can be known only to the insider of p-lia circles and are actually telling the tale about Victor Gutierrez, not MJ.

      *****Victor Gutierrez telling lies about Evan’s diary:

      *****Victor Gutierrez telling various lies about Michael in his book allegedly based on Jordan’s diary (yes, he lied that there were TWO diaries – Evan’s and Jordan’s, while in fact there were none):




      *****Information about Victor Gutierrez going after Michael well before any allegations started:

      * * *
      Bringing all this together is quite a job as you understand, so I don’t promise the summary post today, but whatever each Michael’s supporter finds in those links should be immediately acted upon and probably sent to http://www.mj-777.com/?p=7490 who discovered the news about reairing Peretti’s film first.

      All Michael’s supporters – please help. It is time for action now.

      Even if we don’t stop the film we should make them feel sorry they ever decided to bring Victor Gutierrez into the limelight again!

  195. I thought this particular article had once been posted on Vindicating Michael.

    Perhaps this will give some a better understanding of why they they cannot equate their finances and money management with Michael’s nor any truly wealthy businessman.

    Article Link: http://ezinearticles.com/?Michael-Jackson—Money,-Myth-and-the-Mainstream-Media&id=2779807

    I posted this in Dec 2010 at another site:

    This is what we and Larry Carter are talking about.

    Sony/ATV purchases Viacom Music (Famous Music) Check out two things.
    (1) They do not admit the purchase was Michael’s idea.
    (2) The last paragraph of the article:

    “Through its Extreme division, Famous Music also supplies recordings and musical compositions for use in television
    and radio advertisements, film and television productions, trailers, and major network and cable broadcast promos”

    Nicely Reported:

    Had to take a slap and tell a little lie:

    I begun to understand just how common and petty minded the Media were when it came to Michael.

    Prior to Eminem’s insult in his song Michael had been in tense negotiation with Sony over purchasing music of which Eminem’s was just one part of. The Sony Execs he was dealing with did not think the catalog would be profitable. Because of stray comments on the Execs part many articles about MJ being petulant and spending beyond his means on trinkets began to reappear. And so the legend that MJ purchased Eminem’s music just to get back at him was born. Now think about that one from a financial standpoint for MJ and for Eminem….did either lose or did both win? Did Michael remember the insult at the time of closing I am sure he did, I would have laughing all the way to the bank.

  196. I read somewhere in 2009 about the second catalogue. Ironically Eminem is one of the artist. I have never read anything official from the estate regarding it.

    • “I read somewhere in 2009 about the second catalogue. Ironically Eminem is one of the artist. I have never read anything official from the estate regarding it.”

      Teva, if the estate doesn’t talk about it officially, so much the better. Let it be Michael Jackson’s little secret for a time being.

  197. Helena, I am fascinated by that – that he bought another catalogue. I just have had a sneaking suspicion for a long time that he owns a load more than anyone knows about, around the world. and i read something a few days ago, i just cannot remember where it was now – was it even here?? – that he went to Australia once to open a shopping mall that he owned. does anyone know where this is and if he still owns it? oh, i’m sorry, i just can’t remember where i read it, it may come to me.

    • “I am fascinated by that – that he bought another catalogue”.

      Alison, yes, I’ve known about it for some time – since that article was published – and it was a very comforting thing to learn. However I am praying that everything goes well with it, and didn’t want to speak about it too soon. Let us take this news calmly at the moment.

    • @ Shelly & Suzy
      Raven is fine! She had a power outage at her home, and since her blog is saved on her personal server, she can’t update it until power is restored. But she’ll be back soon!

  198. Helena,

    Was the purchase you spoke of to Despina the Viacom music catalogue? I have that article, but am always on the look out for more which debunks the spendthrift propaganda.

    • “Was the purchase you spoke of to Despina the Viacom music catalogue? “

      I don’t know the name of that catalogue, but the article I’m referring to is this:

      The most interesting thing to his article is a comment made by some “John” who is evidently very much in the know and who tells as a sensational thing (I keep my fingers crossed that it works out all right):

      “I have great fascination for Michael Jackson when it comes to his business side. Im glad you brought up this topic because very few people know that the debt you mentioned is actually a BUSINESS LOAN which he made ($300 million USD) in order to purchase a 2nd, much modern music catalog in 2006-2007. This is not extraordinary when you have assets worth 1 billion and above, Donald Trump has more loans than he does. Based on the terms of the loan with Bank of America, that loan is being paid for MONTHLY for a span of 6 years, and he did it by funnelling the earnings of the NEW catalog he bought to pay for the loan itself. If you realize what he is doing, that is another genius move he adopted from his great businessmen friends– taking advantage of LEVERAGE. Acquiring something without letting out a single centavo of your own money.

      I believe that unlike MANY or probably the REST of the business people in the world, he is not driven by money. This is what made him successful in everything he ever did. Rather, he uses money to help others rather than to keep it for himself which explains why his entire $200+ Million earnings for the Dangerous Tour WENT TO CHARITY. Thats 70+ concerts in jampacked stadiums in the world which he performed with blood, sweat and tears absolutely FREE because all earnings went to charity. Same with his Victory Tour earnings- countless hours of hardwork he did for FREE to help others making up his total charitable contributions to $350 Million USD- the largest ever for an entertainer in History. I dont see anyone else doing that kind of hardwork for FREE, only Michael does that.

      The ATV catalog is much more than Beatles songs, its thousands and thousands of songs that were popular in the 50s, 60s 70s and 80s. Add the 2nd modern catalog and you have virtually EVERYONE who is ANYONE in the music industry right now: Taylor Swift, Eminem, Beyonce, Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber songs which his estate is profiting from right now. He doesnt even need to release new music because he earns from virtually everyone in the TOP 10 of billboard artists year after year. He bought this 2nd catalog WAY BEFORE these names became famous which means he had perfect unbeatable foresight. No business tycoon can match when it comes to the music business, Michael Jackson KNOWS IT ALL when it comes to music and entertainment: What the public likes, what the public dont like, even what the public dont know they like which they eventually LOVE — HE KNOWS.

      His shy demeanor is just a facade of a tiger businessman inside. He rarely speaks but he ALWAYS listens and observes and absorbs. Many of us will be more successful in life if we study his life and his approach on things and how he did things, whether with his own art or in the business side of things. Its very easy to believe tabloid stuff about his finances but isnt it funny that tabloids have been reporting him bankrupt since 2000 YET you can never find Michael Jackson with an IRS issue–NONE. Think about all the other celebrities who went bankrupt and one common denominator is IRS debts they all had. Everyone has been reporting he will be selling his ATV share since 2000 but he died already and when billionaires and media moguls lined up to offer billions to purchase his 50% stake, his own Estate DECLINED them all.

      Michael Jackson’s only weakness is not spending or shopping, its TREATING everyone better than they deserve. This is why he became a target for leeches and scums.”

  199. @Despina
    -Since i was one of those who responded to your comment, I would like to apologize to you if i offended you in any way ,because you really seem hurt and angered. Yes, there are more important things than buying a Michael Jackson cd, yes it is your right not to buy it and yes it’s not always about being number one.
    -I personally didn’t have a problem with those who didn’t want to buy the cd.It was their right after all. I had a problem with those who would resort to stupid, childish, and often unethical means to persuade the others not to buy the damn thing. I got ungry ,i exaggerated and for that i am sorry. One other reason was that i really though that this album was going to be a great chance for people to focus on MJ’s music again and i hoped that this would help his legacy a bit. I thought that people would focus on the good side of this man and on the many things that he had done to help the others.
    -Again, if i offended you, i apogolize. I shouldn’t have reacted that way. I was cought in the moment and i overdid it. But i would like you to know something else also. MJ is not the only thing in my life that i am interested in. I am a person involved in organizations that have to do with human rights and helping people/countries in need. I can not tolerate the injustice and that’s why i am here. Because i feel that something wrong was done to this man and it needs to be restored.

  200. I deliberately stayed out of all this ‘cuz intuitively I knew what was going to happen.I know your motives.They are all good.I’m sure u are good people and u love MJ for all the right reasons.But people….you are aggressive, and get mean…You are rigid….U don’t listen…You characterize…You wanna hurt ‘cuz u hurt….This is just mean….and wrong….U’ve talked about people who sabotage MJ’s new album.What’s that got to do with me?I loved it!!!!there are people that will go and buy his new album, and people that will “steal”it from Torrents.So?U want them dead?It’s their decision!I’m sure they have their reasons.
    Let’s talk about me….
    I CAN’T buy his album.U wanna know why?”Cuz i can’t even buy electricity.My country has gone recently to Global Bank.I’m almost unemployed.Pensions and salaries are cut down, taxes are doubled.I go to the grocery’s and restrict to the basics.I’m not hungry yet, but I know people that are. |There are strikes everywhere.No doctors, no pharmacies, no transportation means.75% of the young generation wants to travel abroad.|People commit suicide ‘cuz of their debts.Everything’s is stopped.Life is stopped.We’re poor and miserable and hopeless.
    And all u go on and on is whether we’ll buy the cd and make Michael number one forever.So don’t u know Michael by know?Don’t u know his heart would break?HE CARED FOR US!!!!For our well being, not his sales!!!
    First of all, u do your homework!!!!I made mine.Michael’s debts which were not under any public eye seen under law, are doing ok.His kids will be just fine, not starve, Michael was well aware of that.SO STOP PATRONIZING PEOPLE ABOUT HIS KIDS GOING HUNGRY!!!!!JESUS!!!!
    As for Sony….Who are u kidding?Michael wasn’t at some kind of war only with Motolla.He hated Sony ‘cuz they never treated black artists good and that’s final!!!And what’s more, they NEVER TREATED ANY ARTIST WITH JUSTICE TOO!It is called a “multi-national company” and we know how they treat people.OR NOT?DISAGREE GUYS???????
    It’s a shame actually….i expected more from u…
    But you’re so fanatic….So blind….You don’t have words like”understand”, “sorry”, e.t.c. in your vocabulary…U’re aggressive and attack…U twist around what people say….so for the last time, although I know u….
    ANYTHING that Michael has ever produced as a sound, it’s MAGNIFICENT!!!!!!U get that or u want it translated into an evil language?M A G N I F I C E N T !!!!!!!!!!So I’m not boycotting anything….O.K.??????????Whether I buy it or not (or i’m able to buy it), it’s my own freaking business, u got this?I won’t let u judge me whether i love Michael or not if I do or not buy it officially u got that?U’re not to tell!!!!!!
    And if ANYBODY goes under a false ID and name and occupation in FB while working for Sony should be thrown out ‘cuz IT’S A FRAUD!!!!!!!!Got that?but of course u don’t.
    U only care about MJ going number one for liiiiiiiiiife!!!!!!!!!!!
    Anything else doesn’t matter….
    I think Michael would laugh….or cry….

