Skip to content

An Insider’s Letter About Michael Jackson’s Women. SEX, LOVE AND JEALOUSY

January 9, 2013

Recently one reader said that I was wrong about Michael’s sexuality and this surprised me very much – I never really discussed it in this blog.  However now it is time we did as new and important facts have surfaced on this engrossing subject.

 1. THE LETTER

First it is necessary to publish the letter about Michael’s love life from someone who claims to be his long-time employee. To be more exact it wasn’t a letter but a message sent to a message board of the National Enquirer.

Part of it was mentioned in a post about Scott Thorson, however it turns out that it is not the full text. Though I’ve known about it for some time now I could not post it earlier as there was no way to prove its authenticity. Now the situation has changed and therefore the message should receive our utmost attention.

Let me remind you what letter we are talking of. It appeared on the message board of the National Enquirer as a reply to their “sensational” story about the alleged gay affair between Scott Thorson and MJ published sometime in spring 2004. I memorized the time as it as it ‘coincided’ with the grand jury deliberations on whether to indict Michael Jackson or not in that crazy Arvizo case.

The ‘gay affair’ with Scott Thorson allegedly took place when Michael was working on Say Say Say with Paul McCartney in London in 1984, so you can imagine how devout a Jehovah’s Witness Michael was at the time.  The author of the letter called the story trash and said that that those who had written it had no idea what they were talking of – Michael was ‘old school’ and straight ‘almost to the fault of himself’. He was very uncomfortable about passes from males and was ‘thoroughly heterosexual’. He didn’t like men. He didn’t like boys. He liked women.

The author explained Scott’s move to slander Michael by a very true statement that “Poverty brings forth all sort of “memories” and now we know that this was exactly Scott Thorson’s case.  Journalist Roger Jacobs who helped Scott contact the National Enquirer described Thorson as a hopeless drug-addict who at that time was in a terrible hole. He simply took advantage of the Arvizo allegations and hoped to make some money by concocting a fictional story of the events which had allegedly taken place twenty years before that. When I wondered if Scott Thorson would ever be able to understand that blood money never did anyone any good, Roger Jacobs simply said “No” in reply (see here please).

The gay story was pure fiction of course. Nothing of what Scott described happened. Scott made two passes on Michael. The first time Michael ignored him and the second time he told him to back off in a very polite language as he was still very sweet and innocent at the time. Since then they never spoke with each other. And this is all. This boring truth and the colorful soap opera around it are described in much detail in this post.

The story about Scott was in the first part of the message in the National Enquirer, however it had a second part to it and over there the author went over Michael’s numerous affairs with women.  The authors broke down the subject to counter balance Scott’s lies with the accurate truth and said he would not repeat it twice – though Michael was no longer his boss, he would still hate his former employee “putting it out like that in public”.

On the other hand the author did not care –  “He ain’t my boss anymore, so he’s just going to have to put up with it”. It was more important for the author to establish the innocent truth about Michael, and the innocent truth about Jackson (if you can decipher it of course) is this:

  • “Scott is full of s.hit, Michael isn’t gay and he sho’ as h.ell ain’t a pedophile”.

I deciphered it as “Scott is full of shit, Michael isn’t gay and he is sure as hell isn’t a pedophile”.

Among the names of women mentioned in the second part of the letter one name is the most captivating for us. This name is a key to the closely guarded secret of the first 1993 so-called “child molestation” case in Michael’s biography and tells the actual truth behind those accusations.

The name of that woman is June Chandler and yes, the author claims that Jordan’s mother had an affair with Michael Jackson, and that “punk bitch” Jordan Chandler just got jealous of mommy’s relationship with Michael.

June Chandler, Lily and Michael Jackson in Monaco, May 1993

June Chandler, Lily and Michael Jackson in Monaco, May 1993

Strange as it might seem now, in the year 2004 not a single detractor of Michael Jackson, not a single reader, journalist or even a fan questioned the official version of June Chandler’s involvement in the case. Everyone looked at her as either a poor trustful woman who overlooked the “molestation” of her son right in front of her eyes or a greedy parent who was callously “selling her son to a predator”.

No other versions were ever considered and therefore the story described by the anonymous author almost ten years ago sounds so unique to us today. It is the singularity of the author’s statement and its difference from the general trend that makes this news so interesting to us – of course in addition to the fact that the revelation about June Chandler having an affair with Michael Jackson  is extremely interesting in and of itself.

Before you read the letter let me explain what “punk bitch” and some other slang words mean.  I looked them up in the Urban dictionary and find that their interpretation adds a lot of color to the narration.  For example, “Punk Bitch” with reference to Jordan Chandler points to him being a cowardly and mean figure (however who can expect a 12-year old to be brave enough to stand up to corrupt adults around him?)

In fact all interpretations of “Punk Bitch” would apply to Jordan:

  • An ass lying to impress.
  • Someone who runs from a fight and someone you are hostile toward.
  • Someone who smiles in your face pretend yall are cool, but shitting on you behind your back.
  • Someone who is fake but try to act like they’re hard.
  • Someone who play phone warrior and talk hella shit over the phone but never to your face.
  • Someone who takes a person kindness for weakness.

Another word used is “Hussy”. It means “a brazen or immoral woman”. The term is applied by the author to no other than Diana Ross.

And the last word is “Sprung”. It refers to Michael Jackson (“that boy was sprung”) and to the way he felt about Lisa-Marie Presley. The word is so special that it inspired the Urban dictionary to whole chapters of explanation:

  • Sprung is when you’ve gone two months without seeing her face, yet her smile still lingers in your dreams. It’s when you can’t get her off your mind, no matter the time or distance apart. It’s when everyday that goes by without her is a bad day. It’s when you can’t help but be a hopeless romantic, waiting for the day she comes around and picks you. It’s when every song, movie, and special moment you shared sparks a flood of memories, of the better times. It’s when you’d trade it all to go back in time, to live it all over again. It’s when you hate yourself for not taking that chance, for letting that fleeting window of opportunity slip by. It’s when you long to tell her everything, about how you felt, how you still feel. It’s when the pain is unbearable. Your time spent with her each day plummets from 80% to a miserable 0% overnight….
  • Sprung is falling in love with someone to the point that they are constantly on your mind and you cannot live without them.. and your everyday is either good or bad, depending on how it went with her. When you’re so infatuated with one person that you feel almost as though you’re in love with them, yet you can’t quite define it as love. When you’re sprung, you’re stuck on one person; suddenly, no one seems to matter quite as much as they do; when you don’t see them all day, it feels like you’re missing something, like the day didn’t even count as a real day.
  • Sprung is when you have no control over how you feel for someone; you feel almost obsessed with them. Yet, somehow, it’s still not quite love. Eventually, it will turn into love, though, given enough time.
1995

“That boy was sprung”. Michael and Lisa-Marie Presley in 1995

So it is an infatuation with a person, though not exactly love?

Interesting.

Now that we know how Michael Jackson felt about Lisa Marie Presley during their marriage and even after their divorce, let us proceed to the letter itself.

Please read it with an open mind trying not to fall into the extremes of euphoria or total disbelief. Before we pass our final judgment on the letter we still need to check up a lot of things.

Also please note that the author of the letter mentions June Chandler in a very matter-of-fact way (the bold type is mine) with no special goal to rub into our minds the idea that the allegations were false and that the case was very much different from what everyone thought it to be. This matter-of-fact attitude makes the revelation about June Chandler all the more valuable to us:

Nor gay or phedofile [sic]

2004-06-12

You people are so gullible! I love it, it’s hilarious.

Anybody who genuinely knows Michael (which is none of you), knows that Michael is straight – almost to a fault of himself, considering that he doesn’t look like the most masculine of brothas. You’re so quick to believe Scott, which is hysterical because if you knew their history, you’d know how weirded out Michael was by Scott’s advances. Michael’s not overtly homophobic, but he is old school and isn’t completely comfortable with it. However, given the nature of his profession, he has tried his best to be accepting and because he tries to be a good Christian, he does not judge, he leaves that to God. He still gets incredibly uncomfortable by advances by anything remotely male….which brings us to Scott. Scott made a pass at Michael. Michael ignored it, initially. The second time, Michael told him to back the #### off (in more polite language, of course…Michael was still quite young and sweet and innocent back in the ’80s, if a dude tried something similar NOW, he might get punched in the face). They haven’t spoken since then. The closest he ever got to Michael after about ’84 was that his boyfriend was friends with Priscilla Presley’s makeup artist. The two haven’t spoken since Scott tried to get all up on Mikey.

One may ask themselves, if his motive for coming forward now was out of some sort of moral obligation and a desire to crush MJ’s “strategy” of declaring himself heterosexual, why didn’t he come forward in 1993? Maids, cooks, ex-guards, everybody and their momma was coming forward with “claims,” why not then? Or, if the motivation behind this is genuine concern for the welfare of children and not money, why not go to the police with the things you’ve seen (i.e. Scott claiming to have seen child porn on Michael’s nightstand)?

Simple, none of it happened and Scott was still livin’ the life with all of Liberace’s dough. Poverty brings forth all sorts of “memories.” Isn’t it convenient that just as soon as his cash stash is running dry, he tells the world he had sex with Michael Jackson?

Please.

Let me break this down for you people and pay attention because I don’t like doing it more than once. Michael Jackson is thoroughly heterosexual. He does not like men. He does not like boys. He likes women over the age of 18. Shiiiiit, even before he was 18, he liked women well over the age of 18. It’s no secret within certain circles that Diana Ross was his first. The poor guy thought he was going to marry her but she fucked him over with Gene Simmons and Arne Naess. He was pretty naive back then, so he chose not to see the obvious. Then he was celibate for about 3 years, before becoming involved with a pretty, blond employee of his, an actress from a popular ’80s/early ’90s sitcom, a singer that nobody cares about anymore but was the sh.it back in the day, some groupie/secretary, June Chandler (the mother of punk bitch Jordan who got jealous of mommy’s relationship with Michael) and, of course, Lisa Marie. Lisa Marie was the only one he allowed himself to become more than just sexually involved with since Diana, that boy was sprung. Lisa Marie, however, led him to believe they would have a family of their own, but stayed on the pill anyway because even if she said she was a rebel, the little bitch didn’t want mommy dearest to get mad at her for having a lil black child. Mike found the pills, split, messed around with a couple of other women with the goal of getting one pregnant just to hurt Lisa (he can be an as.shole sometimes, true) and eventually knocked up Debbie, which, (if I didn’t love and adore his children and think they saved his life) I would say was probably one of the biggest mistakes of his life. He was never faithful to Debbie after they married, never even wanted to marry her but Mike doesn’t like to break his mother’s heart. He and Lisa continued having sex until 1999 (they weren’t “together,” they were just fucking), until he met his third child’s mother, fell very much in love with her, but he is his father’s son, so he wasn’t entirely faithful to her, which is why they split up shortly after she found out she was pregnant. From that time, up until right before these new bullshit allegations broke, he was pretty much a dog. No attachment, just sex. He has no time to get attached to somebody and then depressed again after they part ways now that he has his children. I doubt he has time for anybody other than his children and his lawyers now.

There, you have it. Take it or leave it, but it’s the truth. Mike would hate me for putting his business out here like this, but at least it’s accurate, unlike all of the other trash going around now. He ain’t my boss anymore, so he’s just going to have to put up with it.

Summary: Scott is full of s.hit, Michael isn’t gay and he sho’ as h.ell ain’t a pedophile.

Here are the same man’s answers to questions on the National Enquirer message board:

1. He’s weird, he’s rich, he’s black and he never bows down to anybody. He doesn’t fit any stereotypes of what a black man “should” be, which makes people uncomfortable and enables them to believe anything sinister about him. If you need proof of that, just look no further than this very message board.

2. I think I outlined most of the girlfriends for you, if you think hard enough you could probably figure out names, but it’s not my job to spoon feed this to you. He kept Diana a secret because that’s what the hussy wanted and by the time he got his sh.it together enough to move on and get with other women, he was so obsessed with his privacy that he didn’t want the public to know anything about him that didn’t have to do with music or business (and rightfully so, everything he does is misconstrued, manipulated and taken out of context).

3. Can’t help you there, that’s something you don’t really discuss with Michael. All I can say is that it got more out of hand after he and Diana were officially no more. Nobody around him ever condoned it, I know I certainly didn’t. In all fairness to the kid, most of it is exaggerated. He’s had a lot, but to a fairly localized area, none of this crazy cheekbone, eyebrow, eyelid, forehead stuff. But what does plastic surgery have to do with whether or not he’s a pedophile or a homosexual? Nothing. He’s got a good heart, I don’t give two sh.its about his face.

I’m about through here, maybe a repeat performance or two, but probably not. Just keep all I’ve said in mind before you jump to conclusions about Mike.

==

This post took place on June 12, 2004

http://reclaimingafallenking.blogspot.ru/2010/03/was-michael-jackson-womanizer.html

These messages are smashing to say the very least. And by that I don’t mean that news that Michael wasn’t gay. This is no news to us – we’ve known it all along as this was confirmed by everyone who knew him (except Scott Thorson), and many times over too. Not that I have anything against gay men, it is simply that this allegation about Michael was not true and I see no reason why we should sustain a lie instead of keeping to the truth.

By smashing news I mean the rest of the story. Let us not pretend – of course it is interesting to read all those details, though I personally absolutely do not care how many women Michael had and when his sexual experience started – it was solely his business and not ours. All I can say is that I am happy that at least in this aspect of life he had a little joy to comfort himself with.

However the fact that the author named June Chandler as Michael’s love is really ground-breaking news. I suspected it all along from the various small details which did not fit into the official version of the events presented by the media and prosecutors. The land had been cleared by them of all the debris long before we came, but some small traces of evidence were still left here and there. And the news of June Chandler’s affair with Michael Jackson explains those traces very well indeed.

2. JUNE CHANDLER’S AFFAIR – THE TRACES LEFT

June Chandler’s affair with Michael Jackson will explain, for example, the mysterious phrases she said at some point which were quoted by Thomas Mesereau at the 2005 trial:

  •  “I’ve had males in my life that, you know, have disappointed me. How can I have you in my life and you’re saying that you’re going to take care of us, that you’re so wonderful, everything’s going to be okay, how am I going to do that?”

It may also explain why Thomas Mesereau asked her similarly mysterious questions whether she had ever dropped her clothes off in Michael’s bedroom or ordered food there. While reading the transcripts of the trial I don’t remember a single other instance of Thomas Mesereau asking such quesition of any other woman  – Brett Barnes’ mother, Joy Robson or anyone else.  And lawyers don’t ask questions without any reason at all. When the witness is non-cooperative they use their questions to actually tell the story.

At the 2005 trial

June Chandler at the 2005 trial

June Chandler’s possible affair with MJ can also explain why her maid, who lived in June Chandler’s house when Michael Jackson stayed there for allegedly 30 days, was never seen or heard of by the public (her name was not reported by the press) and why she wasn’t asked to testify at the 2005 trial.

Wasn’t she the first person to be summoned by the prosecution to testify against Jackson? Then why wasn’t she? Is it because her truthful testimony could have fully absolved Michael of any guilt and could have painted a totally different picture of his stay at June’s house?  You know, maids are very knowledgeable people when  it comes to washing someone’s clothes or seeing who stayed in whose bedroom, for example…

June Chandler’s past affair with Michael can also explain why she was all smiles at the 2005 trial. She had not seen her son for eleven years and was supposed to be sad about it, as Michael Jackson had “broken up her family” and had allegedly done some wrong to her son, so it was in her best interests to present a picture of  a distraught mother –  but she nevertheless looked confident, unaffected and glamorous. Is it because it is soooo typical of a woman to use every opportunity to try and impress her former lover by the way she looks many years later and show how attractive she still is?

"Pellicano found damning info about accuser's family" [The Daily Beast]

“Facing molestation charges Michael Jackson reportedly used Pellicano, who claims he found damning info about accuser’s family” [The Daily Beast http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/08/07/pellicano-s-reach.html ]

This affair will also explain what Anthony Pellicano had in mind when he said that back in 1993 he had found damning evidence about the boy accuser’s family.

This is a secret that still needs to be disclosed by Pellicano – of course if he ever leaves the prison where he was put almost forever for a mere wiretapping.  And what can be  more damning than finding that a mother first had an affair with a man and then betrayed him by coaching her son to say the sexual things she herself had engaged in?