    • “You wanna hurt ‘cuz u hurt….This is just mean….and wrong….U’ve talked about people who sabotage MJ’s new album.What’s that got to do with me?I loved it!!”

      Despina, can you please explain what you mean by your message? Who “wanna hurt ‘cuz u hurt”? And why does all of the above have to do with you?

      “there are people that will go and buy his new album, and people that will “steal”it from Torrents.So?U want them dead?’

      Who told you someone wants you or them dead? You are gravely misinformed, my dear. As to me I want everyone alive, please.

      “I CAN’T buy his album.U wanna know why?”Cuz i can’t even buy electricity.”

      I am sorry to hear that, I hope the situation in your home and your country will quickly improve. There is nothing bad in your loading the album from the internet in the circumstances, if you want to listen to it.

      Michael’s debts which were not under any public eye seen under law, are doing ok.His kids will be just fine, not starve, Michael was well aware of that.SO STOP PATRONIZING PEOPLE ABOUT HIS KIDS GOING HUNGRY!!!!!JESUS!!!!

      Michael’s kids are not going hungry and are well taken care of. Michael’s loan from the Bank of America was a major concern for me but recently I’ve come across a great article which explains that the loan Michael took from the Bank was for making a purchase of a century and now the profit of it is going to repay the loan itself. This is a brilliant business deal which speaks to Michael’s business acumen and talent – which I never doubted – so my worry over how the loan is to be repaid to the Bank of America has subsided a little. However let us not speak of it too soon – I am keeping my fingers crossed so that everything goes well as planned.

      “hated Sony ‘cuz they never treated black artists good and that’s final!!!It is called a “multi-national company” and we know how they treat people.”

      I am afraid the company AEG doesn’t treat black artists better judging by the contracts they sign with them. And the AEG of 2009 is much closer to the events described than the Sony of 2002.

      You don’t have words like”understand”, “sorry”, e.t.c. in your vocabulary…U’re aggressive and attack…U twist around what people say….so for the last time, although I know u….

      Dear me, are you sure you haven’t mistaken me for someone else? Where did you get the address of this site? Go to them and tell them they should stop playing practical jokes on people.

      ANYTHING that Michael has ever produced as a sound, it’s MAGNIFICENT!!!!!!U get that or u want it translated into an evil language?

      No, you needn’t translate it into an evil language. I understand that Michael’s sound is magnificent without any translations.

      And if ANYBODY goes under a false ID and name and occupation in FB while working for Sony should be thrown out ‘cuz IT’S A FRAUD!!!!!!!!Got that?but of course u don’t.

      However the above will need some explanation. Who goes under a false ID, name and occupation? Someone pretending to be me or what? And who is working for Sony? If you think it is me I am afraid someone misinformed you again – however could you put in a word for me if I send them my resume? In the best of your language of course, please, as you seem to be thinking that I am doing a great job for them?

      I think Michael would laugh….or cry….

      I FULLY AGREE. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry either…

  201. Helena

    So glad to you’re getting better! We have been worried about you. It sounded like a very serious and painful injury. You just take your time getting well! Much love to you always!

  202. Message to Helena,
    Glad you’re getting better Helena, I was wondering how you were and was gonna ask if anyone had heard from you. Don’t rush it though, give yourself the time you need, its easy to think you are better when you aren’t quite.

  203. Dear friends,

    I am getting better.
    I hear that Lynette has not made her post yet and is somewhat out of reach. I hope that at least she is well and Maureen Orth with all her voodoo tricks does not have anything to do with it.

    Let us pray for each other. It seems that we need it.
    Hugs, Helena

  204. I’m very proud to be Michael Jackson’s defender for many years since I was 10 years old,loved the man,his music,his kindness and of course I respect his humanitarian efforts to the world.

    I love this blog,and I hope to participate the discussion of Jackson’s allegations and the stupid trial that it shouldnt went to court in the first place.

  205. Hey Dialdancer

    I remember that day well! I made sure to open and examine all the files myself as soon as they came out. After I made my analysis at the forums I was visiting at the time, I went to go make comments at articles reporting the contents. I knew first hand that there was nothing there in those files, but imagine my shock (well not really) when severel media outlets completely distorted the contents. I was ofcourse was one of many fans and supporters out there in the comments sections commenting to article about their innaccuracy. To my delight one of the really inaccurate articles got so some many people commenting on it’s bias and inaccuracy that it was taken down. It was an article at ABC.com had been taken down and replaced with a less innaccurate article by the afternoon.

    The nice thing about the release of the files was that they were open to the public, so anyone could go and read the files for themselves and see the media in their spin action first hand.

  206. Time does fly by. Wednesday was the anniversary of the release of Michael’s FBI Files.
    I can still hear the sound of brokenhearted haters.

  207. And while we are fighting about the cd ,Jacques Peretti has made an other documentary wich is going to be aired during the holiday season. You know what that means huh?

    • “And while we are fighting about the cd ,Jacques Peretti has made an other documentary wich is going to be aired during the holiday season. You know what that means huh?”

      Yes, I can guess what they are up to. We can of course boycott Jacques Peretti in advance – just on the strength of what we know about his heroic past, but we can do much better than that – we can unite over paying Michael’s catalog and the news of us collecting millions can be much more impressive than any of their petty stories.

      Show them the example like the one Chile showed the world with saving their miners and all the haters’ news will go pale in comparison with it.

      Let me make myself clear – it isn’t the cd I am fighting for (though it is not that bad) – I am fighting for Michael’s right to retain his catalog.

      I did hope very much that the cd could help raise the money for it and pay out the debt so that the catalog were secure – but since the fans are not buying the album they should do at least SOMETHING for Michael.
      If Michael’s supporters really want to repay him the love and respect he was so lavishly pouring on his fans for so many years it is high time we showed it by our deeds and not words.

      Repaying the catalog for Michael is impossible for a group of people – but IT IS POSSIBLE for the world of us – if each of us gave just a little share of himself to Michael. For the man who spent almost half a billion on the outside world it would be a worthy reward if the world repaid him just a little of what he gave us.

      Make this catalog a present for Michael and with news like that all these Perettis will be virtually unnoticed because Michael’s fans will simply outshine them.

      And as to protesting Sony this will be a much more impressive thing to do than any boycott – now the fans’ refusal to buy “Michael” looks like their unwillingness to support him but if they pay the same $8.99 directly for his catalog the impression will be the opposite. This way Sony will be really punished as they will not be able to lay their hands on Michael’s catalog and Michael’s dream will come true THANKS TO HIS FANS.

    • @ Gigi and Helena
      This is a tweet from Karen Faye. This is her rationalization for boycotting the album and Sony, and she’s just as passionate as PYTHuyla. Reading those 2 tweets gives you both sides of the issue, and Helena it will give you a perspective of how the boycotters think. Karen seems to take it personal, since she was MJ’s friend for many years.

      Can’t we all just get along? LOL!


    • “This is a tweet from Karen Faye. This is her rationalization for boycotting the album and Sony. Karen seems to take it personal, since she was MJ’s friend for many years.”

      I’ve read it. She is being emotional there, but exactly because of the emotions involved she is unable to separate one thing from another – Michael’s feud with Sony from the need to retain his catalog which was Michael’s equally passionate desire.

      If today we had a chance to ask Michael what would be more important to him – retain the catalog or release some of his songs in order to help the catalog – even if it is done by Sony – I am sure what decision Michael would take. He would support the songs. The only difference is that he would have made it brilliantly, not the good way it was done here.

      At a time he was feuding with Sony he DIDN’T know that some 9 years later he would have a need to pay that big money back. And since he was a businessman besides being an artist I don’t doubt he would take all the necessary steps to save the catalog.

      Karen Faye is a nice woman and is a true friend to Michael, but she is overlooking this aspect altogether. I wish she could suggest how to save the catalog instead.

      If people don’t buy the album due to Karen Faye’s opinion I can’t do anything about it and can’t insist on the people buying it – but what I ABSOLUTELY insist on is that they offer an alternative and find ANOTHER way to pay out the debt. This by the way refers to Karen Faye as well.

      Michael’s lifelong wish to keep the catalog for his children should be realized and EQUALLY respected.

      P.S. David, dear, please do move on, you see that I simply CAN’T.

    • David, do you happen to know:


      Solely for the catalog?

      All those who didn’t buy the album (and those who bought it) could send their money to it. Several million fans multiplied by whatever they give out could make quite a sum.

    • @ Helena
      It’s funny you mentioned that! Here is a thread from a fan forum with advice on how to support the family while “boycotting” Sony:

      Worried about Katherine and the kids? Send them a cheque for $1.61 instead of buying the album.

      CD retail price = $8.99.

      Michael’s royalty rate is 20% (assuming Branca didn’t screw him), so 20% x $8.99 = $1.79.

      Branca takes 10% of that, so the remainder of $1.79 – 10% = $1.61.

      So if you want to support the children, send them a cheque for US$1.61 and give the rest to charity, not to $ony. You will still be supporting Michael’s family and charities without paying Sony to hurt him.

      Obviously the person who wrote that was being sarcastic, but you get the idea!


    • “Obviously the person who wrote that was being sarcastic, but you get the idea!”

      David, yes, the idea is in the air. Even my mother’s immediate reaction was – why don’t you send the money to Michael’s kids for the catalog if it was so important to Michael?

      I am DEAD SERIOUS about it. I am ready to remit much more than $1.61 or even $1.79.

      It would be a much more effective way to show that we stand by Michael, but don’t stand by Sony.

      Now I’ve read the comments further and found out that the idea belongs to blogger Seven. She spoke of sending out the percentage only, while my view is that the full sum (or more) should be sent out. And not for Katherine but for the catalog so that a soft-hearted woman like her could not spend the money on her other children, Joe Jackson or other purposes.

      Some of those comments say that Michael’s children are not beggars and don’t need charity. It is a totally wrong and biased point of view – they won’t be beggars even if the catalog is lost. But the catalog was a matter of principle for Michael. He could have sold it long ago and wouldn’t have needed any loans – but he preferred to take a loan and keep the catalog instead which shows how important it was for him and how much he didn’t want to be humiliated by the need to sell it back.

      If it was a matter of principle for Michael it should be a matter of principle for his supporters. What’s the worth of all our “love” for him if we can’t spend extra $10 on the man who gave away millions and ALL his love to others?

      Add to it that it will also show both Sony and the whole world that Michael’s fans have not turned their back on him, and are ready to do for him much more than anyone could expect. Just think of what a present we could make to Michael if we helped him to retain it! It can even reunite the fans back and leave the world in awe for Michael’s supporters.

      In short can anyone contact the family or Branca and tell them to open an account FOR THE CATALOG?

    • @ Helena
      I think if you email Seven, she’ll be able to find someone who has contacts with the estate. Either Seven, or perhaps Catherine Coy. They are both included on the emails that I have sent you recently. Catherine is pro-MJ and bought the album (and enjoys all 10 songs!), while Seven is staunchly anti-Sony, but they both agree that keeping the catalogue is paramount, so you can use that as a uniting force to bring fans together!

    • “if you email Seven, she’ll be able to find someone who has contacts with the estate. Either Seven, or perhaps Catherine Coy. They are both included on the emails that I have sent you recently. Catherine is pro-MJ and bought the album (and enjoys all 10 songs!), while Seven is staunchly anti-Sony, but they both agree that keeping the catalogue is paramount, so you can use that as a uniting force to bring fans together!”

      I WILL. Now I am at my workplace (trying to work). Can I ask you to write them first if you have a chance now? I’ll back up up a little later when I am through with the most urgent things.

      I’ve even thought that we could probably ask someone like Thomas Mesereau or someone whom he advises to be a guarantor of the funds – so that they are not used for anything else, but the catalog. Probably these people could do it pro bono?

  208. I think I will chime in on this convo the last 4 commentors talked about.
    @Ares Pathetic is being very polite. I read a blog back in April mocking fans who are buying the new album and there worries on MJ’s legacy. This person obviously already made there mind up correct.
    Well I went to there site and guesss what they have been bashing the album left right and centre.
    If u have already chosen to boycott Sony back in April why are u even listening to the new material? Let alone commenting on it. All Boycott groups are completely one sided and biased against estate and Sony and haven’t even considered their wrong which annoys me the most as for researchers they seem very closed minded.

    I will call it as it is. The Michael Jackson boycott. If u boycott Sony u could stand outside Sony anytime not only the day Mj’s album is released. How ignorant people are to say this only makes money for Sony.
    Obviously have no understanding of business.

    • “I will call it as it is. The Michael Jackson boycott. If u boycott Sony u could stand outside Sony anytime not only the day Mj’s album is released. How ignorant people are to say this only makes money for Sony. Obviously have no understanding of business.”

      Chris, my hugs to you. Absolutely!

      IT IS THE MICHAEL JACKSON BOYCOTT – which is a full equivalent to a haters’ position. How is it possible for a Michael Jackson supporter to respect a hater’s position? They are asking for the impossible.

      If haters who masquerade as well-wishers managed to fool Michael’s fans, relatives and friends in this relatively simple matter I despair at the thought what they will do to them when it comes to serious matters like Murrey’s trial and handling that “drug” business.

  209. @ares

    “Lastly ,If someone of those who are boycotting all the future or previous projects of MJ has a solution on how we can perpetuate MJ’s legacy without supporting his music,then i am willing to listen. But until then i am going to disagree with their desicion. That’s all”

    I totally agree with this statement. I too will respect the boycotters for their decision but I don’t agree with it and your statement is just one of the reasons why. I’ve come to recognize that they are acting on a different set of priorities that those of us supporting the album and other projects are. I try my best to understand it even if I don’t agree with it. I have already posted my main reason for wanting to album to do well at TIME TO CELEBRATE MICHAEL (but in all honesty there are several reasons).

  210. @Despina
    I have always said in my comments that everyone are entitled to their opinion and of course is their right not to buy the cd. What i have said for the boycotters is that i find very disguisting the methods that some of them are using. They don’t want to buy the album, fine don’t buy it. But leaving bad comments and bad reviews under the album, is just pathetic. Messing with people’s feeling in order to influence them not to buy the cd is just pathetic. Presenting only one side of the story for the same reason is again pathetic.And to tell you the truth i find it a bit hyporctitical for some of them to attack at the Cascios, who were/are always supporting MJ, when the same people couldn’t really care less about MJ when he was alive. What i am asking is for them is to leave people deside for their own. / As for Sony i don’t care about them.I know what Mottola did to MJ but i also know this: I want ΜJ’s legacy to live forever.And if Sony can make that happen, then i am going to support them with all my heart.I just would really like for them though to move their @s and start promoting the damn album/Lastly ,If someone of those who are boycotting all the future or previous projects of MJ has a solution on how we can perpetuate MJ’s legacy without supporting his music,then i am willing to listen. But until then i am going to disagree with their desicion. That’s all

  211. This is all your opinion and your opinion is respected. I only wish that other people’s opinions would be AS respected. It is obvious you’re emotionally charged and up to a point I understand it too.I kindly disagree (I’d like to think that I still have the right to disagree without receiving characterizations but this is only wishfull thinking I guess).
    Anyway, since you’ve already made up your minds and you’re unwilling to listen to any other comment that even distantly could oppose to any parameters linked to it, there is no use to talk further about it.
    I thought you would be interested to know that there are professionals out there that don’t have the courage of their opinion like you do and hide under fake names and fake identities to serve commercial purposes, but since you made up your minds about the rest of the people out there, why bother to talk more?
    I’m sure you’re sure that once you reached some conclusions anything else is too much.
    Nice holidays to all.Love and peace

    • “This is all your opinion and your opinion is respected. I only wish that other people’s opinions would be AS respected.”

      If it were a “music” opinion only I would respect it – I don’t care what singers you listen to in your free time while you’re doing vindication work for Michael. But your opinion does not have anything to do with music.

      We are talking MONEY for Michael Jackson’s children.

      You haven’t answered my suggestion.

      Are you going to HELP Michael’s children to repay the debt if you are not buying the album?

      HOW are you going to do it?

      Make YOUR suggestions please – instead of hypocritically wishing me love and peace. I won’t be able to enjoy a moment of peace unless Michael’s catalog is secure.

  212. @ares, I’ve seen this before. This urge to establish MJ’s artistry through sales. Through breaking records.But personally….I believe Michael was all about right.Right and wrong.I’ve listened to all of his new songs before going out, they are one by one magnificent, according to my own taste.But…so what?The critics trashed him after 1993.What is more important to you, I realise, is that every album of Michael’s will do well at the charts. And…trust me…if it is true they have access to 200 unpublished songs of his, they’ll keep on publishing and selling.
    That’s ok I guess. I’m not the one to try and conveince otherwise.Mike’s new album is doing great everywhere and I’m happy about it. What I’m not happy about is that we don’t have his consent on the final outcome and his consent on “forgiving” Sony on all the mistreating him on so many levels.
    So….if a person thinks (still) that Sony mistreated him a great deal and shouldn’t employ obscure figures to manipulate people, I don’t understand why you are so quick to judge and condemn them, esp ‘cuz we are living in the country we’re living.
    Why not tell the truth always and let people judge by themselves?Why?????and about the “trashing openly” stuff. I’m sure you’ve heard of a word called “propaganda”

    • “if a person thinks (still) that Sony mistreated him a great deal and shouldn’t employ obscure figures to manipulate people, I don’t understand why you are so quick to judge and condemn them, esp ‘cuz we are living in the country we’re living.
      Why not tell the truth always and let people judge by themselves?Why?????and about the “trashing openly” stuff. I’m sure you’ve heard of a word called “propaganda”

      I AM quick to see what’s wrong with all this propaganda against Sony because I am not living in the country you are living in and have seen something else in my life. Consider me an expert in exposing propaganda – I see it miles and miles away.

      In the case with Michael’s new album someone truly professional has turned a great amount of Michael’s fans from their real need to fully vindicate Michael and whole-heartedly support him – to the events of 2002 when Michael had a big problem with Tony Mottola. The guy was fired, the relationship with Sony was not resumed (or probably was as we can’t really know) – but this is not the problem.

      The problem is that all this has NOTHING to do with Michael’s new album and the tremendous success it was meant to have unless someone extremely clever had not intefered.

      The logic is simple as a piece of cake.
      Michael’s catalog is something he never wanted to give away. It is a guarantee for his children’s well-being in the future and should be retained at all costs.
      Michael took some loans with the catalog as a collateral, and part of the debt was already paid by the estate. The remaining part had to be restructured – for the catalog not to be lost altogether! – which means that the percentage paid on the loan will be now higher.
      So each day counts – the quicker the money comes in the lower the debt it. How much is it now? 300 mln? or has grown to 360mln already?

      HOW can this big money may be repaid? Only by tremendous breakthrough successes of some projects. One of the most hopeful ones was the new album.