The affair with June Chandler could also explain why Jordan was sure that Michael was circumcised – so sure that he ventured this information to the police himself and insisted on it.  How come he was so confident of what he was saying? This confidence seemed to be one of the things that impressed the investigators most, so where did it come from?

The possible answer is that if June Chandler really had an intimate love affair with MJ this information could easily come from her (a little later I will explain why in contrast to men a woman can make such a mistake). So what was meant to be only between her and Michael could have been shared with Jordan and former husband Evan – I mean things like MJ’s short pubic hair and the patches on his scrotum, for example.

We can imagine what a devastating effect such a betrayal could have had on Michael – the shock, disappointment and humiliation of it must have changed his attitude towards women once and for all since then.

If we suppose that June Chandler had a relationship with Michael we will understand why Jordan didn’t want to associate with his mother years after the events – first he was jealous of her relations with Michael and then she let him down by supplying the wrong description of MJ’s genitalia, thus creating a real mess and leaving Jordan to bear full responsibility for it.

Jordan must have felt as someone who was thrown under the bus by both of his parents – the father sacrificed him for the millions he sought for his film-making career, while his mother was the one who was involved most, but nevertheless managed to get out of it innocent as a baby while her son had to handle the most dirt and was scarred for life…

But am I contradicting myself when I say that June Chandler could make a mistake by taking a non-circumcised man for a circumcised one? I was saying in all earlier posts that such a mistake was simply impossible, so does it mean that I am recanting on my words?

No, it doesn’t.

I will clarify what I mean, only first I need the underage youngsters, who may be reading this, to close their eyes and skip the next few paragraphs marked by gray font  – the answer to this question will be a very graphic one.

To the rest of you I will say that Jordan could indeed get information about Michael’s so-called “circumcision” from his mother as this mistake can be made only by a woman, especially under certain circumstances.

In his interview with Dr. Richard Chandler Jordan claimed that he masturbated MJ ten times or so. But by saying it he made a big mistake, a really big mistake.  During masturbation the foreskin moves, even in the erect state, so it is impossible to overlook this movement and therefore not to notice the foreskin and the non-circumcision state.

However if a woman is not involved in masturbation of a male and has a “traditional” intercourse she will neither notice nor feel any difference  at all – it is all the same to her whether he is circumcised or not.

Neither will she notice if she sees him only just “before” or “after”, and always in the erect state, because the erection seen from a distance does look like circumcision. Neither will she notice if he wears a condom  in which case  no woman on earth will be able to tell a non-circumcised man from a circumcised one. Nor will she notice if everything is happening in the dark, for example.

In short there are lots of circumstances under which a woman may take a non-circumcised man for a circumcised one.

With males engaged in sex with each other it is different and over there the mistake is totally impossible. The basic difference is in the movement of the foreskin during masturbation (even when erect). And this “punch bitch” Jordan claimed that he had masturbated MJ.

If his story had been true he should have seen it. But me made a mistake here, so he didn’t see or feel it.

See the animation made for medical purposes please: http://www.circumstitions.com/Works.html

No one will tell you these things, and it is only me who is risking all these graphic details. I really wanted to spare you, but there is simply no other way to explain, so please forgive me – it wasn’t easy for me either.

For those who have skipped the explanation let us just make a conclusion that under certain conditions a woman can make a mistake about a male’s non-circumcision state, while a man can never make such a mistake, and the answer to this difference is in the foreskin. The foreskin always moves, and this fact is easily noticed by a male partner but not always noticed by a female partner, and this is all there is to it.

This is why the above letter is so important to us. June Chandler could also be involved in the scam against Jackson and this version will dot all i’s and cross all t’s about the intentions of the Chandlers in the 1993 case:

  • Evan wanted money
  • June wanted money, love and sex, but when Even shattered everything and deprived her of the chance to marry she settled at least for the money and cooperated with the others. However she let her son down by supplying him with wrong information about MJ
  • Jordan wanted to derive some benefits from the terrible situation he was facing. He was the one who suffered most and evidently wanted  a compensation for it.

To make sure that the above more or less accurately shows the disposition of forces in the 1993 scheme all we need to do is prove that the letter above is authentic. If we manage to prove it we can consider the job of uncovering the truth about the Chandlers’ story done. The points that actually need to be clarified are:

1)     Was the letter really written by Michael’s employee?

2)     Could it be written by a fan who simply wanted to whitewash MJ?

3)     And was that employee indeed so well-informed that his story could be fully trusted?

3. CHECKING UP THE LETTER

Checking up the authenticity of the letter is a really big  job. The first thing to do is compare the story described there with independent information we know from other sources. Now we are in a more favorable position than the author of the letter as much has been uncovered since the year 2004 when it was written.

When checking up the story one of the factors to always keep in mind is whether the author could or could not know this information at that time unless he knew Michael very closely. The letter describes a succession of events, so it is top important to check whether the timeline provided there fits the real chronology.

If all the other facts of the letter are proven correct than there will be no reason to doubt the whole of it, including the information about June Chandler.

For a start I’ve selected this quote:

Quote 1.

… that boy was sprung. Lisa Marie, however, led him to believe they would have a family of their own, but stayed on the pill anyway because even if she said she was a rebel, the little bitch didn’t want mommy dearest to get mad at her for having a lil black child. Mike found the pills, split, messed around with a couple of other women with the goal of getting one pregnant just to hurt Lisa (he can be an asshole sometimes, true) and eventually knocked up Debbie.

The fact that Lisa led Michael to believe that she wanted children but never kept her word blasted the media after Michael’s death, when Rabbi Shmuley published “The Michael Jackson Tapes”. However a similar story had earlier been told by Taraborrelli, so a fan could have known or guessed at it after connecting some dots. So we will disregard this point.

However as to Michael finding birth control pills and splitting from Lisa Marie as a result and then “messing around” with someone else, this information I hear for the first time and this could be provided only by a true insider. 

The closest to what is described here is found in Lacienegasmiles blog which is the first place to go to if you want to know about Michael Jackson’s personal life – the blog collected every little bit ever said by the media about Jackson in this respect. This piece from Lacienegasmiles seems to refer to the period when the split between Michael and Lisa-Marie took place.

The 6 weeks period started sometime in July-August 1995:

July 31-August 6, 1995

The fact that while being formally married Lisa Marie, Michael had close association with Debbie Rowe is again confirmed by the same blog which quotes “Magic and Madness” by Taraborrelli. Lisa’s friend, Monica Pastelle speaks there about Lisa’s anger with Debbie and how incredulous she was of the need to act like the jealous little wife in order to handle Michael’s ‘wet’ nurse.

It looks like these two women were tearing him apart between themselves:

Magic/Madness, 1995

Lisa Marie’s friend Monica Pastelle says: ‘I recall Lisa telling me that Michael was trying to make her believe he was interested in a white nurse who worked for his dermatologist. Lisa just laughed it off. She thought Michael was trying to make her jealous, just playing games.’

‘But it was true, just the same: Michael was seeing Debbie Rowe while he was married to Lisa,’ says Monica Pastelle. ‘And Lisa knew it. At one point, she and Debbie had a tense telephone conversation during which Lisa said: “Look, nursey. I’m sorry that you’re in love with my husband. But he’s mine. So get lost”.

‘Afterwards, Lisa burst out laughing. She said: “Can you imagine? Me acting like the jealous little wife because Michael’s wet nurse -or whatever she is-  is in love with him. What is this craziness?” ‘

http://lacienegasmiled.wordpress.com/2010/07/31/1995-1999-debbie-rowe/

I don’t know what Michael “seeing” Debbie Rowe stands for and whether it is the same as “messing around” described in the letter, but the very least we can be sure of is that the Debbie Rowe factor was introduced into the marital picture of Lisa-Marie and Michael at the time when their marriage was not over yet – and this is exactly what the author of our letter claimed.

In another interview Lisa Marie confirmed that the conversation about Debbie possibly giving Michael a baby was taking place while they were still married and she actually gave her okay to it herself,  never really expecting him to follow her advice:

Lisa, Playboy, June 2003

PLAYBOY: Did you and Michael discuss having kids?

PRESLEY: Yeah. [Laughs] I got out of that one. “I just don’t think it’s a good idea right now.” But I knew that’s what he wanted. And I knew Debbie Rowe was offering to do it for him while we were married, according to him. She was a nurse who had a crush on him and offered to have his babies.

PLAYBOY: Was he trying to leverage you into agreeing?

PRESLEY: Kind of. “Debbie Rowe says she’ll do it.” Ok, have Debbie Rowe do it! And it’s funny, when I imagined having a child with him, all I could ever see was a custody battle nightmare.

Wiki also adds to it that Debbie Rowe was impregnated while Michael and Lisa were still married:

  • While separated but still married to Presley, Jackson impregnated Rowe but she suffered a miscarriage and lost their baby in March 1996.

If this was the case I wonder if there is a way to know when Debbie was first impregnated? It would show when Michael split from Lisa and started “messing around” following the wording of the author of the letter. Remember that we are asking these questions not out of idle curiosity (well yes, out of curiosity too) but in order to check up the credibility of its author and learn whether we can trust his other information, especially the one concerning June Chandler.

For an answer about Debbie’s first pregnancy I again refer you to the Lacienegasmiles blog which managed to find out that the pregnancy started in December 1995 (so the messing around must have begun even earlier for obvious reasons). This date was taken from a story which is openly tabloid but claims that its journalist befriended Debbie Rowe and she blabbered away some very intimate details to her, one of which was that she had a miscarriage in March 1996 three months after conception, which indeed takes us to December 1995.

By the way Lisa Marie Presley’s announcement that she wanted out of her marriage with Michael came also in December 1995 and this suggests to us that our timeline is correct. Every detail of it is fitting in – if she had learned the news about Debbie’s pregnancy in December her pride would have been wounded so much that she would not have tolerated the situation for a single minute and would have immediately stamped her foot in indignation.

Well, up till now the information from the letter is being confirmed in every little detail of it!

4. ANGER AND JEALOUSY

In her interviews Lisa-Marie admits that she was extremely angry with Jackson during their separation, only when she speaks about their divorce Lisa-Marie usually displaces the focus from real events to a version which is less hurtful to her pride.

She claims that the divorce was partially due to Michael taking drugs, and it is usually after this statement that the conversation habitually flows into standard talking about Michael’s “drug-addiction” and theories about her “saving” him and her (or his)  fears that “he would die like her father”, and then it goes all the way down to her unhappy childhood experience of seeing her father die, etc.

This is a regular pattern of her interpretation of the events and it is nothing new to us. However Lisa-Marie’s is not quite sincere in her version of the story and we know it from her own statement to Oprah, where she said that she had not seen any drugs in Michael’s life except the moment immediately prior to the divorce. As an example of the only instance when she thought that it was drugs she refers to the incident when Michael collapsed on stage and was rushed to a hospital.

Moreover, if you listen to her attentively you will find that even during that Michael’s collapse drugs were only a supposition on her part – she thought of them (and for the first time too) because when she arrived at the hospital no one could explain to her the reason for his condition, which is why she assumed the worst. And the word assumed is central here.

Isn’t it interesting how she and the media always focused on the so-called MJ’s “drug issue”, while a careful reading of Lisa’s own words reveals that the suspicion arose only on one occasion,  just prior to the divorce and it was nothing but a supposition on her part?

Debbie and MJ 10

Michael did try his marriage to Debbie work. He was so serious about it that he even wore a wedding ring….

What I mean is that all these drug stories are a mere pretext used by Lisa-Marie to explain why she was so terribly angry with Michael. The real reason for it was most probably her anger with the fact that she had lost Michael to another woman and an ordinary nurse at that.

The added insult of it was that the nurse was lacking her glamor, beauty and fame, and still Michael preferred her to Lisa-Marie and all of it because she was giving him a child.

Doesn’t it put things in a different perspective and suggest that by all that talk about “drugs” Lisa was simply having her little revenge on Michael?

This is what Lisa-Marie said to papers:

On Jackson’s drug problem, she claims she didn’t notice until the very end of their marriage.

“I didn’t really suspect and catch on until just before I filed for divorce. There was just an occasion, an incident where he had collapsed and he was in the hospital,” she described of the scene in 1995 when Jackson collapsed while rehearsing for an HBO concert and doctors blamed it on a viral infection.

“It was very confusing what was wrong. Every day there was a different report. And I couldn’t tell what was happening,” she added. “I couldn’t really get a straight answer about what was happening with him and I think we were all a little bit in the dark. At that point, I think I got from various indications that that was going on then.”

“Were you angry with him before?” Oprah questioned.

“I was very angry. I was so angry. I felt that we were so united and then at some point he pushed me out.

http://www.popeater.com/2010/10/21/lisa-marie-presley-michael-jackson/

He pushed her out? So this is what it was really like… And how could we think that a mere suspicion that Michael was “taking drugs” could drive a street-smart girl like Lisa Marie into an indignant state like she is describing? No, it was the pain, jealousy and fury of an abandoned woman that made her turn on him.

All this talk about drugs was only a pretext for Lisa-Marie to file for a divorce and a plausible reason to explain to the media why they were separating – it enabled her to save her face in public and hide the deep wounds to her pride. How could she admit to everyone the real reason for the divorce –  that Michael pushed her way and her place was taken by a nurse, a sheer nobody who was also ten years older than Lisa?

I can very well understand how Lisa’s jealousy, rage and self-pity were suffocating her, however all she had to do to avoid all that pain was giving Michael a child – and then he would have surely stayed and there would have been no happier family on earth. What a mistake she made…

Lisa Marie’s jealousy was so terrible that Karen Faye who wrote a tell-all girlie tweet in 2007 called Lisa Marie Presley an “evil little princess”. Here is Karen’s tweet:

Date: Apr 1, 2007 2:00 PM
Subject: The Real Lisa Marie – Karen Faye.

Hi Angie…..everyone has a part of their mind that will always doubt. We must learn to trust our hearts,
not our brains. Lisa Marie is a very evil little girl. She was horrible to Michael, myself, and anyone who
was around Michael. She was even jealous of her own children when they adored Michael. She was the one
trying to manipulate Michael and his world. I never saw Michael so miserable as I did when he was married
to Lisa. No one should start beleiving the tabloids now……Lisa has her album coming out, she wants as much publicity as she can, What better way than to jump on Michaels popularity….everyone else does.
KF

Lisa is an evil little princess.

Michael is an angel by comparison to LM
she was so jealous of anyone that came near Michael
she hated me…..so jealous, she didn’t want me touching him

LM has an album she wants to sell…what better way than to use Michael…..

she was a lovely person before they married
she pursued him with a vengence even when she was still married
she did not smoke or drink
as soon as they got married, she drank, smoked, wanted to fire everyone around Michael, and demanded he become a Scientologist
he bent over backwards to please her…..he never could, she was just too miserable

Lisa is just seeing the situation through her eyes, which is from a very confused individual. I viewed the relationship from a more objective point of view. Lisa was a miserable, jealous, and treated Michael unfairly in
every situation when I was around. He was so unhappy during his marriage with her, and he tried so hard to
make it work. You must also understand she has an album to sell right now, and again people are more
interested in Michael than they are with her…..what would you say? You would twist everything to support
yourself and your record sales…this is very predictable. Also, remember the media twists the words
of the people they interview also (didn’t we just see that?) Do you think they don’t do it with Lisa too?

KF

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/6krvo5

Karen Faye confirmed what we thought –  it was jealousy, anger and fury at Michael that motivated Lisa Marie to file for a divorce. She took this official step on  January 18, 1996.

5. NO DRUGS

But how can we be sure that Lisa Marie was wrong in her supposition about the reason for Michael’s collapse and that no drugs were really involved in that incident on stage? Earlier there were none either as even Lisa-Marie had not seen any instances of drug use.

We have independent proof that at the time of Michael’a collapse during a rehearsal in New York in December 1995 there were no narcotics in his system. The proof comes from a doctor who was working at the Beth Israel Medical Center in New York and examined Michael after his arrival at the hospital.

Michael was dehydrated, his blood pressure was abhorrently low (70 over 40) and he had a rapid heart rate, but there were no narcotics involved in his condition. The doctor said that he was so critically ill that he was actually near death.  When Michael left the hospital he thanked the doctor for saving his life.