      But someone said some BS about Sony’s never-ending guilt and decided to boycott it. Mind you they decided not to boycott Sony as such and throw away their Sony playstations or TV-sets away from their balconies (for example) – no, they decided to take revenge on Michael’s album instead! The pretexts are:

      – it is a fake
      – it is partially a fake
      – it is disrespectful (What is disrespectful? What disrespect was there in performing Mozart’s unfinished Requiem after he died? It is exactly the respect we are talking about!)
      – it should have never been finished by someone else (in music it is practically always done when a piece is left unfinished. The Requiem was finished by Mozart’s associate).
      – the estate will not receive money from Sony (they will receive their share and can repay the debt with it)
      – the family does not get money from the estate (they should have the decency to be patient – when the debt is paid, all the money will be theirs. They receive a monthly cash allowance and the estate pays all their expenses on the house and staff. They don’t pay the nephews though, that’s true)
      – the family is against the album (some of them seem to be just unable to put two and two together – they don’t see a simple thing that if the album is a flop the debt will grow, and will not be repaid in time, or not paid at all, and they will get nothing as a result)

      This somebody clever has worked on the family too and told them fairy tales about the estate making a billion which they did make, but not in profits as a great amount of money had to cover the expenses of producing “This is it”, etc.

      Now Sony has invested some money in the album (not too much as they have evidently become wary of the fans) and will naturally deduct the cost of producing the album from whatever money they get from it. What if they have losses or little profit? I am not sure it will be good for Michael’s family – including those who are now working against the album.

      QUESTION: So who will be responsible for the possible eventual loss of the catalog? Sony AGAIN? Or someone clever who is working with the “masses”, is fighting the album and having a good LAUGH at their gullibility behind their backs?

      Okay, okay – if you hate Sony so much let me make a suggestion to you then:

      REMIT THE MONEY you could have spent on the album DIRECT TO MICHAEL’S CHILDREN.

      I know it is difficult to do it.

      FIND A WAY.

      Otherwise you are BETRAYING MICHAEL.

  213. @Despina
    I didn’t understand why this girl was dangerous. She is doing exactly the same thing that boycotters do “false identity in order to interfere with this personal business and try and form opinions /I think it’s manipulative and wrong.” Your words. Of course people have the right not to buy the cd. But they are not doing just that.They are doing what you said and even more.I think it is lame that some people are going on sites where they sale the album and leave negative comments or rate poorly the album. That is what the boycotters do.If you think that is a sane reaction, that that is the reaction of people who love MJ, then ok. I have stated why i believe that this album and other albums are important for MJ’s legacy. We both live in the same country and we both know how MJ is treated here.They simly don’t give a sh.t about him. I thought that this album was a nice way for MJ to became relevant to a new generation of people and for the old people to start to appreciate him again. /If you don’t understand (not you in particular, but those who boycotting MJ’s albums) what you are doing and how big opportunity this is for people to focus they attention on MJ’s music again and not on his nose or the allegations, then i give up. Oh, by the way you can all chear up. The media is already talking about an international flop. I am done with it. Aint going to bother again.

  214. @ares, you’re entitled to your opinion and so am I.If your implying I’m dangerous for boycotting MJ’s sales let me be more specific.The relationship between Michael and Sony was a very complicated one, especially after forming a company together. There are articles out there in the net providing info about their relationship and the route of it too during the years that followed, the court fights, the Beatles catalogues and stuff.
    What each one makes out of this and if he/she chooses to buy the new album or boycott Sony in general by not bying any of the upcoming productions is a personal business.
    But what I loathe, is the idea of a person or persons in FB under a false name and a false identity in order to interfere with this personal business and try and form opinions or spy users uploading the unreleased tracks, probably employed by Sony. I think it’s manipulative and wrong.
    I’m not getting into any discussion concerning the buy/not buy Sony’s new MJ album.

  215. @Despina
    I don’t exactly understand what are you trying to saying.Is this girl hurting MJ’s album sales in any way, is she defaming him? Why exactly is she dangerous? Michael released Thriller 25 under Sony.It was his decision, not Sony’s. To me more dangerous are those who keep insiting in boycotting his albums.

  216. vindicatemj, Chris, sorry for the late response but because to me this is a serious matter and in no way I wanted to be a paranoid person, I thought I’d wait and see, just in case. Now I’m sure.
    Chris, not Muzikfactory, I’m familiar.And vindicatemj yes, FB. I think you may find this interesting.
    There was this “girl”, appearing to be American. I was impressed by the collection of rare pics of Michael and the research and info along, and “befriended” her although i don’t usually do that.
    She was online 24 hrs a day, and with only one profile pic, a distant one. She claimed several things and she was always very very kind (to the point of being sick). I’ve been told by a “spy” friend of mine that she had some other prof pics too (probably added after our little “misunderstanding”) but I’d better tell u what was up.
    Because she had all that info about everything, many many details, esp on Jackson 5 albums, that would imply a very dedicated MJ fan, when “Monster”came out in FB and was banned a few hours later, I thought I’d ask her, so I did, requiring info about the lyrics too (‘cuz, as was already very well said, there were fake lyrics everywhere).
    What she did was to post an article of Sony representatives actually, reviewing each one of the songs and urging us to buy the cd. Of course I posted an opinion about doubting Sony’s good will, but nothing too extreme, you know, the usual stuff, doubting.I mean….we know things…right?
    She immediatelly responsed that she knew people from Sony and that they were good guys.
    Then I got to be suspicious and kindly answered back that there is no doubt about it, but then again we know what was Sony’s and Michael’s relation.She started mumbling some stuff about the Japanese and the WW2 and then I knew I had to deal with a pro.Technics like that are a bit familiar to me, so I thought I wouldn’t play along and asked directly:
    “so you think that Michael wouldn’t have a problem today with Sony?”She answered:”his problem was personal with Tommy Mottola”.so I asked again:”You mean that all the banners he held, speaches he gave, arguments over and over again, him declaring that he refused to accept the way multi-national music companies treat their artists, esp the black ones,were personal to Mottola?”and she goes:”Yeah, I believe Michael forgave Sony, and he would love for the new cd to be sold”. I attacked her at once, confronted her with the 24 hr logging in and the one prof pic. She deleted me and our comments dialogue.
    Long story short, the new songs are already out, in FB too, that person never gave one link of them. “She” keeps urging people to buy Sony albums, esp the Jackson 5 ones. The stock…u know…she’s 24 hrs a day logged in. So…wanna make an experiment?I’ll msg you her name in FB, you befriend her, and reach your own conclusions.
    I think it’s gonna be interesting. Personally i think they are pros, a team, not a girl. And i’m very angry for their cheap approaching.
    Thanx for listening

    • Despina, you’ve sent me a detailed message and an email asking to look up Rhonda on FB and make my conclusions. You say you are suspicious of her as she might be a pro put by Sony to turn the public’s opinion over. Your comment in this blog says: “She” keeps urging people to buy Sony albums, … she’s 24 hrs a day logged in. So…wanna make an experiment? I’ll msg you her name in FB, you befriend her, and reach your own conclusions. Personally i think they are pros, a team, not a girl. And i’m very angry for their cheap approaching.”

      Well, I’ve looked up Rhonda and fully side with her. Her approach seems to me reasonable and fair and since the dialogue is there in the open let me quote her:

      ‎@Despina ~ I have some friends at SONY, it and they are not all bad. The important thing to focus on is Michael’s incredible body of work and legacy..!

      ~ Yes, Michael had major contract issues with them at time of ‘Invincible’ ~ but most of his battle was with then head, Tommy Motolla. It is an old battle and not valid anymore. Also, even at the time of his battles with him/them (and I supported him 100%), he never at any time said to boycott them and not support his work and music..! ~ Anytime he had any kind of banner or sign, it said alongside and with any negative feelings, “Promote ‘Invincible’ Now” !! Thus, he was sending a strong message to still purchase and support his music..! ~ and I Cherish and Treasure every bit of it..! ~ I believe the current state of affairs over this issue would greatly sadden and disturb him. I am doing my best to support him fully!, in the way that would make him very happy and proud. ~ This album is Michael, 100%..!, the best there is and all we have left. He deserves to be #1 again..! ~ He’d LOVE it SO MUCH..! ~ Michael was very competitive in everything he did..! ~ He would be Dancing in Heaven to witness being the only artist who has made it to #1 over five decades..!! :) :) I give my all to see that happen… and stop the virtual bloodshed and needless bickering. This album is truly AWESOME!, IMHO

      ~ Simply put, I don’t think Michael would want this.. I Trust and Believe in Michael 100% unto eternity.. ~ Different battles for Different times..! ~ I believe in knowing history and learning from it, but I don’t believe he would be supporting this rancor now. ~ Anymore than I am against Japan because of WWII. ~ I don’t see the point. ~ Blessings to you..♥

      Rhonda has also posted an official statement by the Sony team involved in this project – I found it interesting and informative, this is why am reproducing it here. When asked where it comes from she said it was posted in several places:

      Official Statement: The Story Of MICHAEL

      The following statement has been released by The Estate Of Michael Jackson and Sony Music. This is the full story that tells us, the fans, how Michael Jackson’s MICHAEL was created.


      Michael Jackson passed away as his vision was taking shape for his next album, working diligently on songs he expressly wanted to share with his fans.

      These songs could simply have become part of the rich legacy of unreleased work left behind by one of the world’s great artists. But as it soon became clear to both the Michael Jackson Estate and Sony Music, there was an obligation not only to Michael’s fans but to Michael himself not to let this amazing music gather dust in a vault. It was decided the album that was taking shape needed to be properly completed and released in a thoughtful, dignified way that would honor Michael’s legacy.

      While Michael was not there to complete the tracks as only he could, he had left behind a unique roadmap mapping out his creative vision in the form of notes and detailed conversations with the people he was working with as well as those he was planning to work with.

      This enabled everyone involved in “Michael” to follow his voice and the guiding hand they felt was present in helping them complete the album. For those who generously lent their creative talents to “Michael,” this was a labor of love honoring someone who had inspired all of them.

      How “Michael” came together “Michael” had been evolving as Michael Jackson albums would.

      In 2004, Michael, with the help of his then-attorney, John Branca, ended his relationship with Sony Music and its then CEO, Tommy Mottola. In the intervening years, Michael had been working on music intended for a forthcoming release, drawing up its creative blueprints and recording tracks that would provide the foundation while, at the same time, the regime at Sony Music changed and Michael developed good relations with its current executives, working with them on the 25th Anniversary album commemorating “Thriller” in 2008. Michael was delighted to personally receive special multi-platinum discus for the project at a reception held by Sony Music in Los Angeles in February 2009.

      As work for the new album resumed, he would slowly narrow down the tracks and refine them as his vision took shape. Much of the recording was taking place out of the public eye and in secret. Akon noted in an interview that after their song “Hold My Hand” was leaked to the Internet due to a security breach, both he and Michael became extremely cautious about the location of any work they might do to protect it from being exploited in that way again.

      Akon: “Well, after that experience, we all became super protective. More so him, though. You know, he was like “Okay, we gotta figure this out. Now, we’re gonna work out of the house. I’m not working at the studio no more.”

      Nonetheless, Michael still was aiming to write, record and release his artistry to his fans. Neff-U (Ron Feemster) in an interview told of being around Michael shortly before his passing, and witnessing a renewed passion in Michael for writing music and sharing it with the world. He said:

      Neff-U: “But he was, like, “We’ve got to give the world a gift. We have to give them these songs…” Interviewer: “And so, the process–Would he come with lyrics? Would he make them up as he went along? Did he say, “I want to write a song about this today?” “Neff-U: “No. He was, like, “How you feel?” I was, like, “I feel good.” I was, like, “How you feel?” He was, like, “I feel good.” And he was, like, “Let’s see what happens.” And the fireplace would be on, even during the summertime. You know, it was just the whole atmosphere, it was really cool. Um, and I would start to play, and he would just start to hum. And then, the next thing you know, the lyrics would come. And–And the song would start developing itself.”

      Several people, including Neff-U, Eddie Cascio and Frank Dileo, Michael’s manager at the time of his passing, knew of Michael’s plans to continue recording once he relocated to England for the start of what would have been the O2 performances, the rehearsals of which were featured in the hit film “Michael Jackson’s This is It.”

      Eddie Cascio: “The plan was to continue the recording process over in London, and on the days off or the weeks off that he had, you know, we would be, you know, working at a studio that he was gonna have put in at his home in London…He had made it clear that, you know, that he wanted– he wanted me to be out there and to– to continue working on the music…You know, he had every intention to entertain his fans once again through his music.”

      After an inventory was taken by the Estate of the songs Michael had been working on, the decision was made that to bring Michael’s artistry to completion and to do it proper justice, many of the very producers and talent he trusted his work to in life or those he had planned to work with would be asked to bring his vision to reality. Using the blueprints Michael provided with his notes, his voice and the creative ideas he had shared, they took the songs in various stages of production and completed the album. For Akon, it was an opportunity to finally finish “Hold My Hand,” a song that had not been ready for the world to hear when it leaked out on the Internet after he and Michael recorded it.

      Akon: “But its time has definitely come; now in its final state, it has become an incredible, beautiful, anthemic song. I’m so proud to have had the chance to work with Michael, one of my all time idols.”

      In an interview, Akon added that he felt a responsibility that the song should be heard and released through the proper channels.

      Akon: “You know, I wanted his children, more so than anything, to benefit off this record, ’cause that’s what he would’ve wanted, you know, and his family to properly be able to sit back and say, “He left something behind that we can all benefit and cherish.”

      He continued:

      “So far, I haven’t heard any, you know, complaints from anyone involved, so I know that everything is going the way it’s supposed. So, it feels good knowing that his property now is gonna have the showcase opportunity that it was supposed to, and that feels good. That feels great. Like, that feels better than anything, knowing that it’s now gonna be properly presented to the world.”

      Three of the tracks have relatively mundane origins. Michael had a longstanding friendship with the Cascios, a suburban family he got to know because patriarch Dominic was one of the managers at the Helmsley Palace Hotel, where Michael regularly stayed while visiting New York. He was welcomed into the home of Dominic and Connie for dinners as a respite from his hectic life as a superstar artist, and became a mentor to sons, Eddie and Frank, who growing up had musical aspirations.

      In 2007, Michael and his family spent four months staying with the Cascio family at their Bergen County home, which had a simple home recording studio in which the tracks for “Breaking News,” “Monster,” and “Keep Your Head Up”’ were recorded. Frank Dileo, Michael’s former manager, has confirmed that he spoke to Michael by telephone at the Cascio’s home studio several times while he was recording with them, and said Michael “was excited and enthused by the music and the experience.”

      While these vocals may have been “guide vocals,” or in demo form, it does not detract in any way from their quality or their authenticity. In fact, since the announcement that “Monster” is to be one of the tracks included on “Michael,” 50 Cent (Curtis Jackson) has confirmed that Michael contacted him personally about his desire to collaborate on this track. The day the track list for the album was announced publicly, 50 Cent sent a message to his fans on Twitter that “michael reached out to me to do this song before he passed it going to be the biggest thing ever. hes the one we got our idea from”.

      In a subsequent interview in advance of the release of “Michael,” 50 Cent described how his DJ told him Michael was interested. He said:

      50 Cent: “…he was interested in working with me, and he said he had something he wanted me to actually hear, a song that he created that he would be perfect for us to collaborate on…” adding… 50 Cent: So, you know, it’s, like, I was aware of the actual song, that there was something that he wanted to do, and I said I’d collaborate with him. I wanted to do the record.”

      Likewise, Teddy Riley, who had worked with Michael since 1991 on Dangerous, HIStory, The Addams Family Values project and Invincible, knew Michael’s work intimately. He listened to the music before becoming involved in helping finish “Michael” and producing two of the three Cascio tracks, “Monster” and “Breaking News.” He knew it was his friend’s voice when he heard it and The Finisher, as Michael affectionately called him, did what he always did when coming in on a project with Michael. He said:

      Teddy Riley: “Needless to say, we spent months and months in the studio together. The times I spent with Michael were very important, dear, special, and learning experiences. I studied Michael and everything about him from day one. I know Michael’s voice in every range; I’ve explored Michael’s vocal ability from baritone and tenor to alto and soprano. As the years went by, I’ve witnessed his tones changing, sometimes up or down. My feeling on the authenticity of his vocals on this album (another masterpiece) are that they were all done by Michael in different places and in different climates. The vocals sounded very polished, very on key and processed. I have no doubts that these are Michael’s vocals. I stand for myself with no discrimination.”

      While much of the album stems from new inspirations and work Michael was doing with contemporary artists he wanted to work with, as was often the case some songs fermented over time until they found the right album. Two songs on “Michael” – “Much Too Soon” and “Behind the Mask” — fit the spirit of those songs that Michael would eventually find homes for. In fact, it was John McClain, one of the co-executors of the Estate and a producer for the song “This Is It” released last year on the companion album for the highly acclaimed documentary, “Michael Jackson’s This Is It”, who chose to work on both songs himself. “Much Too Soon” was written around the time of “Thriller” but Michael had never found the right album for it. “Behind the Mask” also had its origins in the 1980s when Michael heard the music performed by the Yellow Magic Orchestra, and contacted Ryiuchi Sakamoto asking for permission to write lyrics for it.

      The “authenticity” of three tracks

      The debut of “Breaking News,” one of three tracks on the album Michael recorded in the New Jersey home of the Cascio family, led some to cast doubt on the “authenticity” of these songs. This triggered no shortage of bizarre theories by people seeking attention and those claiming to have knowledge of a vast conspiracy. One London tabloid printed a claim by a Michael impersonator from Italy armed with these “facts”: He thinks he may have recorded tracks in secret in a studio in Switzerland “after being approached by a man, whom he thinks was from Bahrain, to record the studio sessions, and paid 2000 Euros per track.”

      Mindful of the importance of Michael’s legacy and how much he valued his fans, both the Michael Jackson Estate and Sony Music went to even greater lengths on their own to authenticate the tracks before it was even announced they would be included on the album. As Estate attorney Howard Weitzman detailed in a letter circulated among Michael’s fans:

      Six of Michael’s former producers and engineers who had worked with Michael over the past 30 years – Bruce Swedien, Matt Forger, Stewart Brawley, Michael Prince, Dr. Freeze and Teddy Riley – were all invited to a listening session to hear the raw vocals of the Cascio tracks in question. All confirmed that the vocal was definitely Michael. Michael’s musical director and piano player on many of his records over a 20-year period, Greg Phillinganes, played on a Cascio track being produced for the album, and said the voice was definitely Michael’s. Dorian Holley, who was Michael’s vocal director for his solo tours for 20 plus years (including the O2 Concert Tour) and is seen in the film, “Michael Jackson’s This Is It”, listened to the Cascio tracks and said the lead vocal was Michael Jackson. Engineers, producers and musicians who worked on tours and/or in the studio with Michael when he was recording Bad, Thriller, Off The Wall, Dangerous, Invincible, HIStory and Blood On The Dance Floor, all listened to the music and they all reconfirmed their belief that the lead vocals were Michael’s voice on the Cascio tracks. Two of the nation’s preeminent forensic musicologists in the United States independently evaluated the tracks using audio analysis. Both reported that the lead vocals analyzed were those of Michael. Two prominent persons in the music industry who played crucial roles in Michael’s career, were also played the music and both believe that the lead vocals were Michael’s. As a result, Sony Music concluded: “We have complete confidence in the results of our extensive research as well as the accounts of those who were in the studio with Michael that the vocals on the new album are his own.” And the album was mastered and prepared for release using a mural created by artist, Kadir Nelson, as its cover. The mural is the visual story of Michael’s life and career and acknowledges those people and events that influenced him.


      1. Hold My Hand (Duet with Akon) Written by Aliaune Thiam, Giorgio Tuinfort, Claude Kelly Produced by Akon, Giorgio Tuinfort & Michael Jackson

      “Hold My Hand” debuted as the first single. Recorded with Akon in 2008 in Las Vegas, it leaked out and was never released. Akon completed the song, with a music video to premiere December 9. “Hold My Hand” was written by Akon, Giorgio Tuinfort, Claude Kelly and produced by Akon, Giorgio Tuinfort and Michael Jackson.