This shortened version of the article is providing the details:

Michael Jackson leaves the New York Beth Israel hospital, Dec.1995

Michael Jackson leaves the New York Beth Israel hospital, Dec.1995

Dr William Alleyne about MJ and saving him in 1995

Published: Wednesday, Jul. 08, 2009

By Andrew Dys, Columnist – adys@heradonline.com

In December 1995, Alleyne was the critical care director at Beth Israel North Hospital, on the Upper East Side in New York City across the way from the mayor’s Gracie Mansion. He was the guy in charge when one of the nurses told him, We have Michael Jackson coming here.

Alleyne didn’t believe it then.

“I said, ‘Ha, ha, very funny,’ Alleyne recalled.

He had seen patients who were stars, or spouses of stars, but this was different. Thousands of people started clamoring outside the hospital. The place was turning into bedlam.

“Ten minutes later, they rolled Michael Jackson in on a stretcher, Alleyne said Tuesday from his Rock Hill office where he’s one of the partners at Carolina Pulmonary Physicians. But in 1995, Alleyne was the doctor to the King of Pop. Jackson had collapsed after a rehearsal for an upcoming HBO special at the nearby Beacon Theater.

Alleyne and his wife had seen Jackson before in concert, on television, and now, in 1995, Jackson was waiting, unconscious, for Bill Alleyne to save his life.

“Mr. Jackson was in critical condition, Alleyne said. He was dehydrated. He had low blood pressure. He had a rapid heart rate. He was near death.”

After about an hour or so that December dusk, Alleyne said he had Jackson stabilized with intravenous fluids and other treatment, and transferred Jackson to intensive care. But in the meantime, the crowd outside had become massive, a mob scene.

Jackson soon was stable, and Alleyne and Jackson started a doctor/patient relationship similar to all in theory but unlike any relationship Alleyne had ever had in practice. As people were climbing trees to get pictures of inside the hospital, as Jackson’s fans sang his songs outside and the world press invaded the sidewalks and street for information about the condition of this most-famous man, Bill Alleyne tried to keep Michael Jackson alive with intravenous food and care.

Michael Jackson was the most soft-spoken, least demanding guy you would ever want to meet, Alleyne said. Everything he said was a whisper. His biggest concern was could he perform.

Alleyne told Jackson no way could he perform anytime soon.

Alleyne had to get permission to release information to Jackson’s family. Jackson gave it. Alleyne had to deal with other doctors who came to watch his every move, and a world that wanted information that Alleyne would not give to anybody but those Jackson said to give it to.

After about 72 hours, Alleyne and Jackson’s publicists and others realized they had to give a press conference. So Alleyne worked with Jackson’s people to go over what could be said, what to stay away from but still tell the truth. Alleyne was blunt with the world, saying Jackson did not have any immune system problems because rumors about AIDS were swirling. He was blunt that Jackson had no drugs in his system.

News accounts from 1995 show Alleyne and his then-partner, Dr. Bob Glennon, talking about Jackson’s condition to convince the world that Jackson was, in fact, critically ill.

“Michael Jackson was unconscious when he arrived, Alleyne said. I had to make that clear.

Before Alleyne left the hotel that day, Alleyne recalled Jackson telling him: Thank you for saving my life.

Then Jackson told Alleyne he understood how difficult it had been for a black man to get to such a distinguished position within the medical world, that Alleyne’s accomplishments were inspiring to Jackson.

“It was very touching, Alleyne said. I will never forget that.

The full story is here: http://www.michaeljackson.com/uk/node/820899

So it wasn’ t drugs as Lisa Marie told the whole world. Then why did Michael collapse?

He was preparing for a “One Night Only” show in New York which was his first in eight years. He rehearsed even on the days when he was not scheduled to and the dancers noticed him to be exhausted.  The concert was to be televised and shown to the audience of 250 mln people worldwide. On the day of the collapse he was rehearsing without any breaks from morning until 5 p.m. when the incident actually took place.

By that show Michael was putting very much at stake. After the 1993 case settlement his reputation was ruined. The History album was not doing very well and Michael was trying to straigten it out. This was a very stressful period of his life:

Michael Jackson Collapses At Rehearsal

By DAVID STOUT
Published: December 07, 1995 (shortened)

Michael Jackson collapsed while rehearsing on a Manhattan theater stage yesterday, casting uncertainty over plans for a highly publicized national cable television special to be telecast on Sunday. Tests showed that the entertainer was suffering from low blood pressure.

Mr. Jackson, 37, was admitted overnight to Beth Israel Medical Center North at 170 East End Avenue on the Upper East Side, where he was taken after being stricken at the Beacon Theater, 2124 Broadway at 74th Street, just before 5 P.M. He had been rehearsing for the Home Box Office special, which HBO officials say they hope will be watched by 250 million people worldwide.

Nancy Lindeman, a hospital spokeswoman, said that Mr. Jackson was in stable condition. His blood pressure was found to be an abnormally low 70 over 40 by an Emergency Medical Service crew that arrived at the theater four minutes after the collapse, said John Hanchar, an E.M.S. spokesman.

Quentin Schaffer, an HBO vice president for media relations, issued a brief statement last evening, saying, “Michael is stabilized.” He added that rehearsals were continuing last night, when Mr. Jackson was not scheduled to be rehearsing anyway.

Mr. Schaffer said the entertainer’s personal doctor was being flown in from California — a sign of concern not only for Mr. Jackson’s well-being but also for the huge sums of money that could be at stake.

The HBO special is to be taped at the theater tomorrow and Saturday. Mr. Schaffer and others at HBO acknowledged that the status of the Sunday telecast was uncertain. “The concern right now is his health,” Mr. Schaffer said.

Mr. Jackson was scheduled to receive an award last night at the Billboard Music Awards, which also took place in New York City.

HBO representatives declined to say how much they had spent on preparations for the concert, which have included renting the theater for two weeks. But they said they have had high hopes for the event, titled “One Night Only,” which was to be Mr. Jackson’s first in New York in eight years.

For that matter, Mr. Jackson himself could have a lot at stake. His latest album, “HIStory,” has languished on the charts, ranking No. 55 after 24 weeks, according to Soundscan, a company that monitors retail sales of recorded music. If the HBO concert were a success, Mr. Jackson would no doubt hope for a carry-over effect on his album sales.

Kevin Barwick, an E.M.S. technician who went to the theater after the singer collapsed, said, “We treated him as if he was anybody else.” He and a fellow technician, La-Shunn Knight, said the entertainer was lying on his side, clad in jeans and a T-shirt, and looking lethargic.

Colin Carew, a dancer not associated with the show, said colleagues participating in the production at the Beacon had told him that Mr. Jackson seemed exhausted from rehearsals. “They said he was rehearsing and he collapsed,” Mr. Carew said. “He’s been rehearsing since this morning. They asked him if he wanted to take a break, and he had said no.”

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/07/nyregion/michael-jackson-collapses-at-rehearsal.html

So the reason was the strain of a first concert in eight years to be seen by the whole world, Michael’s exhaustion from hard work, severe dehydration and a critically low blood pressure.  And in addition to all that Michael was going through very much trouble in his personal life – he desperately wanted a child and had to break away from a woman he loved but could no longer live with and rely on, and was making a choice in favor of a friend who was ready to give him this precious gift.

While Michael was ill Lisa-Marie made a visit to the hospital and had a big quarrel with him there. Several weeks later, on January 18, 1996 she filed for the official divorce. Michael answered her by going on January 25 to Motown Cafe in New York with his make-up artist and friend Karen Faye. According to some sources Lisa Marie later called Karen and said that she was a “bitch”. Now they have made up and agreed that both made mistakes in the past.

In February 1996 Michael went away to Brazil to shoot “They don’t care about us”. A month later, in March Debbie Rowe had a miscarriage which she took very hard but said that Michael was there to console her. In May 1996 she was pregnant again with Prince.

Going into all this detail was necessary to make sure that the letter written by our mysterious author was correct – Michael did “mess around” with Debbie with the goal to make her pregnant. Whether it was in order to hurt Lisa (“he can be an asshole sometimes, true”) or simply for a reason that he wanted a child, we don’t know, but he finally did “knock up” Debbie while he was still formally married to Lisa,  just as the letter claimed it.

September 1998. Outside the Ivy restaurant in Beverly Hills

September 1998. Outside the Ivy restaurant in Beverly Hills. She is crying by the way

This is how and why the divorce took place at all.

It is clear that if Lisa-Marie had agreed to give Michael a baby he would have been the happiest person on earth and none of the events that followed would have taken place.

The author of the letter was right   as for Lisa-Marie that boy was indeed sprung.

The four years they saw each other after the divorce are proving it.

(to be continued)

191 Comments leave one →
  1. September 18, 2014 9:23 am

    @ Nancy

    He wasn’t into women? Ok. And how do you know that for 100% certainty?
    You can claim we’re in denial, but we’ll do the same to you if you’re persistent on believing the opposite without any sort of concrete evidence to suggest it’s the actual truth.

  2. nancy permalink
    September 14, 2014 2:10 am

    He wasn’t into women

  3. nancy permalink
    September 14, 2014 2:02 am

    Oh you people are in such denial. The man had sleep overs with little boys not grown women. Michael jackson as lady’s man is absurd.

  4. May 18, 2014 4:03 pm

    people are so confusing about Michael.. I think nobody here really understand the true nature of Michael’s sexuality… yes he was totally normal and liked only women… but… he never found the right woman.. the right woman that he would permit her to unite his body to her body… that’s what people dont and can’t understand…. Michael was not like most men… his mentalily was different… that’s happen when you grow up in a dirty world since 6 and you are a sensible person…

  5. May 7, 2014 2:17 am

    All of Michaels children have had therapists since his death.They must have seen both truth, rubbish and a lot of speculation. Certainly the issues you Cole address have been dealt with
    Personally I have noticed Blanket smiling on some more recent pics and he is no longer only home scholeed I unferstand..
    Still: the damage to them By AEG can not be underestimated. I cannot undrstand how Murray can lve with what he did.

  6. OffTheWall5 permalink
    May 6, 2014 5:25 am

    Lisa Marie Presley briefly mentioned Michael in an Australian interview (2014)

    Article titled : “What I Know About Men” – Sydney Morning Herald, March 16, 2014.

    I don’t regret any of my marriages [to, in order, musician Danny Keough, pop star Michael Jackson, actor Nicolas Cage and current husband, music producer Michael Lockwood]. They were all incredible, fun experiences. Some were marriages of whim – I was wild, they were wild, and we did wild things, but I don’t regret them. Each one ended for different reasons. Some I wished didn’t end the way they did, but they weren’t failures; we just weren’t partnered right.

    With MJ [Michael Jackson], unfortunately, too much happened, too much got between us. There was a very deep strong love there; intense. But people got in the way, on my end and his end. We had so many people telling us what to do and intercepting and speaking on behalf of the other. Had it been just he and I, towards the end, I don’t think we would have divorced.

  7. December 24, 2013 4:33 pm

    - I realize the purpose of this article was to explore and try to verify (to the extent possible) a letter written by a Michael Jackson insider. Yet, these last two newspaper articles (though published some time ago) made me very sad today. Yes, they support the proposition that Michael and Lisa Marie’s relationship clearly included vigorous and satisfying sex. But, when I think of all he suffered between then and now — including the continuous, brutal and unrelenting invasion of his privacy and his private parts — I question the helpfulness of these graphic details though they are reported to come from Lisa Marie herself. Rather than subduing rumors about Jackson’s sexuality, they seemed to whet the public’s insatiable appetite for more and more. Even now, four years after his death, Michael is resurrected time and again as the object of merciless smearing, innuendo and gossip.

    – I referred ONLY to the two newspaper articles (written in the past) that saddened me because they made made me recall the suffering Michael Jackson experienced and the deliberate mis-characterization of just about everything he did and said — and how it has continued over the years by the press to this day. Obviously, my comments were not written well enough to clearly convey that one point without causing confusion. I wish I’d not written them at all now, but will not make the same mistake in the future. Judith Mason

    Judith, why do you wish you had not written them? I didn’t even say a word of criticism of your comments and just explained why I thought that LMP’s recent interview about MJ (2012) and the gossipy article about their sex (1995) were pertinent for this post.

  8. December 24, 2013 3:56 pm

    “I refer ONLY to this particular post which explores the authenticity of a letter written by a Jackson insider that discusses his observations about Jackson over a long period of time.” – Judith Mason

    This post is indeed part of a series about the Insider’s letter about MJ’s women. Actually it wasn’t a letter, but a message on the message board of the National Enquirer.

    For those who have not read the series let me say that the facts described by this insider were unique – for example, he said that Michael “became involved” with June Chandler and “this punk bitch Jordan got jealous of mommy’s relationship with Michael”.

    This cast a totally different light on the Chandlers’ story but to believe this man we needed to make sure that the message was authentic and was written by someone who was really privy to Michael’s most guarded secrets.

    The authenticity could be checked up only by the facts from other sources. The circumstances of LMP and MJ’s separation in January 1996 that became known only later and from LMP’s own accounts of it were one of the ways to do it.

    Now I am almost one hundred per cent sure that the insider was Bill Bray though by the time he wrote the letter he was very old and was no longer working for MJ. However he speaks of Michael as his former employer, so things perfectly add up here too.

    After checking almost every detail of the letter now we can safely say that the message was authentic and this means that Michael was indeed “involved with June Chandler” and Jordan was “jealous of mommy’s relationship with Michael”.

    So in her testimony at the 2005 trial June Chandler did not say the main thing about that 1993 story – it was she who was involved with Michael in 1993, and not her son Jordan.

    Lisa Marie Presley was still married to her first husband at that time, and had just had her second baby by him. Michael always liked LMP, but he was a God-abiding and a family-oriented man, and it wasn’t his style to break up other people’s families, so he could easily be looking at June Chandler as a possible marriage partner.

    Actually with the exception of his two wives June Chandler is the only other woman with whom Michael ever travelled.

    There are four of them here – Jordan, Lily in Michael’s arms and June Chandler (Monaco, May 1993):

    It seems to me that June Chandler is even carrying the Love bracelet which Michael presented her with at the time:

    Lily is always in Michael’s arms. Jordan is sitting next to him:

    June Chandler in 2005:

  9. Judith Mason permalink
    December 24, 2013 3:40 pm

    I referred ONLY to the two newspaper articles (written in the past) that saddened me because they made made me recall the suffering Michael Jackson experienced and the deliberate mis-characterization of just about everything he did and said — and how it has continued over the years by the press to this day.

    Again, I did not mean that you or anyone else (with or without a blog) should stop trying to set the record straight whenever and however you can. All efforts to do so should be encouraged and applauded. It is the unrelenting tabloid press (with the very big voice) that tries, even now, to perpetuate myth and lies..

    Obviously, my comments were not written well enough to clearly convey that one point without causing confusion. I wish I’d not written them at all now, but will not make the same mistake in the future.

  10. December 24, 2013 3:13 pm

    “Helena. I did not say your blog was about sex. I refer ONLY to this particular post” – Judith Mason

    Judith, you’ve made your observation clear enough for me. But you know, it sounded to me like “Michael’s privacy has been invaded so much that it’s time we stopped invading it even more”. I may have misinterpreted your statement, but if I did not let me say what I think of it.

    Michael’s privacy was indeed invaded in the most horrendous way possible, however as long as the internet is full of dirty and fictional stories about Michael’s private life, I see it as my duty to counter balance them with the truth about it – no matter how shocking it might seem to my readers.

    In fact this never-ending state of shock is what Michael was forced to live in the major part of his life, and now we are at least beginning to have a feel of what it was like.

    Seventeen years ago when Lisa Marie was divorcing Michael these articles were a norm and absolutely no one was shocked by them – this was regarded as the ultimate truth. However it is a shock to read them now and this is what I want people to see and realize:

    LISA-MARIE TO DIVORCE JACKSON; End of ‘sham’ marriage.

    MICHAEL Jackson’s bizarre marriage was officially declared over last night when his wife Lisa-Marie Presley filed for divorce.

    Her claim – made in Los Angeles – blamed “irreconcilable differences” for the end of a relationship that lasted less than two years and was dubbed the strangest in showbusiness.

    Now Jacko, 37, may have to pay up to pounds 10million as part of a split-up settlement with the 27-year-old daughter of Elvis and Priscilla Presley. Priscilla, the tough-as-nails widow of The King, emerged as the woman who engineered the parting.

    She was horrified when her daughter wed Jackson. Advisers told her he had his eyes on a big slice of the Presley empire.

    Priscilla was determined he wouldn’t get a penny and is said to have worked relentlessly to untie the knot.

    Last night a source close to Priscilla said: “Nothing will delight her more than to see Jackson take a moonwalk from this sham marriage.

    “He was after the Presley publishing rights and the Graceland profits from day one.”

    The couple wed in secret in the Dominican Republic in May 1994, the year after Jackson faced allegations of sexually abusing young boys.

    He was never charged, but settled a civil case involving 13-year-old dentist’s son Jordy Chandler by paying a reputed pounds 10m-pounds 15m.

    It was claimed the marriage to Lisa-Marie was an attempt to deflect attention from the scandal that almost wrecked Jacko’s career.

    But last night it was pronounced finished as Lisa- Marie’s lawyers went into action.

    Her publicist Paul Bloch confirmed the news when he said: “Yes, yes – it is true. There have been papers filed in Los Angeles and she is citing irreconcilable differences.”

    If Jackson does not contest the action, they could be divorced within weeks.

    But they could squabble over money for months.

    It is expected Jackson will have to pay at least pounds 10m of his huge wealth

    The couple signed pre-nuptial agreements to protect both their fortunes at the time they tied the knot 20 months ago.

    But any money earned since could be deemed common funds.

    Divorce lawyer Jerry Silver said: “If either side wanted to be bloody-minded, they could certainly start a fight over earnings made during the time they were together.”

    Since the marriage Jackson has released his greatest hits CD HIStory, which despite flagging sales is expected to gross more than pounds 50m.

    Earth Song, from that album, was also the Christmas No.1 in Britain.

    It was a photograph in the Daily Mirror last August that was the final nail in the coffin of the marriage.

    The picture showed Jacko, his face covered by an anti-pollution mask, arriving in Paris with two boys aged 11 and 14.

    Jacko took the two brothers to Disneyland in Paris and then Switzerland just as new child abuse allegations surfaced in America.

    Lisa-Marie, who has two children by her first marriage to musician Danny Keough, complained: “How come he can find time for other people’s children, but not mine?”

    Their empty marriage had already been exposed when they gave a live TV interview in June.

    Despite Lisa-Marie’s claims that they had sex, they were cold and distant towards each other.

    And last week mother Priscilla said in a US magazine: “Lisa-Marie should come to her senses and kick this freak out.”

    Copyright 1996 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

    http://www.thefreelibrary.com/LISA-MARIE+TO+DIVORCE+JACKSON%3b+End+of+'sham'+marriage.-a061326664

    SO Michael and Lisa Marie have admitted it was all a sham.

    A final cynical attempt by one of the shrewdest manipulators of people I have come across to win back flagging public support.

    Michael Jackson’s 20-month marriage to Lisa Marie Presley was never going to work.

    It was as farcical as the 15- minute ceremony in a judge’s front room on the Dominican Republic which united them as man and wife in May, 1994.

    The cold, emotionless service left the judge who conducted it, Hugo Alvarez Perez completely bemused. At the time it was seen as a marriage of convenience to paper over Jacko’s tattered reputation following the battery of child abuse allegations.

    Anyone who knows Jackson, and I have spoken to many former staff and assistants, will tell you he simply doesn’t fancy women.

    The only role they can play is as a mother figure to his demanding, temperamental, petulent and highly neurotic character. Liz Taylor is the perfect example.

    There was no room among the life-sized toys, which fill Jackson’s bedroom, for the curvaceous Lisa Marie Presley.

    As his former personal maid Blanca Francia told me: “He’d moonwalk backwards out of the bedroom window if he was expected to make love to a woman.” But Jackson’s head of a multi-million pound empire. Behind the syrupy sweet voice and diatribes of “I love you all” is a sharp business brain.

    After his $21million pay-off to Jordy Chandler he knew he had to convince the world he wasn’t a sex abuser.

    And what is more normal than a young man marrying. Especially the daughter of the king of rock, Elvis Presley.

    They went on TV last June to try and convince the world they had a healthy sex life. But the body language between them was as warm as that of Charles and Diana on a bad day.

    Jackson likes computer toys and little boys. With a new No.1 hit now firmly under his belt, Lisa had served her purpose and was no longer needed.

    Copyright 1996 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

  11. Judith Mason permalink
    December 24, 2013 11:25 am

    Helena. I did not say your blog was about sex. I refer ONLY to this particular post which explores the authenticity of a letter written by a Jackson insider that discusses his observations about Jackson over a long period of time. I’m sorry if I did not make that clear in my response.

  12. December 24, 2013 11:08 am

    “Yes, they support the proposition that Michael and Lisa Marie’s relationship clearly included vigorous and satisfying sex. But, when I think of all he suffered between then and now — including the continuous, brutal and unrelenting invasion of his privacy and his private parts — I question the helpfulness of these graphic details though they are reported to come from Lisa Marie herself. Rather than subduing rumors about Jackson’s sexuality, they seemed to whet the public’s insatiable appetite for more and more.” – Judith Mason

    Judith Mason, this blog is not about anyone’s sex at all. The blog is more of an investigative kind and is set to prove Michael’s innocence and show the craziness of allegations against him.

    By now many have already forgotten how people were laughing out loud when Michael and Lisa-Marie married. It was a matter of non-stop jokes for millions of people – ‘he is distracting attention from his “boys”, ‘it is a deal and will not last a month’, ‘he is using her for publicity sake’, etc.

    But for Michael and LMP it was real. Like for many of us ordinary people it was a marriage filled with love and hope that they would be able to make it. And like all people in love they hoped they would live together ‘until death will part them’. But instead they got the whole world ridiculing them and looking into their bed.

    Diane Sawyers incredulously asked them in a TV interview whether they really had sex and Howard Stern demanded from Lisa-Marie how his penis looked like. Oprah asked Michael if he was a virgin and Michael looked at her in disbelief that a well-respected interviewer would be asking him such questions. Martin Bashir asked something similar in his filthy film and the only thing the shocked Michael could say was that he was a gentleman.

    YES, Michael was a gentleman, while all those around him were not. These people were sort of drunk with freedom to ridicule and interrogate him over most intimate matters in the most insatiable and shameless way.

    They asked their offensive questions because they wanted to take him unawares, were checking his reaction and hoped to make him open up some “dark secret” this way. Never in their life did they believe that the most eligible girl like Lisa Marie would choose “this freak” and would be even in love with him. This matter was regarded as a joke and was laughed off in many corners of the world throughout their marriage.

    It is impossible even to imagine what kind of “marital bliss” they could have together if all they saw around them was a laugh thrown in their faces. This is why in one of the photos Lisa Marie actually cries while trying to present a bright smile to the media and Michael’s eyes reflect the endless sadness of their love story ruined by all those who meddled with their lives.

    September 1998

    The public is still insatiable for stories about MJ and LMP?

    Well, we all heard that they “never had sex” and “all of it was just pretence”, so I see no harm why I can’t present the reports contrary to that. Remember that it isn’t me who is telling these stories, I’m simply the one who found them:

  13. Judith Mason permalink
    December 23, 2013 6:02 pm

    I realize the purpose of this article was to explore and try to verify (to the extent possible) a letter written by a Michael Jackson insider. Yet, these last two newspaper articles (though published some time ago) made me very sad today. Yes, they support the proposition that Michael and Lisa Marie’s relationship clearly included vigorous and satisfying sex. But, when I think of all he suffered between then and now — including the continuous, brutal and unrelenting invasion of his privacy and his private parts — I question the helpfulness of these graphic details though they are reported to come from Lisa Marie herself. Rather than subduing rumors about Jackson’s sexuality, they seemed to whet the public’s insatiable appetite for more and more. Even now, four years after his death, Michael is resurrected time and again as the object of merciless smearing, innuendo and gossip.

    Salon published an article today about rape accusations leveled against R. Kelly by young girls. While the story was NOT about Michael Jackson, nor was his name in the headline, I scanned the very long article and — sure enough — found the following sentence.” And, abuse of boys isn’t enough to hinder a promising media career, either: Michael Jackson remained the reigning King of Pop until his death despite legal battles and tabloid fodder over charges that he molested as many as two dozen boys and paid millions to cover it up.” The article proposes that famous, rich artists are somehow given a ‘free pass’ by The Press for their heinous sins. Contrary to this sweeping generalization, we know for a fact that Michael Jackson was NEVER given a ‘pass’ by the press for anything — good, bad, or indifferent. Nor was he EVER given the benefit of the doubt.

    In this season of Peace, Goodwill Toward Man, I’m reminded that Michael Jackson was never allowed to live in peace. Nor, it seems, is he allowed to rest in peace — at least not yet.

  14. December 23, 2013 3:50 pm

    Let me also add here a little story from the National Enquirer, October 10, 1995:

    MICHAEL’S A SQUEALING LOVER, SAYS LISA MARIE NATIONAL ENQUIRER, OCT 10, 1995

    A sizzling new book that dishes up sensational details of Michael Jackson’s love life with Lisa Marie Presley claims sex with him is a scream – literally! She told a pal that Michael starts singing when he approaches the height of ecstasy – then lets loose with his trademark high pitched screeches, according to author Anthony Gregoreli. And Lisa Marie LOVES it! Hard to believe?

    You might question whether Michael is really Mr. Macho. But the new book, “Dark lady: The Unauthorized Biography Of Lisa Marie Presley-Jackson” is undeniably fascinating. It’s due for U.S. publication early next year. But in scouring the world to bring you hottest gossip, I discovered some preview tidbits in Great Britain. Is Michael Jackson really a red-hot lover?

    Here are some of the eye-popping revelations in the book: Lisa Marie had wild sex with Jackson before marrying him – because she wanted to make sure he could perform his husbandly duties. They were spending a weekend at Donald trumps Florida mansion when she pulled him into bed.

    She claims they were intimate all night – and oddly enough, he preferred making love while standing up!

    After that Thriller sex session with a real stand-up guy, Lisa Marie told a pal: “It was absolutely wild. He was slow getting started, then he just wanted more and more”.

    She said that when Michael began screeching, she couldn’t help laughing.

    Despite all the racket, Elvis’ daughter later told her pal it was the best sex she’d ever had. In fact, she called Michael “a hot little number”.

    Lisa Marie moved into Michael’s Neverland Valley Ranch while she was still married to unknown musician hubby Danny Keough. The relationship grew closer when Lisa Marie stood by Michael after he was accused of child abuse in 1993. Slowly, the friendship turned to love.

    But not for Michael’s house hold staff. They thought she was rude and snotty to them, sort of a Leona Helmsley in training.

    Lisa Marie and Elizbeth Taylor fought like cats and dogs over Michael. After he began overdoing drugs during his child abuse scandal, longtime pal Liz wanted him to check into a rehab clinic. When Lisa Marie said she wanted to be there to give Michael support, Liz Objected. The two women had a HUGE catfight. But Lisa Marie won the round and escorted Michael into treatment in London.

    Round two erupted when Liz pressured Michael to sing a big solo number on a Jackson family TV special in 1994. He didn’t want the spotlight, but she said he owed it to his fans. Lisa Marie exploded and screamed at Liz “Leave him alone! He knows what he’s doing!” Once again, she won. Although Michael joined in a family chorus at the special’s end, he didn’t sing by himself.

    http://www.fanpop.com/clubs/michael-jackson-and-lisa-marie/articles/193900/title/squealing-lover-lisa-marie-national-enquirer-oct-10-1995

    That autobiography of Lisa Marie Presley was never published.

  15. December 23, 2013 3:14 pm

    He was loveable? “Very.” – Lisa Marie Presley

    Offthewall5, thank you very much for the text – I had only the picture of the magazine cover but not the text. Now it is complete and is great – as of today it is the most sincere of all Lisa Marie’s accounts of her love for Michael and reasons for separation:

    Lisa Marie Presley, The Times UK, October 2012 :

    Why did Presley marry Jackson in 1994?

    “Because I fell in love with him,” Presley says briskly.

    A lot of people found the union odd.

    “I don’t know why, because we were actually similar in a lot of ways. We didn’t have conventional lives. It made sense to me.”

    He was loveable? “Very.”

    Was she acting out some desire to “save” Jackson in a way she couldn’t her father?

    “I’m sure there were things about Michael that reminded me of my dad. I don’t think it’s unfair to say I’m still a sucker for a father figure. I think I always have been. There were probably things they shared that intrigued me. Both were incredibly dynamic and iconic. My father set the precedent for me early. There were some big shoes to fill.”

    Was Jackson gay?

    “Absolutely not, not in any way shape or form. Not, not, not, not.”

    She was with him when the first child molestation charges were made.

    “I always maintain it’s not anything I was around for and nothing I witnessed.”

    Did she want to have children with him?

    “In the beginning, yes.” They divorced after two years in 1996. “I hoped it would be the one that would last, but that was a messy situation. Too many people got involved between us.” She means entourages. “We both allowed that, which was a mistake.”

    Jackson’s death in 2009 “was really confusing and really, really painful. Our relationship was something I had parked away, pushed away. It brought it all back in a way I was not prepared for, things I hadn’t dealt with. Some of the things that we went through could never be fixed or resolved. It was devastating.”

    They last spoke in 2005. She spent time alone with his body after the private funeral: “Not an easy thing.” Now she has found “some peace, it can quiet but never go away”.

    She remains close with matriarch Katherine, presently in reported dispute with her son’s children.

    “They’re really sweet, incredible people,” Presley says of the Jacksons. “I’ve always had a relationship with them. All I can do is wish them the best.”

  16. OffTheWall5 permalink
    December 23, 2013 2:39 am

    Lisa Marie Presley, The Times UK, October 2012 :

    Why did Presley marry Jackson in 1994? “Because I fell in love with him,” Presley says briskly. A lot of people found the union odd.
    “I don’t know why, because we were actually similar in a lot of ways. We didn’t have conventional lives. It made sense to me.” He was loveable? “Very.” Was she acting out some desire to “save” Jackson in a way she couldn’t her father? “I’m sure there were things about Michael that reminded me of my dad. I don’t think it’s unfair to say I’m still a sucker for a father figure. I think I always have been. There were probably things they shared that intrigued me. Both were incredibly dynamic and iconic. My father set the precedent for me early. There were some big shoes to fill.”

    Was Jackson gay? “Absolutely not, not in any way shape or form. Not, not, not, not.” She was with him when the first child molestation charges were made. “I always maintain it’s not anything I was around for and nothing I witnessed.”
    Did she want to have children with him? “In the beginning, yes.” They divorced after two years in 1996. “I hoped it would be the one that would last, but that was a messy situation. Too many people got involved between us.” She means entourages. “We both allowed that, which was a mistake.” Jackson’s death in 2009 “was really confusing and really, really painful. Our relationship was something I had parked away, pushed away. It brought it all back in a way I was not prepared for, things I hadn’t dealt with. Some of the things that we went through could never be fixed or resolved. It was devastating.”

    They last spoke in 2005. She spent time alone with his body after the private funeral: “Not an easy thing.” Now she has found “some peace, it can quiet but never go away”. She remains close with matriarch Katherine, presently in reported dispute with her son’s children. “They’re really sweet, incredible people,” Presley says of the Jacksons. “I’ve always had a relationship with them. All I can do is wish them the best.”

  17. December 4, 2013 4:28 pm

    “where can we get more info about his goodness and near to his death if he wanted or did he revert to islam after staying in the arab places” – yunus karbanee

    Yunus, I think that all information in this blog is about Michael’s goodness. I suggest that for a start you read Michael’s speech in Oxford – it shattered me to my very foundation: http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/03/12/michael-jacksons-speech-at-oxford-university/

    As to islam, Michael did not revert to it. My personal opinion is that he was above religious confessions and had a different kind of a relationship with God – he spoke and reported for his deeds directly to the Almighty without any mediators in between. You can see it even in his songs.