      2. Hollywood Tonight Written by Michael Jackson, Brad Buxer/Spoken Bridge Written by Teddy Riley Produced by Teddy Riley, Michael Jackson/Co-Produced by Theron “Neff-U” Feemster

      Written by Michael during the time of the Invincible album, Michael pulled the track out of the archives in 2007 to work on the song with producer Ron “Neff-U” Feemster, Hollywood Tonight was written by Michael Jackson; the spoken bridge was written by Teddy Riley and the track was produced by Teddy Riley, Michael Jackson with co-producer by Theron “Neff-U” Feemster.

      3. Keep Your Head Up Written by Michael Jackson, Eddie Cascio, James Porte Produced by C “Tricky” Stewart, Angelikson, Michael Jackson

      In 2007, Michael wrote that inspirational ode with Eddie Cascio and James Porte in New Jersey. Keep Your Head Up was produced by Tricky Stewart, Angelikson, and Michael Jackson.

      4. (I Like) The Way You Love Me Written by Michael Jackson Produced by Theron “Neff-U” Feemster, Michael Jackson

      This song was originally released in its early stages of development as a demo on Ultimate Collection in 2004; it was song that Michael loved and was finishing in Los Angeles. The Way You Love Me was written by Michael Jackson and produced by Theron “Neff-U” Feemster and Michael Jackson.

      5. Monster (Featuring 50 Cent) Written by Michael Jackson, Eddie Cascio, James Porte/Rap Lyrics Written by Curtis Jackson Produced by Teddy Riley, Angelikson, Michael Jackson

      Recorded in New Jersey in 2007 at the Cascio home, Michael actually recorded some of his background vocals through a PVC pipe for the song. The song also features the rap of 50 Cent, who Michael had contacted about the collaboration. Monster was written by Michael Jackson, Eddie Cascio and James Porte with Rap Lyrics Written by Curtis Jackson. It was produced by Teddy Riley, Angelikson and Michael Jackson.

      6. Best Of Joy Written by Michael Jackson Produced by Theron “Neff-U” Feemster, Michael Jackson Co-Produced by Brad Buxer

      “Best of Joy” is one of the very last songs Michael was working on and had planned to continue to work on while in London for the O2 arena shows in Summer 2009. The song was written by Michael Jackson and produced by Theron “Neff-U” Feemster, Michael Jackson and co-producer by Brad Buxer.

      7. Breaking News Written by Michael Jackson, Eddie Cascio, James Porte Produced by Teddy Riley, Angelikson, Michael Jackson

      “Breaking News” recorded the song in 2007 in the New Jersey home of the Cascio family. Writers on the song are Michael Jackson as well as Eddie Cascio and James Porte. The song was produced by Teddy Riley, (Eddie Cascio & James Porte) Angelikson and Michael Jackson.

      8. (I Can’t Make It) Another Day (Featuring Lenny Kravitz) Written by Lenny Kravitz Produced by Lenny Kravitz Co-Produced by Michael Jackson

      Recorded as a demo with Lenny Kravitz during the Invincible era, the song unexpectedly leaked in 2008 prompting Lenny to finish the song. Dave Grohl is the featured drummer on the track. Written by Lenny Kravitz and produced Lenny Kravitz and Michael Jackson.

      9. Behind The Mask Written by Michael Jackson, Chris Mosdell, Ryuichi Sakamoto Produced by Michael Jackson, John McClain

      After hearing “Behind The Mask” as performed by Yellow Magic Orchestra, Michael contacted Ryiuchi Sakamoto asking for permission to add his lyrics on the track. It was recently completed by John McClain. The song is written by Michael Jackson, Chris Mosdell and Ryuichi Sakamoto and produced by Michael Jackson and John McClain. “Behind The Mask” contains a sample of the recording “Behind The Mask” as performed by Yellow Magic Orchestra.

      10. Much Too Soon Written by Michael Jackson Produced by Michael Jackson, John McClain

      “Much Too Soon” was written at time of Thriller. But never found the right home on an album. The song was written by Michael Jackson and produced by Michael Jackson and John McClain. David Campbell is featured on the strings.

      Conclusion What does the future hold for the incredible wealth of other amazing tracks Michael left behind? The immediate goal of both the Estate and Sony was to complete this album that Michael had set out to make, selecting the combination of tracks that best represented the mixture of new creativity and vintage sounds Michael liked to combine. While it is too early to announce specific future projects, it is safe to say that given how much Michael valued his fans the selection and release of those works will be done in a way that properly honors his legacy.

      With thanks to:

      Sony Music UK Estate Of Michael Jackson Michael Jackson’s Online Team




      Despina, I would love to hear your suggestions on how to pay for Michael’s catalog if we don’t buy the cd. What about the idea to remit money to the Jackson family with the funds going directly into the catalog?

      Looking forward to hearing your ideas and suggestions,


  217. Please share vindicate.

    This is Barbara at Inner Michael asking a favor…

    Forbes Everett Landis wrote “Does the American Dream have to Die with Michael Jackson” and we featured the article in Voices Education Project “Words and Violence” Curriculum with the Title “The American Public Must Demand Honest Journalism.”

    The article in now nominated for an award which means that it would be included in the HUB newsletter. HUB is “Humanity Unites Brilliance,” a social networking and entrepreneurial venture with a mission to change the world. Many of my acquaintances have joined. Forbes is a member. I received a letter from him asking for my support and my vote in the contest at HUB where the winners of the divisions will have their articles featured in the HUB newsletter.

    According to Forbes, the newsletter circulation is 60,000 which means that 60,000 people who didn’t know the truth about Michael Jackson will learn the truth from Forbes’ article. I am throwing my full support behind this effort so I am requesting that you go and vote for his article. Scroll halfway down the page to the “Education and Science” section of the page and vote for the last entry on the list “Does the American Dream…” and click “VOTE.”


    You may read Forbes’ full article at Voices:


    Forbes and I thank you.
    Barbara Kaufmann at Inner Michael

    • “Forbes Everett Landis wrote “Does the American Dream have to Die with Michael Jackson” . The article in now nominated for an award which means that it would be included in the HUB newsletter. According to Forbes, the newsletter circulation is 60,000 which means that 60,000 people who didn’t know the truth about Michael Jackson will learn the truth from Forbes’ article.”

      Chris, thank you for sending us Barbara Kaufmann’s letter. I remember the article as very good indeed and deserving the award, but what impresses me most is that due to the newsletter 60,000 people will learn the truth about Michael – so let us not hesitate for another second and click VOTE here:


      Guys, I’ve voted and looked up the list of other nominees – well, “How to buy stuff online” and “Little trick to drying a wet electronic device” may be nice and helpful of course BUT COMPARING IT TO FORBES’ ARTICLE ABOUT MJ AND HONEST JOURNALISM?

      (see here: http://www.voiceseducation.org/content/american-public-must-demand-honest-journalism)


      Please don’t forget to scroll down to the bottom of the page to the second section of VOTE!

  218. Hey you guys…
    You’re the only people I trust the most in the net about Michael.I’ve contacted you again in the past about a matter or two and you were there to provide me with valid info.
    But now i am very upset. Very very upset.
    I’m in FB and enjoy it very much.|Recently |I came across to this “person” appearing to be as a mega-fan, with lots of infos and stuff about MJ.
    But the moment I started questioning this “person’s” excessive dedication to Sony I sensed sth was wrong.
    I’m very disturbed. My feeling is that there’s not even an existence of such a person, because what I would comment about was not even a “strong” one.|Not a single comment about not buying Sony’s new cd of michael’s unpublished songs…Just the usual stuff about Sony and what Michael thought of its tactics.
    so I believe…I strongly believe…there are people out there…professionals…put by all shorts of … don’t know/…interests…to try to blend in and form opinions…and I’m very…very angry…
    I just wanna ask you guys.Do you have a story about stuff like that?
    Because…I’m not talking about an amateur hater or sth. I strongly believe there are people that are pros, with lots of influence. I could give you more info in private, but i’m mostly interested in the info you have on the subject.What’s the deal?
    P.S.No no, i’m not a psycho seeing enemies everywhere

    • “I’m in FB and enjoy it very much.|Recently |I came across to this “person” appearing to be as a mega-fan, with lots of infos and stuff about MJ.”

      Despina, excuse my ignorance please, but what is FB? And whom did you approach? (P.S. Sorry for the stupid question about FB – I now realize it is Facebook).

      “I believe…I strongly believe…there are people out there…professionals…put by all shorts of … don’t know/…interests…to try to blend in and form opinions…and I’m very…very angry…”

      I also feel that some people working against Michael are professionals. Arranging a covert operation like the fake Monster lyrics posted all over the Internet with no possibility to correct them – well, this does require an organized effort. And I am deeply suspicious of some sites, for ex. MJFiles which sometimes presents their information in such a manner which makes my hair stand on end. I think time will show who is who.

  219. Hey you guys!
    I just watched a youtube video Tom Mesereau uploaded, titled “‘Good Morning America’ Interviews the Jury that Acquitted Michael Jackson”.
    Besides that there was another one titled “2 jurors say they made the wrong decision in acquitting Michael Jackson in 2005”.In both of those videos there was an old lady juror, telling two completely different stories.I’d appreciate it if you had more information about the subject.
    Keep up the good work! You’re great!

  220. Thank you for the kind words vindicatemj.I always give credit where credit is due,and you have provided me with much important information through this site which has helped me in my interactions with the haters in this world,the facts on this site have even helped me convince two personal friends of mine,who previously believed in michaels guilt,to have a very quick change of opinion (they unfortuanatly fell for the tabloid bias hook,line and sinker,but when i have talked to them on a personal level,and reeled off the evidence of michaels innocence they were shocked and stunned to say the least.)that is the true gift of your website,to enable the fans to counter every false accusation haters can muster.And that is why it is I that owe you thanks, many times over.Now to let you in on the youtube hater i have previously mentioned,The person operates a number of profiles (possibly all the same person,possibly several,although from the styles of wording,and re-using of videos,a would say its the former).All names are variations of “mjnewsonline”(egMJNOonline etc,you can find the user names through youtube by typing in Michael Jackson Terry george and look for the names above)This person runs a website of similar name.And claims to be in possesion of “incredible evidence”he/she claims proves the allegations true,yet the videos are rather pathetic,including a badly made version of michaels 1993 statement edited to make it look like michael confessing,another similar one uses a voice machine (similar to steven hawking style)and again claims to be a confession.The saddest part is the video creator insists they are genuine,and comes up with elaborate backing stories that are pure fabrication (think you may be right,to me it sounds like the product of a serious mental illness).I have continued to debunk the videos many times over,to the point they very rarely reply, as so far i have countered every claim,and despite me fronting them out,and telling them if they have the evidence they claim (which they obviously dont),then they have the world stage of youtube to show it,to which they have point blank refused and tried to get me to visit there website (it wasnt so much an invite for me,it sounded more like a threat of intimidation).From there comments as well this person seems to relish in rather perverse descriptions of what they believe michael did.Thought it was only fair given the fact that you are playing a massive part in the fight to clear michael,that i should let you know about this particular hater,his/her videos would be quite offensive,if they werent so completely pathetic

  221. A big hello to all the people here on the one website i trust for telling the actual true story,you guys continue to do a truly incredible job,and i wish to thank you once more for continuing with the battle to clear michaels name once and for all (and i truly believe it will happen,thanks to people such as yourselves),i feel truly greatful that you guys are willing to stand up and take this massive task on yourselves,Which brings me to my main point of this message,with regards to the hater you guys are having to deal with (the multi-faceted desiree).You guys dont need to give me the full details,but is this person by any chance known to be running a well known MJ hater site?If you know who im talking about in this case,lets just say i have been having a number of discussions with the owner of said site through there various youtube accounts,and have spent a lot of time debunking there hate filled videos.The sad thing is with these haters,is that despite there steadfast belief in michaels guilt,they dont seem to get the fact that by using multiple profiles,usernames and alter egos in there constant quest to convince people of michaels guilt,they are showing themselves up to be deceitful,obsessive and borderline psychotic,I ask the haters this,do the lengths you go to,spending hour upon hour flitting between websites,posting lies and hate and constantly insisting you are correct in your views,despite the wealth actual REAL evidence of michaels INNOCENCE (thats right real evidence,not the fabricated versions haters choose to keep blathering on about)do your actions really sound like those of a sane well balanced individual?

    • “You guys continue to do a truly incredible job…. Is this person by any chance known to be running a well known MJ hater site? They dont seem to get the fact that by using multiple profiles,usernames and alter egos in there constant quest to convince people of michaels guilt,they are showing themselves up to be deceitful,obsessive and borderline psychotics”

      Carl S, I remember you writing to us before and me not answering because I’m always at a loss how to thank people for the kind and generous words they say to us. Thank you so much – I think all of us are doing what we can. I see you are also involved in lots of discussion with one of the haters. No, I don’t know what site you are talking about – the yola site which we’ve been able to identify as Ray Chandler’s seems not to be active. I’ve also seen some youtube videos by someone called Alfonso but I am not involved in the discussion there either (tried several times to leave a comment on Youtube, but the available space did not allow to write anything meaningful there).

      You are right about haters – something is wrong with these people. Their preoccupation with hating Michael is completely unnatural, which makes me think that they are either mentally unbalanced or are just doing a job.

  222. @ Helena

    Sounds like just another incarnation of Desiree to me. Whether it’s her or not I also sense religious fanatism there (fanatism is never good whether it’s religious or secular) – I mean the way she keeps mentioning we “worship” Michael or make him out to be a “god” or a “messiah”. I can’t see how believing in someone’s innocence and promoting what we genuinely believe the truth is (basing it on logical arguments, documents and evidence), is equal to worshiping him as a “god”? Is this were Desiree (or whoever this person is) really coming from? Is she a religious fanatic who feels threatened because in HER MIND she can only think in extremes: if somebody says MJ was innocent and falsely accused, and that he had a good and caring heart, to her that equals to claiming he was a god?

    If this person who wrote this is coming from there, I have one message to her: try to look deeper into what the Bible really teaches about human values and love, do not let brainwash yourself by religious groups: that there are people with good intentions and a kind heart doesn’t threaten the position of Jesus and God! It definitely doesn’t in my own heart, I don’t know why you feel threatened in yours.

  223. There is still a lot of misconceptions about timeline for the Chandler’s allegation and the Arvizo’s. Some people are not aware that Michael did not spend that much time with either or that there was an entire year he and the Arvizo had not seen each other. It has been made to look as if he spent years grooming/seducing these boys. It is not known that he did not allow another family to get that close to him for 10 or that the allegations were publicly reported almost during the same time as 10 years previously. To have all that under one topic rather than scattered through several would be of immense help. (hint..hint)

    • “To have all that under one topic rather than scattered through several would be of immense help. (hint..hint)”

      Dialdancer, you are right. It is time we started making summaries of a few things which should be grouped together so that not a single detail is lost. I am torn between so many things to be done all at once that sometimes get paralyzed. However I am planning to make a review of one particular link in the chain of the events summing up all the information we have about it at the moment.

      The ultimate goal is to link all the separate episodes together turning it into a kind of a book. David can do one chapter, Lynette another, Suzy (who is also a co-editor now) a third one, probably Deborah will also join – the idea is to look at the key issues and provide the key arguments in a concise form.

      However it is too early to make final conclusions. At the moment we can speak only of the interim results.

  224. Helena,
    If you look at our stats, you’ll see that yesterday was the busiest day ever! We had 1,198 hits! Wanna know why? Because I gave a link to this blog to several facebook friends who have MJ groups, and they posted the link in their status updates!

    Since the spokeswoman for SNAP thinks that MJ’s settlements were signs of guilt, I told them to email my settlements article to SNAP, as well as your article about “How to tell a True testimony from a Fake one”.

    One of the groups I spoke with was Justice For MJ http://www.justice4mj.com/snap/, and the other was Reflections on the Dance.

    The Home Page had 237 views, the “Making Way For Miracles” post had 150 (since it was the most recent post, it’s obvious that it would have the most hits), but my settlements article had 121 hits, and the “How to tell a True testimony from a Fake one” had 114 hits.

    We also now have 42 active subscriptions! I don’t know exactly how many we had prior to yesterday, but I think it was in the 20’s or 30’s.

    Just wanted to share this good news with you guys! I’ll be sure to continue to use facebook to spread the word about this site in the MJ community in order to increase our hits and our subscriptions!

    • “We had 1,198 hits! Wanna know why? Because I gave a link to this blog to several facebook friends who have MJ groups, and they posted the link in their status updates!”

      Thank you David for all this face group work I have no idea how to do. The ratings are a good thing of course but we should explain to the newcomers from MJ groups that it is not just another of those “fan” sites – this blog is a kind of a lab where allegations against Jackson are vivisected or a sort of a courtroom where haters’ lies are listened to and refuted (which means that to a certain extent haters’ opinions may be represented here – usually in the form of articles, though sometimes they do make their personal appearance).

      I am saying that to introduce to you an exchange of messages I recently had with another of those ‘doubters’ (who sounded very much like our earlier friend) – from which I learned that they are worried about why we are so consistent in our support for Michael Jackson. The word ‘rabid’ was mentioned of course but the fact that the doubter comes here again and again means that he doesn’t believe this idea himself and is actually intrigued by the phenomenon of so wide and ‘inexplicable’ support.

      Here is a slightly abridged version of our correspondence. See how he/she constantly refers to some documents which are not available to the public – but PLEASE DON’T BUY IT as it is an obvious lie.
      Everyhing there was to uncover was already uncovered by our favorite diligent D.A. Tom Sneddon and what he might have overlooked (which was virtually impossible) was picked up and scrutinized by the FBI – and in spite of their double scrutiny nothing was ever found. This makes the talk about “secret” documents a little belated and mentioning some ‘souce” a mere gossip:
      “I know I’m going to make myself very unpopular with you, the web master. But I used to be unsure whether or not Michael Jackson really did m-t those boys or if he was just so mentally ill, he didn’t understand why it was inappropriate for a grown man to have sleepovers with children. Then I met somebody in the camp of a very well-known person in the music industry, who was very familiar with Michael. He told me Michael was a p. and went into great detail about what happened and how the family knew about it but tried to cover up for him. He went into more details than I wanted to hear. I also met somebody who handled child-molestation cases and had read the documents, including those not available to the public. He then told me how to access documents that are available for public viewing. This removed all doubt. Bear in mind I have never bothered to read any of the books on this subject, by the so-called experts. I checked for myself.

      You can spin the obvious evidence as much as you wish. But I want to know what you have at stake in trying to insist he was innocent because I do not understand celebrity worship. Michael was human, not the new messiah. Knowing the truth about Michael Jackson doesn’t make me a hater. I still like his music. If anything I feel sorrier for him. He had a tortured mind from the physical, emotional, and sexual abuse he suffered as a child, and he lived a tragic life. But I take it as a lesson that the cycle of abuse will continue if the abused don’t seek therapy to heal the trauma.

      It’s taken a lot of courage to write you. I’ve read the comments by what I refer to as the rabid worshipers of the Church of Michael Jackson, and they scare me. They are ugly and inflammatory toward anyone who even suggests Michael was human and not a god. They are also threatening, and I would be afraid to meet them on the street. My personal safety is important to me. However, I would simply like to know what is inside your mind that needs to canonize another human being you never knew. What is it you need from a celebrity that fulfills your life? What is missing from your life that needs to cling to celebrity status?

      I don’t know if you’ll have a calm answer for me, or if you’ll strip my humanity and aim for personal attacks of an individual you don’t know. But bear in mind I still see you as human and would merely like an explanation.

      …., we here are not discussing any gossip which may be told by this and that man in Michael’s surrounding.

      I also have an article written by a former child who was in a video studio with Michael while a new video was made there and who says that all those around Michael thought he was a p. They didn’t know a thing but thought they did and were even sure that they knew.

      “How else can it be if he is with a child every day”? they thought. And what if Michael didn’t want to associate with these guys around him – who played cards and drank beer during the pauses (which were many as this child describes) and made dirty jokes openly about Michael? They laughed behind his back saying they would not stay alone with him for fear he does something to them.

      If these are the people who are your sources – no thank you. I don’t associate with such people in real life and I am not going to start doing it in the virtual one. Cynics are just not my cup of tea.

      However if you have any documents we are ready to look into them. We are not stretching the truth here to cover up things – we are establishing the truth.

      If I can ever get permission to tell you who spoke, I will. My concern, however, is said individual would be crucified by those who don’t want to know an ugly truth. In regards to the documents, they are very easy to access. Just go to the Santa Barbara County and Los Angeles County websites, and you can download publicly available documents. Bear in mind, the criminologist I mentioned also read the documents that were not made available to the public, due to his position. But facing the truth about what Michael Jackson did doesn’t make anyone a hater. It just means they see him as human and not a god. It means just being realistic and enjoying his music for what it is.
      But you still aren’t answering my questions about what you have at stake, in all of this. Why do you need to see a mere mortal as if he were the new messiah? Is something missing in your life that causes you to need a celebrity to worship? I need to know why you, and others like you, are so obsessed with a celebrity. I find your brand of fandom both intriguing and frightening. But I want to understand it. Right now, it comes across as insanity.

      Giving a person’s name is not important – being a foreigner I would not know who he is anyway, so names do not have an effect on me. What I am interested is the documents. I’ve been to the LA county webside and have seen ALL the documents provided there – this is where we found that Ray Chandler was fighting the subpoena from MJ’s team. Ray said his book was based on documents, but when MJ’s defense demanded he presents them in court he fought this chance tooth and nail.

      If you are speaking about any other site with ‘damning’ documents please provide the link and we will look into them.

      Answering your question about what is at stake – it is the truth which is at stake. This is what I am really worshipping and if in the process of establishing the truth Michael Jackson turns out to be a pure human being, ruthlessly crucified by the world for more than 15 years, consequently a saint and probably a messiah, so be it.

      At the moment a thorough scrutiny of each available fact has proved to us that Michael Jackson was slandered on an exceptionally massive scale, that is why our investigation is slowly turning into the direction of finding out “Why”?

      And why are you asking? Isn’t it natural for people to want to know the truth?


    • @ Helena
      Actually, I sent you and the rest of the team an email about this person, which we all know who it is. I logged in and read your exchanges with her, and I immediately knew it was garbage because this person is using the same M.O. as our previous adversary.

    • “I sent you and the rest of the team an email about this person, which we all know who it is. I logged in and read your exchanges with her, and I immediately knew it was garbage because this person is using the same M.O. as our previous adversary.”

      She/he is most probably another reincarnation of Desiree – the arguments are very much the same and there is no factual evidence AS USUAL (just some vague hints at what “one woman round the corner said”).

      Guys, I have provided this correspondence only as an example that all Michael detractors are adhering to one and the same pattern:

      – Michael was “this and that” because the hater thinks so

      – someone “important” told the detractor some sick stories nobody ever heard of (as if this person did not have an opportunity to speak up for the 15 years of Michael’s public lynching when the nation was practically invited to talk about it to the D.A. for free and to the media for a reward)

      – Michael was too powerful (when all his ‘power’ did not prevent Tom Sneddon from stripping Michael of his underwear as well as his dignity on the basis of only one boy allegedly said – and I can imagine what would have happened if some “important” guys had testified)

      – this important guy saw some “secret” documents (which were evidently not accessible to the FBI, Tom Sneddon, Paul Garcetti and many others who were investigating the case)

      – and here we go on a second or third round of statements meant to hypnotize us into thinking that M. was “this and that”….


      I am posting things like that for you TO LEARN NOT TO REACT to them!
      If we don’t develop an ability TO LAUGH at their lies we won’t go far in vindicating Michael!
      That is why I am not even arguing with these people (it is a waste of time in my opinion) – I just demand, FACTS PLEASE!

      What I actually think is that our correspondent is in love with Michael and his supporters. He envies Michael and his closely-knit community. He is jealous. He can’t understand why this seemingly fragile, soft-spoken and gentle guy could invoke in people so strong emotions and so much love that this fire is still keeping us going. He wants to understand because it defies all usual logic and reason. And all these people are doing it not for the sake of money which is simply unheard of! He can’t believe that we don’t have an agenda and is trying different ways to make us reveal our secret…

      This is the reason for all their trolling. We are intriguing them. Let us keep doing it.

    • “Can I use the account I have for my Hungarian blog (which is a wordpress blog as well)?”

      Well, I’ve tried and it worked, so now you are a co-admin here too – you were automatically registered as “jacksonaktak”. Now that you enter the blog you will have some new icons on top – dashboard and things like that. Dashboard is actually where you see all the comments and can start a new post from a Posts section. You have the same full rights as David, Lynette and Deborah here.

      I am happy to see you joining us.

  225. thank you for info, I just don’t understand people like Sony and especially for me ABC and CBS. I don’t care what contracts say a terrorist attack doesn’t come under contract negotiations so stop moaning about money and support the event and victims.

    I appreciate the links and although I know Muzikfactory has SOME credible info I also know first hand that she is a racist, accuses fans of being fake when they don’t agree with her opinion and also takes facts from a document or article but ignores infomation in the same document that proves some of her facts wrong. Sooo, personaly I have no time for her.

  226. Guys my biggest wish is to get MJs humanitarian efforts acknowledged, but with that said is it true that ABC and CBS didn’t show the Man In The Mirror and What More Can I Give performances for the United We Stand tribute show because they couldn’t come to an agrrement due to the 30th anniversary? Isn’t the charity show and helping the victims the aim?

    • @ Chris
      MJ did perform “Man in the Mirror”, “We Are The World”, and “What More Can I Give” at the 9/11 Benefit Concert, but the songs couldn’t be aired because MJ had signed an exclusive agreement with CBS not to perform on any other network. The concert was shown on ABC, who had to edit out his performances. Also, Sony refused to allow MJ to release “What More Can I Give?” to the radio, despite the fact that it was a charity single for the biggest terrorist attack of all time! How corrupt can one company be? MJ was right! Tommy Mottola is devilish!

      Maybe once day the estate will get the rights to these performances, and perhaps include them in a DVD? Who knows? Maybe they already did, and maybe they’ll be included on the new 3-DVD box set of MJ music videos that will be released in a few weeks. It has ALL of MJ’s videos, and a “new” video, which many believe will be “One More Chance”, which MJ was shooting when he was arrested in November 2003. For more info, read the links below:




  227. @ Helena

    I feel honoured that you think of making me an admin. I don’t know if I can be a big help there though. I can translate articles like the one Louise sent me, but you guys are so much better at research and writing articles.

    I’m very busy with my own blog in Hungarian (I’m just covering the 2005 trial), so that takes most of my time. I will help with anything I can, but I’m afraid that won’t be much.

    • “I don’t know if I can be a big help there though”.

      Suzy, you can, dear – though I very well understand that the problem of time is critical for all of us here. No one expects you to write on a regular basis but if you do we will be happy to see it.

      To become an admin you need to create an account with the wordpress – just tell me when you’re over with it. I’ll probably leave for the country today even despite my couph and a severe cold which is currently making me stay at home – but as soon as I come back I’ll be honored to add you as a co-admin.

  228. Dear co-editors and readers, there are a thousand things to do to streamline this blog and since we are aiming at maximal transparency here I want to discuss a few things with you openly.

    1) I’ve just seen several parts of a wonderful film David added to his post about Peretti and realized that it is not correct to update earlier posts with new information (especially if it is big). Old posts should stay the way they are while we should move forward. The way David added a new film to Peretti’s it got completely lost and I bet very few people saw it.

    To make a long story short I am asking David now to make a separate post out of that Moowalking film he added to Peretti’s (though it won’t hurt to leave it there too – this way more people will be able to see it). In case you know you’ve added something equally important but it has also got lost, please turn these pieces into separate posts.

    NB: David, only please do it after we more or less finish with this Gutierrez business.

    2) Every post needs some time for its discussion and consolidation of information around it. So it is top important to leave at least several days between the posts before the new one is made. It also shows our respect for each other’s contributions and makes sure that we read what others contributors do and gives us time to add to their posts whatever we have to add on the subject.

    However there should be always be regularity in our posting – we can’t post all at once and then leave the blog unattended for a week or more.

    3) Of course I would prefer the narration to be continuous and the next brick of information to be put on top of what was accumulated in the earlier posts – however this is not always possible as this on-line investigation is sometimes taking a completely unexpected turn which breaks all your previous plans altogether. So we will have to put up with the blog growing in the same natural way as a tree grows – with some of its branches (themes) fading for a time being and new branches suddenly springing. Such diversity may be only for the better.

    4) However this natural growth has some drawbacks. I am really getting frustrated with an obvious fact that it has become increasingly difficult to find specific information in the blog. It seems we should find a way to link similar articles to each other so that one theme could be traced from its very beginning to its end. If you have any ideas on how to do that please share! I am currently thinking of making the blog more orderly and remembered that Gigi once told us how to make subdivisions in the blog (but naturally can’t find this information either. SOS! Gigi, can you repeat it please?)

    5) Some of our readers have made so big a contribution into the blog that I would very much like to see them as our co-editors here. I know that they might be busy with other projects but should Suzy and Dialdancer be willing to change their status from readers to co-editors I would be more than happy to see them in this capacity.

    If anyone has any ideas on how to streamline the blog (structurally) and make loads of information contained here more accessible please share!!! Thanks a lot!

    • Helena
      1. I just made a draft of a new post on the “Moonwalking” documentary that I added to an earlier post. I’ll post it whenever you ask me to.

      2. Yes, you should definitely add Dialdancer and Suzy to the blog, but remember they cannot be added as “editors”, but only as “administrators”. There is only one editor per WordPress blog, and that is you. You have rights as an editor that we don’t have as administrators (such as blocking comments, adding additional admins, etc.), so I just wanted to clear that up.

      3. Gigi’s comment on adding sub pages is located in the “Is it Devilish Cleverness or Angelic Stupidity” post, on 8-16-10 @ 4:26am. I did a search for it in the comments by searching by her IP address.

      4. I just ordered the Frozen in Time DVD, and I’ll get it sometime next week. If we choose to post it here, we’ll have to upgrade our blog to let us post our own videos, whic