  18. December 4, 2013 2:36 pm

    you are giving a lot of good factual info but where can we get more info about hjs goodness and near to his death if he wanted or did he revert to islam after staying in the arab places

  19. October 24, 2013 2:24 am

    @Concerned, please tell this someone that this ‘problem’ was thoroughly discussed in the comments to the post about Scott Thorson and was thrown away as non-existent.

    Thorson and Liberace did indeed see Michael once in England and they invited him to a motor museum of Lord Montagu there. And the piece from this video is about their joint visit to that museum. I’ve written a comment about it with respective pictures.

    If you look at Michael’s face and how far he is trying to sit from Scott Thorson you will realize his general mood about that visit and his general lack of enthusiam in associating with these people:

    The text to this photo says “Lord Montagu, Liberace, Scott Thorson and Michael Jackson, at Beaulieu in 1981″, Beaulieu Motor Museum (UK)

    The Beauleu vehicle museumAt the Beaulieu motor museum

    So what? So what that they went to a motor museum and are driving an old car from the museum’s collection?

    http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2012/05/05/lies-about-michael-jackson-will-scott-thorson-understand-that-blood-money-has-never-done-anyone-any-good/#comment-24821

    P.S. I’ve updated the post about Scott Thorson with your video and my picture.

  20. Concerned permalink
    October 23, 2013 11:37 pm

    Someone said that this clip is proof that Michael had ties with Scott especially when they were in England.

  21. OffTheWall5 permalink
    October 11, 2013 3:53 am

    Joe Jackson wrote about Lisa Marie Presley in his autobiography (2004)

    “Michael never had to be afraid of Lisa marrying because of money. She had enough herself. He knew that all she wanted was his love.”

    “Lisa Marie was and still is Michael’s big love of his life. When I think about them I always have to smile to myself. Her love for him warmed my heart.”

    “Contrary to all the rumors they are still near to each other. During the time Michael had two children with Debbie Rowe she was a good friend to him. But of course the media just reports the bad stuff and so nobody could read about Lisa Marie and Michael meeting in South Africa (in 1997) or that they were going out very often. Debbie too, knew that Michael will always love Lisa Marie, and I see it the same way. We never met Debbie, but with Lisa the family stayed in contact even after the divorce. She has a special place in Michael’s heart.”

  22. September 29, 2013 3:24 pm

    “I have a feeling the letter is from a bodyguard.” - Myuu

    Later on I had some correspondence with the girl (owner of http://michaelandthetruth.blogspot.ru/) who contacted the person that left the message and though she did not tell me who the man was I got the impression that it was Bill Bray. This is what I thought from the very beginning of it. He calls Michael a “kid” and sounds like a father to him, and Bill Bray was indeed like one to Michael.

    As regards Diana Ross I collected lots of information about her and nearly made a post but then thought better of it as it is too private a matter and is none of my business. But my attitude to Diana Ross changed very much. The affair was real and Michael was completely taken aback by her sudden marriage to a Norwegian billionaire which she kept a secret from him (she didn’t even tell him she was already married).

    But the last straw for me was her affair with that awful guy Gene Simmons. And though I hear it was before Michael it does not change much – Gene Simmons is a complete opposite of Michael and I cannot imagine how she could fall in love with this vulgar monster. She thought it necessary to attend his birthday celebrations together with Cher many years later but did not bother to speak up for Michael when he needed her support very much. It seems that her career was always much more precious to her than her association with Michael, and Michael most probably knew it.

    Lisa Campbell is writing in her book:

    The October 23 [1993] issue of Billboard celebrated thirty years in show business for Diana Ross. A special section of the magazine devoted to Ross contained many congratulatory ads, including one that read, “Congratulations! In much love, MJJ Productions” with Michael’s Moonwalker logo. This seemed surprisingly cool in comparison to one placed earlier in the same publication for Berry Gordy. Also, it was signed “MJJ Productions” and not by Michael. Ross would be among Michael’s close friends who were conspicuously silent during Michael’s media hanging. Even while making public appearances to promote her new book, album, and TV movie, she never once even mentioned Michael’s name.

    In short, I am afraid that though Michael was madly in love with her and they had an affair, she did not turn out to be a real friend to him. It seems to me that “Who is it” was written by Michael about Diana Ross. She made him suffer a lot and in my opinion didn’t deserve him.

  23. Myuu permalink
    September 29, 2013 9:33 am

    I think this is one of the posts I was looking for after I had encounters on “Gossip” sites regarding Scott Thorson where almost every hater just jumped in for the “haterade” bandwagon. But boy, I never thought the letter will have a lot of bombs to drop. Though, this post can somehow illuminate some truth from tabloid junk, I can’t help, but feeling like I’m learning too much info. By that, I mean I felt like intruding someone else’s business. Well, it’s just something that I feel, but I think we can’t help it. We have to learn some stuff to debunk some lies. The Diana Ross part was sad. It’s not surprising, but still sad. The June Chandler part actually makes some sense. A lot of sense. The LMP part was not a surprise.

    Truth be told, reading this also made me feel sorry for Debbie. I think she knew everything (despite being very much in love with Micheal), but in the end she decided to walk away from all the mess which in her words “like walking out from a friend”. But I think, Micheal did not make a mistake from having kids.

    I have a feeling the letter is from a bodyguard.

  24. Nan permalink
    September 21, 2013 1:12 am

    I agree with Lynettes assessment of June Chandler..Pretty sure it was Joy Robson who said June wanted to be mistress of Neverland.
    My impression of June is she never let go of one mealticket until she had hooked another and she was aiming for MJ to be her next husband by inviting him over for dinner, having him help her kids with homework., making him part of her family, inviting him to meet her relatives etc..
    When she realized, they would have to be out of MJ life after these nasty accusations, she might lose her son on top of it , and MJ was hanging with LMP all the while , I think she just figured she might as well do a cash grab herself.
    Very interesting , how Evan remarked about MJ being in love with LMP, to Mr Schwartz, and yet he is getting ready to accuse MJ of all these terrible things with his son.
    I think at that point he was demanding money for MJ breaking up his family.
    If only he never met these people..His life might have been so much more different.

  25. August 26, 2013 11:16 am

    “MJ was sprung on Diana, not LMP. You interpreted that incorrectly.”- OH
    “Debbie said in an argument with PearlJR on Twitter that Michael loved Lisa with all his heart. Diana Ross might have been a ‘first love” in the sense of a very young man but Lisa, it would seem, was the love he looked for as an adult.” – Lynande

    Hello Lynette, thank you for answering OH. It never ceases to amaze me how easily these matters are decided by Michael’s fans. I mean whom he loved more or less. They speak as if they know it better than anyone else.

    In this post I didn’t write about Diana Ross only because it was not the time period I was interested in, but I did my research and realized that Michael was madly in love with Diana, that she was indeed his first as the insider said, but she let him down very much too and this was a huge trauma for Michael. He probably never stopped loving her, because I remember his shining eyes when he attended some ceremony many years later (in 1996) and she sat on his knee.

    Princess Stephanie who was sitting next to Michael had a look of total increduility at the intimate scene she was witnessing. It looked like a declaration of love made in full view of everyone.

    Here is one of the videos: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNwi9KGcIv4

    But all this does not rule out Michael’s big love for LMP. The first love is rarely forgotten, but with LMP he was also infatuated. But why should it be one or the other, why couldn’t he love both? MJ wasn’t monogamous and said about himself with much sadness (to Rabbi Shmuley) that “he was such a rolling stone” and that he “couldn’t be completely married all the time”. He envied old couples who lived together until their last day.

    Here is my collection of MJ’s quotes about women from Shmuley’s book. I am no fan of Shmuley and consider his then comments on MJ disgusting (they are omitted here) but Michael’s views on women are very interesting and very often true. He says women are like cats while men are like puppies, and I agree. Another point is that women are not as playful as men, and this is true too. I cannot imagine a whole stadium of women going crazy over some football match, while men for some reason are never tired of it, no matter what age they are.

    SB: In trying to preserve childlike qualities in your life you Michael, you have shied away from talking about overt sexuality. Like when Oprah asked you about your sex life, you responded something to the effect that, “I’m a gentleman and I don’t talk about that”. ……. So you were brought up to be shy and modest about things pertaining to love and romance?

    MJ: Yes, we don’t talk about it.

    SB: You have been married twice. Michael. Do you still believe in romance or have you had some negative experiences and it is therefore more difficult to believe?

    MJ: No, I believe in it, but I am shy about it. None of us have invited our parents to our weddings. We don’t believe in it. We are too shy. I wouldn’t dare in a million years to have my mother at a wedding of mine. I can’t have myself walking down the aisle and my mother sitting there. That’s why we all ran off and got married secretly and my mother reads it in the paper and she doesn’t mind. Because we are just like her. She would have done the same thing.

    SB: So love has to be something hidden and concealed?

    MJ: It’s like private, like mushy stuff.

    SB: And mushy stuff is always private?

    MJ: Yeah.

    SB: Well, I also believe that romantic love thrives through mystery and concealment. But we can’t overdo it. Your parents should definitely be at your wedding. So romance is something you believe in but you have been taught to be shy about it?

    MJ: I am shy. I don’t know how good I am at it because I am shy. I am very different in that way. I have heard guys be really poetic with girls and, “Oh baby, this and that.” I am not like that. I am like straight to the point and say it simply.

    SB: So what do you do in things like music videos when you’re expected to portray romance and do love scenes and things like that?

    MJ: That’s why it is my job to cast the girl, because it is my job to think they are cute. So I can do it if I really like them, like some of the girls you see in my videos. I have cast them because I really like them and it caused a problem afterwards because they start to really like me, and I don’t want to get that serious, and it becomes a problem sometimes.

    SB: You probably face this all the time because not only are you famous, but you are the kind of guy who women want to be around—soft, gentle, not afraid to express his emotions. Women die for guys who aren’t afraid to show vulnerability and softness, whereas a lot of the guys in Hollywood are stereotypically self-absorbed, self-obsessed, and can’t commit. So do you often find that this happens, that women get clingy?

    MJ: What do you mean?

    SB: Like you said, it is supposed to be a professional thing. You just film something with a female costar, but afterwards they become attached.

    MJ: Yes, it happens.

    SB: How do you break the news to them that you don’t reciprocate?

    MJ: When they see me running the other way. Yeah. Some of them follow me around the world and it is so hard.

    SB: That probably makes them chase you even more because they probably are drawn to that boyish shyness. To be sure, many women like “bad” boys. But for the same reason, a lot like shy guys. In the same way they believe that they can redeem the bad boy and polish up this coarse diamond, they believe the same thing about the shy guy. They think, “Only I can bring him out of his shell.” But I guess after a while, with you running halfway around the world from them, they get the message. But you never tell them directly?

    MJ: No, because it would hurt them too much.

    Shmuley Boteach: What did Cindy Crawford want from you last night?

    Michael Jackson: I have seen Cindy from afar several times, and she was with other guys, and we have met up at other functions . . . from afar. I think she felt this was her chance to really meet me. She probably admires me. A lot of the people come over. What you saw was nothing.

    SB: You have seen celebrities behave like that, like a pack of dogs, chasing after someone who is more famous than them? It was so degrading.

    MJ: Yes! It’s worse.

    SB: What did she talk to you about?

    MJ: [Imitating Crawford] “How are you?” I go. “I’m all right’ “Oh, you sure you are okay? Oh. I just love your work, and I love what you do. How long are you in town?” I said, “I am working here. I’m recording’

    SB: Do you think there was a romantic interest?

    MJ: Yeaaah. I kinda think so.

    SB: Was she asking you out?

    MJ: Those girls flirt. . . they flirt. She is pretty.

    MJ: A woman I really liked and respected was Princess Diana.

    SB: Why?

    MJ: Because she was classy and sincerely cared about people and children and the plight of what was going on in the world. She didn’t do it for show. I like the way she made her kids wait in line to get on a ride for something.

    SB: Was she a feminine kind of woman?

    MJ: Very feminine and classy. She was my type for sure, and I don’t like most girls. There are very few I like who fit the mold. It takes a very special mold to make me happy and she was one of them. For sure.

    SB: Because of her love of kids?

    MJ: It takes a lot to find a mirror image, a mirror image. People always say that opposites attract and I think that is true, as well. But I want somebody who is a lot like me, who has the same interests and who wants to help and they gotta go to hospitals with me and care. .. That’s why you saw Lisa Marie and me at those kinds of things. She cared about that stuff, too.

    SB: Did you ever think of asking Princess Diana out?

    MJ: Absolutely.

    SB: So why didn’t you have the nerve to ask her?

    MJ: I have never asked a girl out in my life. They have to ask me.

    SB: Really?

    MJ: I can’t ask a girl out.

    SB: If she would have asked you out?

    MJ: Absolutely. I would have gone. Brooke Shields asked me out every time you saw us out together. It was her idea to go out and do it every time. I sincerely liked Brooke Shields too. I liked her a lot.

    SB: Does she like kids?

    MJ: Yes. My first girlfriend. Tatum O’Neal, she’d won the Academy Award for Paper Moon … I was sixteen, she was thirteen. And was I naive. She wanted to do everything and I didn’t want to have sex at all, because there were a lot of values associated with being a Jehovah’s Witness. I said, “Are you crazy?” One of those was to be kind to everyone.

    When I held Tatum’s hand it was just magic, better than anything, kissing her, anything. Her, Ryan Q’Neal and myself went to this club and were watching a band and underneath the table she was holding my hand and I was melting. It was magical. There was fireworks going on. It was all I needed. But that means nothing to kids today. She grew up too fast. She wasn’t into innocence, and I love that.

    Now Brooke Shields, she was one of the loves of my life, we dated a lot. Her pictures were all over my walls and mirrors. I was at the Academy Awards with Diana Ross and she just came up to me and said, Hi, I’m Brooke Shields. Are you going to the after party?” I said “Yeah, and I just melted.” I was about twenty-three. . . during Off the Wall. I thought, Does she know [that photographs of her are] all over my room?” So we get to the party and she says, “Would you dance with me?” And we went on the dance floor. And man, we exchanged numbers and I was up all night, spinning around in my room, just so happy. She was classy. We had one encounter when she got real intimate and I chickened out. And I
    shouldn’t have.

    Lisa. . . we’re still friendly, but she’s running around. She just changed her number and we don’t have the new one yet.

    SB: Can you immediately tell innocence?

    MJ: Right away, although I find it harder to tell with women because they’re so smooth. But with men, I can usually tell, because they’re more open and like puppies, while girls are more like cats. You know how if you’ve been on vacation and get home and a puppy is all over you, while with a cat, it’s, “Hey, I don’t need you. You walk over to me and pick me up.” They give you attitude. They’ll walk right by you even though they haven’t seen you in three months. Women are very smart. Walt Disney always said they’re smarter than men, and [he] always hired more women.

    ……

    Shmuley Boteach: The same principle of not being overexposed. Would you advise women in relationships to do the same thing? Would you say to people today who get bored of one another, You know, fifty percent of marriages end in divorce and so much of it is that husbands and wives just get tired of one another. They get weary and bored. Would you say that if there was more – mystery, if they learned to hold back and leave room to discover one another, then there would be more adventure in their relationship?

    Michael Jackson: Yeah, yeah. I think going away is good. Like they say, “Absence makes the heart grow fonder” I totally believe in it. Going away is really important. I don’t understand how people can be together all day with each other and be totally fine. I think it is sweet and beautiful. . .

    SB: Have you seen marriages like that?

    MJ: I have seen couples, yes. I don’t know how they do it. Because creatively they have to do so many things.

    SB: So the women you have dated, the ones who were smart enough not to throw themselves at you, were they the ones that you were more interested in, the ones who weren’t always available and you had to chase them a bit?

    MJ: The ones who were classy and quiet and not into all the sex and all the craziness because I am not into that.

    SB: They are the ones that you are more interested in?

    MJ: Aha. I don’t understand a lot of things that go on in relationships and I don’t know if I ever will. I think that is what has hurt me in my relationships because I don’t understand how people do some of the things they do.

    SB: Mean things?

    MJ: Mean things and vulgar things with their bodies. I don’t understand it and it has hurt my relationships.

    SB: So for you love is something very pure?

    MJ: Very pure. It shocked me some of the things.

    SB: What was it about Diana, that kind of a woman, her dignity, that kind of innocence? Do you see that often in people where they have a regal bearing to them?

    MJ: No. we don’t see it and that’s what I love. I think she truly cared about people’s feelings and really tried to make the world a better place. I really believe that her heart was out for other people. You could see it in some of the photos where she is touching those little baby’s faces and they are sitting on her lap and she would be holding them. That is not faked. You could see it. When you see the queen come out she has got these gloves on and she is waving from a distance, you can see the heart. You can see.
    You put your money where your mouth is and you go in those huts and go in those ditches and sit with them and sleep there. That’s doing it, that’s what I do. Remember when you said you saw my picture in China in some hut, some lady’s hut. I go in there and I touch the people and I see them.

    SB: When you are in a meeting, are you able to see who is the hard-nosed businessman, bottom line is everything, he’ll manipulate, lie, whatever it takes, and the ones who are pure, more innocent, who you want to do business with? Can you see immediately? Or, on the contrary, do you see with a child’s eyes and see goodness in everybody, which is why you have sometimes ended up with people who aren’t the nicest people?

    MJ: That’s true, too. It works both ways, but you can detect it and feel it in another person. There is this man in LA and he works in a vinyl record shop and he has got to be in his fifties and he has the spirit of an eleven-year-old boy. I always stare at him and he stares at me and there is like this telepathy going on. He talks like a kid and the way he moves his eyes. I say to myself, “This is so interesting.” I’d like to get to know him better and find out what is this. I mean it. It’s amazing. I feel it. I feel it in children right away, of course. I pick up on it like that and children can tell it in you.

    SB: It’s almost like a relief. Here is someone who understands me?

    MJ: Ye all. Their eyes light up when you come over and they want to play and they feel it.

    SB: Michael, have you never met a woman like that who loves those same things: who’d play hide and seek with you, who’d love the water fights with you?

    MJ: Not yet. The ones I have had are jealous of the children. All of them. They get jealous of their own kids and start competing with them. That rubs me in a bad way.

    SB: Theoretically, if you were Adam in the Garden of Eden and you found an Eve like that, would that be your ideal woman?

    MJ: Absolutely. I haven’t found it [women who want to play]. . . I think more guys are more apt to goof off. Even when they are much older, their thirties, and a woman will come in and say, “What are you doing? Don’t do that. Are you crazy?” The guy will go. “What, we are just having fun?”

    SB: Women almost feel that it is immature if they behave that way, no?

    MJ: Yes, but if you look in history you never see real serial killer women.

    SB: Yes, but they don’t play the way boys do.

    MJ: I know they don’t.

    SB: Even at a younger age they are playing with dolls and they are marrying Barbie and Ken. In other words, the quintessential thing is – that if boys are shooting spit balls at each other, the girls will say, “Stop doing that.” Even then they want to be older. It is almost against their gender. Have you ever found girls who like the practical jokes that you like? Have you ever found a woman who collects comics?

    MJ: It is a rarity. If I find one I will go nuts. Especially, if she has those qualities and is beautiful inside. It would be a home run for me. That’s why guys hang out. Because they can do that.

    SB: Thinking about mothers and fathers, mothers are really good at doing homework with their kids and being more nurturing. But the rough playing is what the fathers do. They get on the floor and get dirty, wrestle, build castle with them in a sandpit. Isn’t that interesting? It creates an imbalance in the book to an extent. On the contrary, it is the girls in school that are always ridiculing the boys for being immature. “Loоk at those boys. Look at the way they are behaving.” Maybe the women need to be taught the art of playfulness as much as the men.

    MJ: Do you not think it’s embedded in them biologically? Biologically, as a breed, don’t you think women are just a different species?

    SB: They are definitely different, but the question is, “Why don’t they want to play?” The funny thing is this: when they play, it’s when they flirt. In other words, if you chase them round the room and there is something romantic going on, then they will run around with you and laugh and giggle. But it’s specifically when it is romantic. They don’t do it with each other. You don’t see two girls running round the room, playing hide and seek or wrestling each other, the way they’re prepared to suddenly when it’s a boyfriend. A lot of fans — the women who are interested in you — would do all these things just to make you happy. But you don’t know if they were doing it because they are really enjoying it. It seems that it’s only romance that makes women playful. But then, sometimes it bothers men, because the women become like a tease and, you know, they have this power over you with these little games they play. I have got to find four or five women who fit into this opening chapter who are very successful but who have retained child-like qualities and, so far, we have come up with one. When you think of Bill Clinton don’t you think of a guy as being pretty playful? He goes to McDonald’s and he jogs and. . .

    MJ: Riding his bike at the White House. Did you see it? He was riding his bike in the White House to get him to the next meeting. A great shot of him In Vanity Fair. Can you think of Hillary doing that? Nope, not in a million years. I can think of little girls who would join in with play. Girls who are tomboys.

    SB: Okay, when they are tomboys. But when they get older, do they still play to the same extent?

    MJ: Do you think it is in their heart that they can just be themselves and be dignified?

    SB: What women seem to look forward to more than anything else is falling in love. They don’t look forward to the playfulness in the same way. But once they’re in love a carefree playful side is released.

    MJ: I have to play.

    SB: Is there a difference in how your male fans and female fans relate to you?

    MJ: Sometimes. But I am finding today, and it is so true, that guys today are really changing and I have watched it happen through my career. Guys scream with the same kind of adulation that girls do in a lot of countries. They are not ashamed. They are shaking, “I love you.” We have guys chasing us around.

    SB: But die fanatics are the women.

    MJ: Yeah, they are loyal, women. They have been loyal. They are activists. They will fight you about me.

    SB: Do you find it easier to be closer to motherly figures in your life like Elizabeth Taylor, your own mother, who you always praise, and your sister Janet? Do you find that women are more child-like than men? Are they gentler, are they less competitive, less mean? You have been around some mean women, as well, who behave in a masculine – aggressive way, like Madonna. You told me -that she can be mean. Is that a feminine trait or do you feel that she has a real masculine streak in her? Do you find it easier to be closer to women?

    MJ: In some ways, yes, and some ways, not. It depends on the age. I have seen some women who are very bitter and mean and they become ladies later. They come into their own and they become good people. I have seen it in my brothers’ ex-wives who were horrible. They were like nightmares when they were young. With time and age they become good people. But they were horrible, just horrible. Then with time they just level out, that’s what I like when they become truly good.

    SB: But, intuitively, do you find women easier to get along with? Are they softer than men? I mean. I personally find women more naturally nurturing, more refined, possessed of a greater nobility of spirit. I have to tell you.

    MJ: I am trying to be real honest with you.

    SB: But many of your closest friends seem to be women.

    MJ: Women are softer than men. Yeah, that’ true.

    SB: Do you think that a child star as cute as Shirley Temple, do you think a boy star could be that cute?

    MJ: Yeah, but he wouldn’t have the same. . . Shirley Temple just had something that was meant to give us bliss and make us smile.

    SB: Are you more protective of Paris because she is a little girl?

    MJ: Paris can stand [on] her own sometimes – much more. Prince won’t stand up for himself. People can push him about and he won’t stand up. She won’t take anything from anybody. She fights. She’s tough, very tough. It’s true, man. Prince will let people take complete advantage of him and won’t say anything.

    SB: He is more like his father, like you.

    MJ: I was like that. My mother always told me. “Don’t let people hurt you. You are too much like me.” She would cry. “You are too much like me. I don’t want you to be like me. I hurt so much.” Because people take advantage.

    SB: But you never toughened up. It seems that you would rather be taken advantage of than do the taking advantage of. It hurts to be taken advantage of. But it doesn’t hurt as much as being a mean and aggressive person. Mean- spiritedness is a form of internal corruption and it makes it impossible to be happy. Notice that evil people never seem happy. They are miserable and they seek to make other people just as miserable as they are.

    MJ: Yeah. I’d rather suffer…. I hate to say it because I suffered a lot. God, have I suffered. But I would rather suffer.

    SB: You have seen the ugly side of people.

    MJ: I have seen the worst… the nightmare of the human condition. I would never even think that common man would be capable of behaving in such a way.

    ………

    MJ: Lisa was great. She was a sweet person. But it is hard to tie me down. I can’t stay in one place one time so that’s why I don’t know if I [can] really be completely married all the time.

    SB: Did you want to be a father to her kids?

    MJ: Yes.

    SB: Do you still stay in touch with the children?

    MJ: Yes, and with her.

    SB: But marriage is too confining?

    MJ: Yes. I don’t know whether I am disciplined enough because I am such a rolling stone. I have such a life when I am always on the move and women don’t like that. They want you to be settled in one place all the time but I have to move. I have been in the same city as where my house is and still check into a hotel just to feel like I am going somewhere. My house is right there. I guess I am just moving all the time, moving.

    SB: You have gotten used to it. That’s your lifestyle.

    MJ: I love being on the move, love it.

    SB: It impresses me that everywhere you go you take your children with you. So you are on the move but it is almost like your household moves with you. Prince and Paris aren’t unsettled because of it because their source of security is always with them. But what about the families who don’t have the resources for that, and most don’t? They don’t have enough to be able to fly the kids around here and there. Businessmen who have to travel, they fly economy just to afford their own fare, and they can’t possibly bring their kids along every time. Should they not travel?

    MJ: I feel bad for their children. I feel bad for their children. I always ask pilots and stewards “How do they do it? The children suffer. Absolutely. They suffer’.

    SB: You wouldn’t be doing this if Prince and Paris were going to suffer as a result. You are doing it because you have the resources to bring them where you are.

    MJ: I couldn’t hurt them like that.

    SB: Do you want to find them a Rose Fine kind of figure, a bit of a motherhood figure?

    MJ: That would be nice. That would be sweet. If the person is completely sincere, like Miss Fine was, who would read to them and teach them and give them the right values and teach them that there’s no difference and that we are all the same people. She used to always rub my face and I never used to understand why. She used to say I had beautiful hands. And I used to say, “Why, don’t all hands look alike?” But now I see what she means because now I do it to my kids. I rub their face like that because they are so sweet. [Laughs] I never understood why she did it to me. Then you grow up and you realize that it is an endearing thing to do, to say, “I love you.”

    SB: I asked Michael about his celebrity friends. Why could he connect with them more than with noncelebrities?

    MJ: Yeah, but I don’t really have Hollywood friends. I have a few.

    SB: Why don’t you? Why don’t you hang out with more celebrities?

    MJ: Because I don’t think they are all real people. They love the limelight and I don’t have anything in common with them. They want to go clubbing and afterwards they want to sit around and drink hard liquor and do marijuana and do all kinds of crazy things that I wouldn’t do. We have nothing in common. Remember the line I told you? Madonna laid the law down to me before we went out. “I am not going to Disneyland, okay? That’s out.” I said, “But I didn’t ask you to go to Disneyland.” She said. “We are going to the restaurant and afterwards we are going to a strip bar.” I said, (“I am not going to a strip bar.” Guys who cross-dress! Afterwards she wrote some mean things about me in the press and I wrote that she is a nasty witch, after I was so kind to her. I have told you that we were at the table eating and some little kids came up. “Oh my God. Michael Jackson and Madonna. Can we have your autograph?” She said. “Get out of here. Leave us alone.” I said, “Don’t ever talk to children like that.” She said, “Shut up.” I said, “You shut up.” That’s how we were. Then we went out again and went to the Academy Awards and she is not a nice person. I have to say it. She is not a nice person.

    SB: Did the people around you feel that it was important to be seen with her?

    MJ: They knew nothing about it. This was totally between her and me.

    SB: So you save it a chance and it didn’t work?

    MJ: Yeah. I gave it a chance like I try and give everything a chance.

    SB: You basically saw that your values do not match those of most Hollywood people.

    MJ: No, they do lots of crazy things that I am not into and at the time I was with Madonna she was into these books, a whole library of books of women who were tied to walls. She said. “I love spanky books.” Why do I want to see that?

    SB: I think a lot of it is the image. She once said something to the effect that she would much rather read a good book than have sex. I think the other vulgar stuff is part of the outrageous image she tries to cultivate.

    MJ: She’s lying [about preferring to read a book]. I can’t judge. I don’t know if she has changed or if she [is] trying to claim she has changed.

    SB: Why does she say mean things?

    MJ: I think she likes shock value and she knows how to push buttons on people. I think she was sincerely in love with me and I was not in love with her. She did a lot of crazy things and that’s how that went. I knew we had nothing in common. But I am pretty sure that having a baby has to change you. I don’t know how much she has changed, I’m sure she is a better person than before.

    SB: She has two children now.

    MJ: Yeah. I know. How would you like getting a phone call and she is telling you that she is putting her fingers between her legs. I would say, “Oh Madonna, please.” She said, “What I want you to do when you hang up the phone is to rub yourself and think of me”. That’s the kind of stuff she says. When I see her she says: “This is the finger I used last night”. Wild, out of control.

    SB: But you were raised that all things romantic should have a certain modesty…
    Have you ever found women who are a bit more modest to be more attractive for that reason?

    MJ: Yeah. I don’t like the women who are always saying, “My nails need to be done. I have to do my toes. I need a manicure”. I hate all that. I like it when girls are a little bit more tomboyish. If they wrestle, climb a tree. I love that… It is sexier to me. I like class though. Class is everything.

    SB: If a woman walks around with all her cleavage showing…

    MJ: Frank loves it. (Michael gestured to Frank Cascio, who was sitting right next to us. We all laughed.)

    SB: A man might want sex with a woman like that. But it doesn’t mean that he would want to fall in love with a woman like that.

    MJ: Of course you want to look. I am in love with innocence and I tell Frank that.

    ………………..

    MJ: I don’t like clubs now, I did all that when I was eleven, eight and- going back—nine, eight, seven, six, Fights break out, people throwing up, yelling, screaming, the police sirens. Our father never let us become a part of it other than to perform and leave. But sometimes in having to do that you would get caught up in some of the craziness. I saw it all. The lady who came on right before, when The Jackson’s were little. “And now next, The Little Jackson 5,” was the lady who took off all her clothes. Threw her panties into the audience and the men would grab them and sniff them. I saw all this. Her name was Rose Marie and she put these things on her breasts and moved them around and she showed everything. So when I became sixteen, seventeen and guys would say. “Let’s go clubbing.” I would go. “Are you crazy?” And the guys would be like, “No, are you crazy? We can get girls, we can get liquor.” But I had done that. I did that when I was a baby. Now I want to be a part of the world and the life I didn’t have. Take me to Disneyland, take me to where the magic is.

    SB: Let me ask you about loneliness. So wherever you travel, you, thank God, have an entourage. People you’ve been with for a long time, Frank and Skip [Michael’s bodyguard at the time, a very pleasant and decent man from New Orleans]. But it’s still not like having a wife in your life or something. Do you get lonely? Or is there so much going on in your life that it doesn’t really happen?

    MJ: Like lonely for like a wife? For like a mate? like that?

    SB: Yeah.

    MJ: I’ve been through two bad divorces and I just got out of the second one. Even when married to those women that I was married to, I’d go to bed hurting. I was hurting. I was crying last night as I went to sleep and I didn’t sleep good last night. And I cry. Shmuley, because I feel this. . . and I’m not trying. I’m telling you the honest truth and if you don’t believe me you can ask Frank. Frank knew how I was hurting. I just was feeling all the pain of the children who suffer and I was hurting so much. That’s why I was trying to reach any child I knew who had pain, from [Michael mentions a little girl who was battling cancer and whose family he met at our home] to Gavin [Michael’s later accuser]. I was trying to like, calling/dialing and I woke up the first thing, the first person I called was [the little girl’s] house and she had gone already. It hurts me. But I think that’s where my real love comes from, Shmuley. If I can help in that way. I’m fine and I don’t need the other [romantic love].You know if I meet some girl somewhere and I think she’s beautiful, which I see a lot of them, that’s great. I mean, I’ll go on a date or something. Nothing wrong with that. Jennifer Lopez looked awfully good the other day, she did. I was shocked ’cause I never thought. . . She looked good [Michael laughs as he says this].

    SB: But have you given up on women understanding you? You tend to think that children will understand you a lot better?

    MJ: I’m not easy to live with in that way for a wife. I’m not easy and I know I’m not easy. Because I give all my time to someone else. I give it to children, I give it to somebody sick somewhere, to ‘the music. And women want to be the center. And I remember Lisa Marie would always say to me. “I’m not a piece of furniture. I’m not a piece of furniture. You just can’t . . .” I say, “I don’t want you to be a piece of furniture,” and you know, there’d be some sick little girls calling on the phone and she’d get mad and hang up on them. And, you know, I feel that’s my, that’s my mission. Shmuley, I have to do it.

    SB: What if you found a woman who was that soft, who was incredibly soft?

    MJ: like a Mother Teresa or a Lady Diana or. .. That would be great. It would be perfect.

    SB: Would that be better than having to do it on your own?

    MJ: Absolutely, and Lisa was great with going to the hospitals with me, and she was so sweet about that. They would tie the babies to the bed or chain the children down. We’d go unchain. . . we’d go free all these babies. I hated that and she, she discovered a lot of that injustice with me. Countries like Romania and Prague. Czechoslovakia and all that, Russia. You should see what they do to the children in those. . . you’d be shocked. They chain them to the wall like they’re animals and they’re naked and they slept in their tinkle and their feces too. It’s just so sad. It made me sick. So we brought clothes and toys and just love and love. I love them and I went back every day visiting them, hugging them, wanting to take each and every one of them to Neverland.

    SB: When you started becoming this childhood star, did you realize that your childhood was slowly slipping away? You won a contest at age eight. In 1964 you were chosen as lead singer for the family band. Did that make you feel excited or were you worried? Did you think to yourself, “Where is all this headed? What’s it going to lead to?”

    MJ: I didn’t think about it. I didn’t think about the future. I just took each day as it came. I knew I wanted to be a star. I wanted to do things and make people happy.

    SB: Did you know what the cost was going to be in terms of childhood?

    MJ: No way. No way.

    MJ on phone: Tell the guys to let the music talk to them and not to, like, jump on it right away. Listen to it a couple of times and let the melody create itself. That’s the tiling, let the music speak to them. Alright? Goodbye.

    SB: Is that your dream that one day, like part of the messianic future, as far as you’re concerned, that all these kids will come and live in Neverland and live happily ever after?

    MJ: Yes.

    SB: And If you had the resources truly you would just. . .

    MJ: I would do it, Shmuley. I would do it. I would love it.

    SB: Lisa Marie was good about at least visiting. So she had no problem going and doing some. of the compassionate, things of giving these children love and making them feel special?

    MJ: She had no problem doing that but her and I had several big arguments cause she’s very territorial with her children. Her children were [her major concern]. . . and I said, “No, all children are our children,” and she never liked that coming from me. She was very angry about that. Plus, she had a fight with me one time when two little boys in London killed this other kid and I was going to visit them ’cause, the queen gave them adult sentencing of life. These were like eleven- and ten-year-old boys and I was going to go to the prison and visit them. She said, “You idiot. You’re just rewarding then for what they did.” I said, “How dare you say that.” I said. “I bet if you trace their life you can find they didn’t have parents around, they didn’t have any love, nobody there to hold them look in their eyes and say “I love you.” They deserve that, even though they’re going to get life, I just want to say I love you and hold them.” She said. “We’ll, you’re wrong.” I said, “No, you’re wrong.” Then the information came out that they came from broken families, were never watched as little kids, attended to. Their pacifier was those Chucky movies with the stabbings and the killings. And that’s how they became conditioned to that.

    SB: Did she admit then that you had a point?

    MJ: Nope, she thinks I’m rewarding bad kids.

    SB: Did she want you to be a father to her children?

    MJ: Well that at was once asked of her. She was asked that question on TV and she said. “No, they have a father. Their father is Keogh,” that other guy. But I was really good to her children. Every day I’d bring them home something and they’d be waiting by the window for me and hug me. I love them. I miss them so much.

    SB: Did she get used to living in Neverland or was it too isolated?

    MJ: Lisa didn’t live at Neverland. We visited Neverland the way. . . I lived at her house in the city and every once in a while we visited Neverland. It’ d be like our big fun weekend.

    SB: And her children liked it?

    MJ: Are you kidding me? They were like in heaven.

    SB: And you were happy to show it to them?

    MJ: Mm hmm.

    SB: Did it have more meaning to you suddenly when you had a family you could show it to?

    MJ: Yes, yes. It’s just a place to make families, to bring them together, to bring people together through love and playful spirit and nature. It makes families closer, Neverland. It’s healing.

    SB: Since you idolize the family was it very hard for you when you had to go through that divorce then?

    MJ: Which one?

    SB: With Lisa.

    MJ: Was it hard for me?

    MJ: Yeah, and she – promised me that before we married, that would be the first thing we’d do was have children. So I was broken-hearted and I walked around all the time holding these little baby dolls and I’d be crying, that’s how badly I wanted them. So I was determined to have children. It disappointed me that she wouldn’t keep her promise to me, you know? After we got divorced she would hang out with my mother all the time. I have all these letters saying, I’ll give you nine children. I’ll do whatever you want.” and of course the press don’t know all these stories and she just tried for months and months and I just became too hard-hearted at that point. I closed my mind on the whole situation.

    SB: So she thought maybe you could get back together?

    MJ: Uh huh.

    SB: But children were a major, major issue?

    MJ: Of course.

    SB: She had the kids and that was it.

    MJ: She had hers and I wanted us to feel like we all were one big family and have more. Just. . . my dream is to have nine or ten children, that’s what I want.

    SB: You’re still very young. Do you think that will happen?

    MJ: Yeah.

    SB: But then it means getting married again.

    MJ: Yeah.

    SB: Are you happy to do that?

    MJ: Uh huh. . . or adopt.

    SB: Is it possible Michael, that you’re attracting the wrong kind of girl because of your celebrity?

    MJ: It’s hard. That’s why it’s hard, it’s hard for me. It is hard. It’s not easy for celebrities to be married.

    SB: Do you thinк that you could only really marry celebrities so that they don’t need you as much?

    MJ: That helps, in my opinion. And they understand what you go through. They’ve been there.

    SB: They help you for the right reasons, then?

    MJ: Yeah, they’re not after, you know? What you’ve made [the money] or, you know? [singing] ‘That’s what you are. . . “[He won a Grammy for that.]

    Shmuley Boteach: Love and fear, as I said, are antithetical. They are like fire and water. The more of the former, the less of the latter. The more valuable you feel, the less you fear your destruction. The more love you have in your life, the less room there is for fear.

    Michael Jackson: That’s right. I used to walk the street asking for people to be my friend. It’s true. In Encino right down there. People would look at me and go: ”Michael Jackson!” I just wanted to talk to somebody. I was up there alone in the house and my mother and father were downstairs watching television. And I was up in my old room and all my brothers and stuff had moved out because they were married and stuff, and I was up there all alone and you can’t…

    p. 108
    …about what you could do for kids?

    MJ: Truly in my heart, I love them and I care more than anything. I am still taking care of Gavin. He had chemotherapy yesterday and he is weak and not feeling good and it just touches your heart. Your heart goes out to the world. I think I am a lot like my mother. I don’t know if it is genetic or environmental. I remember when we were little she would watch the news and even how she has to watch the news with tissues. I’m the same. I start crying when I watch the news about the woman who takes her kids and throws them in the lake, one drowned, the other survived. So I invited the kids over and went to the funeral, paid for the funeral and I don’t even know these people, but you hear these things. It’s like asking, why aren’t there more people like Mother Teresa? “Why aren’t there more people like Lady Diana?

    SB: They are famous for being good, but you are famous and you are good, there’s a very big difference. Even Diana, Diana was a good woman. I didn’t know her. You did. She had many saintly qualities and did a huge amount of good. Still, she loved the glitzy life. But you love children. Why?

    MJ: I am not trying to be philosophical but I really think it’s my job to help them. I think it is my calling. I don’t care if people laugh or what they say. [Children] don’t have a mouth to society and I think it is now their time. From here on out it is their time. They need the world’s awareness and they need issues to deal with, and this is for them. And if I can be that light, that pedestal just to shine some light on who they are, and the importance of who children are, that’s what I want to do. I don’t know how God chooses people, or plays chess with people, and he does put you in position and sets you up. Sometimes I feel like that, like this is my place. I think about from Gandhi to Martin Luther King to Kennedy to myself to yourself. Do you think these are self-made men or from birth, do you think God said: “Aha!” And smiling a little bit. … Do you think that just happened on its own by their fathers, or they were supposed to do this? I am asking you this question?

  26. lynande51 permalink
    August 26, 2013 9:34 am

    @OH
    Debbie said in an argument with PearlJR on Twitter that Michael loved Lisa with all his heart. Diana Ross might have been a ‘first love” in the sense of a very young man but Lisa, it would seem, was the love he looked for as an adult.
    Michael connected with Lisa in November of 1992.They were brought together by Brett Livingstone Strong at Lisa’s request because she wanted Michael to hear some of her music. They quickly became friends and called each other on the phone to speak often..
    They met secretly when they could and were publicly together in May of 1993 at a charity function with Jimmy Carter.
    In the beginning of the taped conversation that Dave Schwartz made with Evan Chandler they speak of Michael loving Lisa and Evan threatening to call Lisa. There are only two ways that Evan Chandler could have known about Lisa. Either Michael told him or Jordan did because he was aware of the relationship or do we pretend that there was a different Lisa that Michael was in love with.
    I believe that it was this information and a threat to have June charged with pandering her son that led her to turn on Michael. She knew because of her knowledge of LIsa and how Michael felt about her that she would not be ‘mistress of Neverland” as someone referred to her.
    Also I think that because Debbie made the choice to give her friend what he most wanted, children, she is in a better position than any fan is to know how he felt about Lisa and what happened. He was devastated when Lisa filed for divorce after telling him she wouldn’t and Debbie made him the offer of becoming the mother to his children. I know people look at that as something abnormal but friends have children for friends through surrogacy everyday why is what Debbie did any different?

  27. August 26, 2013 1:28 am

    MJ was sprung on Diana, not LMP. You interpreted that incorrectly.

  28. July 19, 2013 4:50 am

    “This letter looks as if somebody close to Michael wrote it. But I disagree with the point, that Michael made a mistake when he knocked up Debbie” - Irina

    This man was really close to Michael and evidently had some reasons for saying it – he probably saw Michael feeling sorry about it at some point. Any of us can have an opinion about it but ultimately it should remain the private matter of MJ and these two women only.

    What’s really important is that this insider knew of Michael’s real love life and was privy to all his secrets. And he laughed at Scott Thorson’s story and said that Michael was not only heterosexual, but “thoroughly” heterosexual if I remember it right. This is actually why he left a message on the National Enquirer board – they were discussing Scott Thorson at that time. And his revelations about Michael’s women came simply as a bonus to the main story.

    Out of everything he said I find his story about Diana Ross and June Chandler the most interesting ones. When I look at Michael and Diana Ross for example, I really understand that she was his first – there is a definite aura of possessiveness in the way he behaves when he is with her:

  29. Irina permalink
    July 19, 2013 3:52 am

    “Lisa Marie, however, led him to believe they would have a family of their own, but stayed on the pill anyway because even if she said she was a rebel, the little bitch didn’t want mommy dearest to get mad at her for having a lil black child. Mike found the pills, split, messed around with a couple of other women with the goal of getting one pregnant just to hurt Lisa (he can be an asshole sometimes, true) and eventually knocked up Debbie, which, (if I didn’t love and adore his children and think they saved his life) I would say was probably one of the biggest mistakes of his life”

    This letter looks as if somebody close to Michael wrote it. But I disagree with the point, that Michael made a mistake when he knocked up Debbie, LMP didn`t love Michael but he realized that too late. First, if she really had loved him, she wouldn`t have disappointed him in the hospital when he was really ill, second – she would have wanted to have children with him before he told her about Debbie`s pregnancy, and third – she wouldn`t have given interview, where she told a lot of bad things about their private life. For example, Michael didn`t say anything horrible about their relationships, her jealousy, bad habits, breaking her promises even though he got hurt more.
    P.S. Sorry for my English

  30. May 8, 2013 9:32 am

    holy mother of ….. June chandler?? seriously!! wow…..I never thought that ever happened….this explains ALOT

  31. April 29, 2013 11:52 am

    I think this is the most stupid story I have ever read not to mention humiliating and dumb. The reporting has no ethics, and it is a conspiracy of untruths that people say happened, or knew Michael so well that this or that had happened. For God’s sake not even his biological family knew what was going on in his life. He knew what he was doing and shocked at the stupid hired help wanting a piece of the pie. Only the hell hounds can sniff out the truth. That they shall. Come on, there was nothing going on with Diana Ross, ever. Well, then…..

  32. February 25, 2013 8:27 pm

    I believe that this person was very intimate with Michael, he knew many things that Michael never tell a person that he did not trust, or that person was a type of worker who was close to Michael 24 hours, which was the case of Bill and Wayne. See, Wayne was so close, that he was warned that Michael (he was with the kids Cascios) that the media had found out about the wedding. Recalling that the family Cascios, did not know about marriage

  33. February 24, 2013 10:55 am

    “Like, why a wall of text justifying it?” - MJFan

    Because the hysteria unleased by the National Enquirer (during the time when the jury was deliberating whether to indict Michael or not) was really too much. In fact it is raging even until now as only recently Scott Thorson made his appearance on TV and retold the same story, only in a much milder form. It was practically the host of the show who was telling it by asking the respective questions and Scott Thorson was only nodding, smiling and giving “knowing” looks.

    The person who refuted Scott’s lies and drew the real picture in 2004 noted that it would be the first and last time he was doing it, so please pay attention. And why couldn’t he write “a wall of text”? Michael’s detractors write whole books of lies about him and no one wonders why, and when one person decides to tell the truth this suddenly raises questions. Why?

    “Someone sugested it was Bob Jones who wrote it but I don’t believe it, because of the book he wrote with Stacy Brown…he would never defend Michael.”

    No, it was surely not Bob Jones, and not only because he wrote a book of lies with Stacy Brown, but because he was a different kind of a person, diffident, cynical and also slightly sarcastic about Michael, even in the best of times. He said he didn’t want to stay on the same floor with his boss as this type of closeness “breeds contempt”. Though he was Michael’s PR man he said he visited Neverland very rarely. He mostly worked in his office and was not at all close to his boss and he said it himself. Bob Jones’ stories about Michael were based on his own preconceived notions about MJ. And they were highly distorted. Most probably there was not even love lost between the two of them – it was more of a formal arrangement.

    The man who wrote that “wall of text” was different. He is more of a father figure to Michael. He knows his every little secret and was a witness to many of those love affairs with women Michael had. He is compassionate and knowing how much damage some of those women did to Michael he does not even stop at calling them names (“hussy” for D.R.).

    This kind of a man could be only Bill Bray who was in fact almost like a father to Michael (though he was old and long retired by then) or Wayne Nagin, the person Bill Bray hired in 1980 and who worked for Michael until 2000. It is funny but both men look very much like the close confidant of Michael in his “Who is it” video. The video is about Michael’s intimate life and this person’s presence there is only natural and tale telling.

    Here are some pictures.

    Bill Bray when he was younger (the late 70s?):

    November 11, 1992 Michael’s Heal the world foundation sends $2,1mln. of supplies to Sarajevo. Bill Bray is in the right hand corner (he always stays by Michael’s side):

    In April 1999 Michael visits London. Wayne Nagin is sitting immediately behind Michael:

    The last two photos are taken from a fabulous Romanian site which I highly recommend as a source of very rare pictures, all of them systematically arranged: http://en.michaeljackson.ro

    The actor playing the part of Michael’s confidant in “Who is it” (1992) looks like both Bill Bray and Wayne Nagin taken together. Both were working for him at that time. You can see compassion and understanding for Michael in this man’s face.

  34. MJFan permalink
    February 24, 2013 12:24 am

    Hi again,
    I admit I thought the letter was from a fan trying to defend Michael. Some words like “please” in the middle of the text brought suspects to me. Like, why a wall of text justifying it? (Please don’t be angry at me for saying that) Someone sugested it was Bob Jones who wrote it but I don’t believe it, because of the book he wrote with Stacy Brown…he would never defend Michael.
    (Again, sorry my english)

  35. February 5, 2013 11:42 pm

    “Has anyone even considered that most of what the media says about the kids parentage is in fact a ploy to get Blanket’s mother to come forward?”

    Lynette, I think you have hit the nail on the head here. The more I read Frank Cascio and other information about that period the more I realize that Michael’s friends sort of encrypted all facts about Blanket’s mother to avoid a terrible media hysteria around her, and what’s more important – around Blanket.

    And it looks to me like it is done by them on purpose. Well, Michael could have announced to Frank in May 2001 that he was going to be a father, but it doesn’t mean anything except his plans to be one or his thinking so. Natural or articifial insemination, but at that stage no one could really know. As you mentioned somewhere more time was needed to really make sure.

    Michael’s confident manner of the announcement also surprises me a bit as I remember how dreamlike and fearful of talking about Debbie Rowe’s second pregnancy (with Paris) Michael was in that interview with Barbara Walters. He didn’t speak about it at all, as if he was afraid to say it too soon. The interview was on September 12, 1997 when Debbie should have been 3 months pregnant already. And still Michael said “Let’s say I am not sure yet”.

    And if Michael’s close friends and aides were (and still are) shrouding the circumstances of Blanket’s birth in secrecy, making it as contradictory as it is only possible, this will explain that slight note of insincerity which I also feel in the Insider’s letter about Michael concerning that matter.

    I suggest we don’t discuss it any further, leaving it as it is, if this is what Michael wanted it to be, at least until a much later time.

    P.S. I would like to make it a point that whatever Michael’s aide said about the “third woman” and the circumstances of Blanket’s birth it doesn’t make the rest of his letter less authentic. In a way it makes it even more authentic than I originally thought.

  36. J Mason, New York, NY permalink
    January 31, 2013 5:26 am

    Didn’t Michael routinely give jewelry to women he cared for — Elizabeth Taylor being a huge case in point? Not that Liz needed jewelry — she already owned all the important stuff available for sale at the time, yet still enjoyed the collector’s quest for more. Michael gave her jewelry and she always accepted it with great gusto – and, I believe, in the spirit of their relationship. Michael loved La Liz (and vice versa), he knew what she liked, and gave it to her. Dimonds. Rubies. Pearls. Emeralds.

    June Chandler, on the other hand, never dreamed of owning such baubles or experiencing the luxury and glow of having them bestowed on her — though she strongly coveted both. Of course, she was impressed and happy. A grand gift of jewelry from the King of Pop. Who wouldn’t be overjoyed? How that gift is interpreted depends, I guess, on who is looking and where they are standing.

    As for Debbie and the Baby, I don’t think it would be hard to conceal this from the press. Why? Because media was heavily invested in “Michael Jackson, Freak Child Molester” rather than “Michael Jackson Knocks Up Other Woman While Married to Elvis’s Daughter”. From the tabloid perspective, the first scenario is much juicer, more profitable and sells more papers than the second scenario. At this point, Michael having sex with a women — any women — is treated as a joke by media, despite Lisa Marie’s earnest protestations to the contrary. Yes, the press would have reported it (with tongue in cheek), but not with the same ferociousness as the child abuse accusations.

  37. Fatima(Fatti) permalink
    January 31, 2013 5:23 am

    Actually i did manage to find a clip not from the movie but from an interview where Taraborelli says Michael married Debbie because of “pressure from members of his family” most likely meaning Katerhine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdxZtAejAtQ

  38. Fatima(Fatti) permalink
    January 31, 2013 4:51 am

    Helena, have you seen the movie/documentary, “Michael Jackson, life of an Icon”? I saw that movie a while ago and absolutely remember there was a quote somewhere along the line that Michael never wanted to marry Debbie, but did it for his mom. If I’m not mistaken I think it was Taraborelli who said that quote. I saw that movie before I read the “inside letter” and was surprised that someone knew about that even back in 2004. I was trying to find the movie on Youtube but they dont have it there. Its a great movie, although it left me with a bit of sadness to think MJ’s not here anymore.

    There’s no doubt that the letter is from an insider.

  39. January 31, 2013 12:56 am

    Guys, I’ve been sent the book by Taraborrelli today and started some random reading of it. You will probably be surprised but up till now I haven’t read it. There were so many negative reviews of it that I was very much biased against it and thought that it was mostly lies. Now that I’ve read a little bit of it my perception has somewhat changed. Taraborrelli fully depended on what he was told by others – if these people lied, he lied too, and if they didn’t his account was more or less true. As to Michael’s own words it seems that there are not that many of them there (at least in the part I’ve read).

    Chapter 11 about Lisa Marie Presley totally amazed me by the fact that Taraborrelli’s account of that period largely coincided with my conclusions made on the basis of the Insider’s letter. We approached it from totally different angles but the conclusions are surprisingly very close. This makes me think that Taraborrelli did speak to Lisa Marie and what we are reading in this chapter is mostly her account of the events (I find it rather sincere by the way, except the reason for their separation of course, though over here not a word is said about “drugs”).

    Taraborrelli wonders if Lisa Marie knew of Debbie’s pregnancy in December 1995 and LMP’s friend thinks that she probably did not (while in reality she did), and he is greatly surprised that Michael’s fans did not pay attention to that point. It seems that Michael was very worried how his fans would look at him, a married man having a baby by another woman. The quote provided below refers to Debbie’s next pregnancy, but if this matter was so meaningful to Michael in the spring of 1996 we can imagine how much more meaningful it was for him in December 1995 when Debbie was pregnant the first time, when he was still officially together with LMP.

    Here are some quotes:

    It’s fascinating, in retrospect, that Debbie’s pregnancy and subsequent miscarriage – as well as her very existence in Michael’s life – had still escaped public scrutiny. It seems incredible that someone of Michael’s celebrity status could be married to one woman and planning a baby with another… and no one in the media would catch on to any of it. How, one wonders, did he manage it? ‘Carefully,’ responded someone in Michael’s camp, only half-kidding. ‘Very carefully.’

    Perhaps a clue to Michael’s behaviour – his distancing himself from Lisa and his subsequent, apparent panic attack – can be found in analysing a chain of events from late 1995. It would be many years later that Debbie Rowe would reveal that she became pregnant that December. Michael had certainly given Lisa fair warning that Debbie would have his baby if she wouldn’t do it. ‘Tell her to go ahead and do it,’ Lisa had said. If she was being sarcastic, perhaps Michael didn’t catch the mockery.
    Did Lisa know about the pregnancy? ‘I don’t think Debbie even knew yet,’ observed Monica Pastelle. ‘I think by the time Michael was on his back in the hospital, she was only a couple of weeks’ pregnant. As for Lisa, if she had known, do you think Michael would have been still drawing breath when she left that hospital room?’

    Well, in fact Lisa Marie did almost kick out all life from Jackson when visiting him at the hospital in December 1995. And again, this scene fits perfectly well not only with the news of Debbie’s pregnancy but also with the upcoming concert which Michael regarded as very important for his career and also with what Michael said to Frank Cascio about LMP being jealous of the Cascios (or at least her not wanting to have the Cascio boys around him):

    It’s possible that Michael really did want Lisa to be with him. However, when she got there he must have been sorry she’d agreed to the public relations manoeuvre. She showed up with fire in her eyes. When she walked into the room, the first thing that hit Lisa were all the framed posters of Shirley Temple as a child-star, Mickey Mouse and Topo Gigio, the strange, little puppet-mouse popular from the old Ed Sullivan Show in the 1950s and 1960s.
    When Lisa looked down at Michael, he appeared to be on his death bed; it seemed as if he had tubes coming out of every limb. He reminded her, she would later say, of the pathetic creature from E.T. at the end of the movie when the alien has taken a turn for the worst. As she stood there, ‘E.T.’ gazed up at her weakly and, mustering all his strength, managed to say, ‘Hi, Lisa. How are you?’
    Lisa wasn’t moved. She didn’t care much about Michael’s health, not at that moment, anyway. She suspected that he wasn’t suffering from ‘exhaustion’ or ‘dehydration’. He had long ago confided in her about his panic attacks. According to those who know her well, she figured that he’d suffered another and, based on his destabilized condition, that it had been quite a jolt to his system. Surely, though, it wasn’t because of the upcoming concert, she speculated. He’d made many such appearances, why would this particular one cause such a reaction? The broadcast had actually now been postponed indefinitely, costing both Michael and HBO a fortune. (It would never happen.) Whatever was going on with him was serious. Now that Michael was a captive audience, she wanted to confront him. So where had he been? Why was he so anxious? Most importantly, where did she stand with him?
    Michael usually tries to avoid confrontation. So, for his irate wife to barge into his safe, hospital haven was upsetting. His heart must have been thundering in his chest.
    Making matters more tense was the fact that the Cascio brothers had just left the room five minutes earlier. Had Lisa seen them? It was difficult to tell; her face was that impassive. But it’s likely she wouldn’t even have recognized them now. Still, it was a close call.
    Lisa closed the door behind her. She and Michael then engaged in a private and, judging from the shouting going on in the room – hers, not his – heated conversation. ‘I’m like a lion, I roar,’ she would say in 2003. ‘I won’t be a victim. I don’t sulk, I get angry. I go immediately into retaliation.
    ‘I couldn’t figure out what was wrong with him,’ she recalled. ‘I started asking questions, and it was always a different story. He said I was causing trouble and stirring up problems. He told me, “You’re making my heart rate go up,” and asked me to leave. I said, “Good. I want out. This is insane, all of it.”’
    When the door to Michael’s room opened, Lisa burst out as if shot from a cannon, past everyone in the hall and straight to the elevator. ‘Mrs Jackson,’ exclaimed one of the doctors. ‘My goodness! Your husband cannot be upset like this. He’s much too fragile. If you’re going to do this, you’ll not be able to visit him.’
    Lisa gave him a sharp look. Michael’s mother, who had been pacing in the hallway, regarded her daughter-in-law intensely. She could not fathom that Lisa would fly all the way from Los Angeles to New York just to fight with her son. Janet, who had also rushed to be at her brother’s side, had just gone to the ladies’ room. As Lisa stood waiting for the elevator, Katherine walked up to her and exploded in stunned disbelief. ‘What is wrong with you, Lisa,’ she hissed. ‘You are so spoiled. I can’t believe that you would do this to Michael.’ At that moment, the elevator opened and Lisa got into it.
    She turned, faced Katherine and gave her a critical look. Luckily for Katherine, the elevator’s doors then slammed closed between them.
    Lisa wanted to see Michael the next day. ‘Absolutely not,’ Michael’s handlers told her. There had been a meeting with Jackson family members and it was decided that Lisa was an antagonizing presence in Michael’s life, and that he should now be protected from her, at all costs. Furious, Lisa went back to Los Angeles.

    Though he tried not to show it to the expectant mother, Michael actually was apprehensive about the news of Debbie’s pregnancy being made public. First of all, would his fans put it all together and realize that he’d been working on having a baby with Debbie before he was even divorced from Lisa? How would that look? (Oddly, it would turn out that much of his public wouldn’t figure it out, or, at least, care.) Not only was he unsure how his fans would take it, he was worried about the reaction of his mother, Katherine.
    Indeed, Katherine, still a devout Jehovah’s Witness, was not happy to learn from news broadcasts that her son was fathering a child with a woman to whom he was not married. ‘This reminds me of what Michael’s father did in the seventies,’ Katherine said, privately, speaking of Joh’Vonnie. ‘It broke my heart. I won’t have history repeat itself with Michael. I just won’t have it.’

    Many of these details fit in perfectly well with the picture painted to us by the Insider’s letter. Of course the circumstances of LMP’s break-up with Michael related by LMP represent only her view of the matter with a couple of words added by the hospital doctors. But if we combine LMP’s account of the events (in Taraborrelli’s book) with the account of Michael’s aide (in the Insider’s letter) showing Michael’s view on the same thing, we can get an almost complete picture of what happened.

    This delights me not only because this way we are restoring a really true picture of the events, but also because it once again confirms the authenticity of the Insider’s letter.

    On the other hand Taraborrelli’s chapter 9 on June Chandler is a grave distortion of the truth. There are very many lies, omissions and half-truths there, and all of it because it also reflects the story told by one side only – that of June Chandler (or Evan, or Ray Chandler) and probably even Victor Gutierrez. And since it is only their version of the events, we cannot believe a single word of it.

    Look at the incredible way June Chandler (or Evan?) explained the Love Bracelet (it turns out that it also had rubies in between diamonds):

    Quote:

    The next day, Michael gave June a $12,000 ruby-and-diamond bracelet from Carrier’s. June stared at him as he presented the gift, dumbfounded. ‘A token,’ Michael told her. ‘It’s nothing. I just love you.’

    Nothing? Michael could have bought her lots of other, more conventional (and to be frank) more attractive jewelry if he wanted to impress her, but he still selected the Love bracelet, and the Chandlers present it as “nothing”? Well, from the happy smile on June Chandler’s face I didn’t have the impression that she regarded it that way at that time. Especially after Michael said to her: “I (just) love you”.

    No, guys, Taraborrelli’s book is a very interesting document if you know how to handle his information.

  40. January 30, 2013 4:13 pm

    “this is a great conversation” - Cole

    No, it is not.

    “You wrote: “And what if Blanket – just by chance – sees that TV program? Did anyone think how big a trauma it will be for the child?” And I absolutely agree, I feel the same regarding blogs. It could be hurtful for Prince and Paris to read that (according to this supposed letter) that “one of the biggest mistakes of [Michael’s] life” is when he “eventually knocked up Debbie”.”

    First of all the letter is not a “supposed” one, but is very much real and genuine, containing lots of details which proved to be true. And you yourself have provided me with links to the Enquirer’s message board where it was posted on June 12, 2004, so now we even know where it was found.

    Second, your quote of the letter is not correct. What the insider said was this:

    “Lisa Marie, however, led him to believe they would have a family of their own, but stayed on the pill anyway because even if she said she was a rebel, the little bitch didn’t want mommy dearest to get mad at her for having a lil black child. Mike found the pills, split, messed around with a couple of other women with the goal of getting one pregnant just to hurt Lisa (he can be an asshole sometimes, true) and eventually knocked up Debbie, which, (if I didn’t love and adore his children and think they saved his life) I would say was probably one of the biggest mistakes of his life. He was never faithful to Debbie after they married, never even wanted to marry her but Mike doesn’t like to break his mother’s heart. He and Lisa continued having sex until 1999″

    So with all the reservations the author of the letter is making, it is clear that he adores Michael’s children and realizes that they saved his life, and if it were not for them Michael would not have survived. But he still thinks that “messing around” with other women at the time was Michael’s mistake. Michael should have tried to sort the matter out with Lisa Marie and think of something to neutralize her family which was a huge negative factor for both of them. The insider thinks that Lisa Marie was not hopeless and Michael should not have thrown her out of his life at that moment leaving her for 6 weeks and trying to “knock up” another woman (“just to hurt Lisa” too).

    It is the personal opinion of a man close to Michael who saw everything with his own eyes and his observations only add to our understanding of the pain both Michael and LMP were going through as well as the mistakes they were making. These observations do not affect Michael’s children in any way, except that they may teach them some day to learn to take responsible decisions in whatever situations they find themselves in their future life.

    The insider does not have anything against Debbie – all he says is that Michael should not have messed up with other women at that particular moment and it would have probably saved his marriage with Lisa Marie, giving to it a happier turn. The later events proved that she could have agreed to give him a child (“nine children” according to Schmuley’s tapes), only by then it was too late. That “knock-up” thing had already taken place and now none of them could change anything in their lives. This is where the mistake was.

    When you come to think about it, Lisa Marie began to defy public opinion (and the opinion of her family) soon after her divorce with Michael. By the mere fact that she followed him all over the world she showed to everyone that she cared for him more than what the public opinion said about it.

    Even if Michael’s children learn of this dramatic moment in Michael’s life from the insider’s letter (or this blog), it will not bring any negativity into their lives. It will probably teach them something good and helpful instead.

    And it is absolutely not the same as rubbing salt in the wounds of a small child like Blanket by irresponsible speculations about who his mother is or whether he has a mother at all and he comes from a sterile tube instead.

    Putting these things on a par is pure demagogy and cynicism which I detest.

    This is why I don’t consider it to be a “great” conversation.

Trackbacks

  1. The Insider’s Letter About Michael Jackson’s women. Part 2. CHECKING IT UP WITH FRANK CASCIO’S HELP « Vindicating Michael

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,119 other followers

%d bloggers like this: