Haters Parasitize on the Success of Michael Jackson’s Vindicators
Guys, yesterday you probably noticed my activity in the comments section which I later had to erase not to mess the blog up. These were the traces of my trying to minimize the effect of some parasites which are living in the Internet at our expense.
By parasites I mean those Michael Jackson’s haters who are totally unable to win in an honest competition with Michael’s vindicators and pierce the skin of the more successful in order to take their lodging there and live a happy life forever after.
BEWARE OF PARASITES
The parasite method is simple. They take words like Michael Jackson’s vindication, or what’s even more outrageous, assume the internet name of vindicatemj (the name given to me by someone else long time ago), use both of them for themselves and this way launch on their road to success.
After two posts about the insider’s letter it has become clear that the goal of my writing about it has been totally misunderstood. Of course it is my fault and no one else’s, so let me try and explain it again.
THE INSIDER’S LETTER
I’m comparing every little detail of that letter with real events known to us now not because I want to savor the most intimate details of Michael’s personal life, but because I need to make sure that the letter is authentic. By authenticity I mean that it was written by someone who knew Michael’s most intimate secrets and is able to tell us the truth. And if the insider is found a credible source of information in all other matters, his statement about June Chandler may be regarded as perfectly credible too.
And what does the author of the letter say about June Chandler and her son? Well, nothing much.
The author simply includes June Chandler into the list of Michael’s love affairs or at least love interests, and calls Jordan a punk bitch who got jealous of mommy’s relationship with Michael (“punk bitch” means cowardly and mean).
Let us note that the matter-of-fact way he mentions them shows no desire on the author’s part to rub the information in, which is uncharacteristic of a fan but typical of a true witness – he talks of it like someone who really knows and just states the truth without any hysteria or sensationalism.
Quiet as this statement is, it is still impossible to overestimate it. It shifts the focus of the 1993 case from the “child molestation” absurdity to the reality of a man-woman relationship, putting the official Chandler story into a big lie category and once again stressing the thoroughly heterosexual side of Michael Jackson (which the author of the letter already explained to us through various other cases).
This revelation tells us the true essence of the 1993 case – among all the Chandlers Michael was interested in the woman, while they presented it as if he was interested in the boy instead.
June Chandler (wearing white) is with her kids at the World Music awards ceremony in Monaco, May 1993
An Insider’s Letter About Michael Jackson’s Women. Part 2. CHECKING IT UP WITH FRANK CASCIO’S HELP
We are still discussing a reader’s letter published in the National Enquirer on June 12, 2004. The goal is to find out whether it was written by a former Michael’s employee, who knew all secrets about his “thoroughly heterosexual” love life or by a fan who was simply inventing things about the idol.
The four of them together. The star in this picture is June Chandler. I don’t like the way Jordan Chandler is looking at her
The author of the letter states that it was June Chandler, and not her son Jordan, who was involved with Michael in 1993 case and this is why we have our own specific interest about this letter.
It says that Jordan got jealous of his mother and Michael’s attention to her. Previously we also noticed some signs pointing in this direction and if the letter is proven authentic the author’s statement about June Chandler will turn for us into a precious gem to crown all the work done in this blog by now.
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.
Michael told us that children were the only reason worth living for. Why didn’t we listen?
This post has turned into a diary as each day new comments had to be added here from another post.
December 19, 2012. ALFRED KINSEY’S LEGACY
Don’t you worry child?
Guys, I must confess to you that I am going through a terrible crisis.
It started with all the injustice towards Michael Jackson from the media and the public, and their hypocrisy in harassing an innocent man while overlooking the problem of real child abuse.
LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE report Those who contributed to it
This was followed by the Pennsylvania University report about sexual exploitation of children in North America which I partially retyped swallowing tears on the way. It turns out that children are abused on a mass scale and mostly in families – by relatives and those whom children know and not by strangers as everyone thinks. The abused minors run away from homes and form an army of street children who have to sell sex for survival. They flock to sun-and-sand cities where really “big bucks” are. Many respected fathers of families go there as conventioneers and pay for sex with the young (the younger the child is, the higher fee is). Then they happily return home and raise their own children. The “sun and sand” cities are Los Angeles, San Francisco and the like.
Incidentally, the California state which has a life-long tradition of persecuting Michael Jackson for no reason at all, is also a place with the highest rate of commercial sexual exploitation of children in the US. To me it looks like an explanation why they chose to harass Michael Jackson at all – behind the smokescreen of a “fight” against Michael’s imaginary “crimes” it was much easier to hide real and mass sexual abuse of children blossoming in California on an incredibly large scale. Read more…
The Documented Evidence of MICHAEL JACKSON’S LAST ALBUM
To see the true worth of things it always helps to look back into the past and see the events with a fresh eye of today. It can teach us great lessons.
To my big surprise the talk we had about Ireland made me recall the events already long forgotten but seen in a different light now that we know what Michael did in Ireland and how he felt among the Irish people.
This post will be an attempt to restore some of those past events and reevaluate them with the new knowledge we have now. Hopefully it will help some people to look at themselves from afar and stop the insanity towards Michael Jackson which is still going on, and even with a renewed force considering the fact of recent release of Sullivan’s book.
THE INSANITY OF HATRED
You will understand what I am talking of if we look together at some articles published in the press at the time when Michael Jackson was staying in Ireland. While Michael Jackson was living there a simple life of a countryman, the insane and unkind went on spreading about him the usual crazy stories. One of such stories was a fictional report in Ireland’s Daily Mirror, invented out of nothing with the sole idea to raise the sales of the paper at the expense of their victim. Read more…
Guys, I was wondering about Thomas Mesereau’s statement concerning Sullivan’s book and really don’t know now. Can he have a different copy from the one we are reading? From the look of it, his version does seem to be an advance copy and may indeed be different. However even if it is, Thomas Mesereau’s vehement defense of the book makes you think twice before saying all you initially wanted to say about it.
THE BOOK AND THE LAWYER
Mesereau looks tired and it seems that he knows more that he is saying in public. In his place anyone would be tired – for years he has been fighting the system, which not only doesn’t follow the “innocent until proven guilty” principle it so boldly proclaims, but does not allow to call a person innocent even after he is proven innocent like Michael Jackson was.
If I were in his place I would be frustrated. What was the good of defending the man in the court of law if even after the non-guilty verdict and seven years of speaking about Michael’s innocence this vicious machine is still running full speed and calls an innocent man “criminal”?
Indeed, what else should he say to the people to convince them that their court system works? And that Michael Jackson was absolutely no fool to “molest” anyone after Bashir’s documentary aired, when the authorities were already conducting the first interviews suspecting him of a crime…. How much longer should Thomas Mesereau indeed say to the public that the prosecution simply had no case against Jackson and all of it was nothing but sheer malice?
Let us move the discussion of Randall Sullivan’s book Untouchable: The Strange Life and Death of Michael Jackson into a special post as it has become too big an issue for the comments sections only.
THE HIGHLY ANTICIPATED MEDIA PROJECT
It seems that putting the Sullivan project into the center of public attention was the main idea from the very start of it. The amount of publicity the book is receiving is simply astonishing and is even unnatural if you understand what I mean. One would imagine that another book about Michael Jackson, released also these days should be worthy of this kind of attention – the one written by Lisa Campbell whose accuracy in writing about Michael in her earlier books is unrivalled – but no, it is Sullivan’s dubious project that is promoted like no other.
This reminds me of the orchestrated media campaigns that accompanied each Michael’s gesture while he was still alive. The word “orchestrated” is the key word here.
The New York Post of November 22 also noticed something of the kind:
“The evening news on ABC, CBS and NBC devoted more than a third of their broadcast coverage for an entire week to Sullivan, who was a contributing editor to Rolling Stone for more than 20 years”.
Their verdict for the book is unrelentless:
“Fans of Jackson, and even readers who are just curious about the onstage phenomenon he once was, would be better off viewing the documentary made from rehearsals for that comeback tour or YouTube clips of the “Motown 25” TV special nearly three decades ago — than reading this bloated, thoroughly dispensable book.”
Initially it indeed seemed that the book did not require any of our attention. The first reviews by those who read the 827-page opus showed that it was nothing but a compilation of every single media story ever told about Jackson sprinkled with a little bit of truth and sympathy over this new edition of the old lies.
The usual idiocy intended for the brainwashed public, I thought to myself, meant to refresh the old lies and correct the tarnished image of the media (not Jackson) by showing that journalists are human too and not that unresponsive to the public feeling towards Jackson. So human and so responsive they are that now they agree that Michael Jackson was also a human being and allow the public to see a little bit of the humane side of the man.
DIANE DIMOND in a case of a HOMELESS KID and pedophile RODNEY ALLEN
Diane Dimond’s adventures over a fictional molestation case of a Canadian boy were already covered in an earlier post here, but recent discussion of the same subject made me look into that 1995 story once again – this time in the light of Diane Dimond’s ‘cooperation’ with a pedophile named Rodney Allen.
BACKGROUND FOR THE CANADIAN SCAM
The report about the MJ scam aired in April 1995
Judging by the weather and fur coat Diane Dimond wore upon arrival in Canada the story took place either in the winter/spring of 1995 or late autumn the same year.
That year was notable for Diane Dimond as in January 1995 she and Gutierrez publicly lied about a certain “graphic” but totally non-existent video tape allegedly involving a ‘young boy’ and Michael Jackson.
This non-existent tape got Dimond and Gutierrez into big trouble as Michael Jackson sued them and Stephen Doran of “Hard Copy” for slander for the sum of $100 mln. The suit was eventually won by Michael Jackson, but only against Guttierrez who was the source where the lie originated. All those who repeated and promoted the lie got away with it while Guttierez had to flee from the US in order not to pay the $2,7 mln. awarded to Jackson.
Diane Dimond managed to escape justice after getting help from no other than Tom Sneddon, who made some misleading official declaration concerning the case. This enabled her to hide behind the Shield Law which protects journalists who in theory don’t always know whether their sources tell the truth or not. In theory no, but in reality the matters of truth have long stopped to have anything to do with Diane Dimond and Gutierrez – however this point was somewhat overlooked by the court. The court also made a mistake of thinking that there was ‘lack of malice’ on Diane Dimond’s part and let her go in peace, alas. Read more…
VICTOR GUTIERREZ behind the scenes of Michael Jackson’s case
As you can well imagine I spent several days exchanging Spanish-English computer translations with Marcelo. It is too early to predict anything but hopefully something good will come of it one day. The process turned into a sort of an inventory of facts known to us about Victor Gutierrez which brought me to some unexpected conclusions I would like to share here.
The first question is why this creature is so important to us at all. The short answer is because he wrote a dirty, slanderous and pornographic book called “Michael Jackson Was My Lover. The Secret Diary of Jordie Chandler!” after which there was simply no stopping him.
Even Michael’s death did not put an end to Gutierrez’s hateful activity against Michael Jackson. He took it as a personal gift for himself because now he does not have to pay Michael $2,7 mln following the ruling of the court after Gutierrez was tried and found guilty for telling lies about a certain ‘explicit’ video tape he could never produce.
The humiliation of that defeat never gave Gutierrez any peace, and to make even with Michael after his death Gutierrez turned it into a lucrative business for himself – while Michael’s body was still awaiting burial Gutierrez launched a nasty MJ impersonation show on Chilean TV featuring a clown calling himself Maikel Perez Jackson. Read more…
OPEN LETTER TO VICTOR GUTIERREZ by Marcelo Morales Navarro
Two days after Michael Jackson’s death, on June 27, 2009 Marcelo Morales Navarro from Chile wrote an Open Letter to Victor Gutierrez, the author of a pedophiliac book of lies about MJ called “Michael Jackson Was My Lover – The Secret Diary of Jordan Chandler”.
The title sounds sensational, however the problem is that the boy never had a diary and all we see in the opus is the author’s own fantasy of conversations and fictional activities between a adult and a boy which in reality never took place (at least between MJ and Chandler).
Jordan Chandler NEVER kept a diary, so all activity described in the book is the invention of Victor Gutierrez’s sick mind (or a glimpse at his own experience?)
The fact that the diary was non-existent and consequently Gutierrez invented most of the story was confirmed by the boy’s uncle Ray Chandler who was not above slandering Michael Jackson himself, but even he at some stage grew so resentful of Victor Gutierrez that called him a “sleazebag”:
- Ray Chandler said he did not endorse that book. “Victor Gutierrez is a sleazebag,” he said.
THE 1993 CASE: Jordan Chandler’s declaration, Michael Jackson’s photos and Tom Sneddon’s tricks
THE HIGHLIGHTS:
1. Did Jordan Chandler ever want to testify?
2. Why wasn’t Jordan Chandler deposed?
3. The criminal investigation is over. Tom Sneddon goes on talking
4. Prosecutors urge changes to the law to “nail” Jackson
5. Can a child’s declaration be admitted without the child’s testimony?
6. The Sixth Amendment and exceptions for children allowing them not to testify
7. Jordan’s case – a declaration with no evidence
8. A bluff with the 1993 photos at the 2005 trial.
Plus
9. The summary for those who can’t read long posts. And an update and an attachment.😊
This post is a review of some facts known to us about Jordan Chandler’s civil case against Michael Jackson which will be now supplemented with new information from recently discovered legal sources.
I myself am absolutely sure of the conclusions made here, however if anyone wants to dispute my points the post is fully open to discussion.
The question that interested me most was whether it was possible to bring criminal charges against MJ in the absence of the accuser Jordan Chandler who in 1994 refused to testify against Jackson.
The question arose because Michael’s haters usually call it the main reason why the criminal case didn’t go any further.
Though the prosecutors didn’t have a witness they claimed they had other evidence: 1) the boy’s declaration made within a civil suit (in addition to police interviews), 2) a certain description of MJ’s genitalia given to the police and 3) the respective photos taken during Michael’s strip search conducted by the police too.
From various sources and our own findings we know that the photos did not match the description, but Tom Sneddon repeatedly claimed that they did, and if we are to believe his words this alleged match looked to me like sufficient reason to bring charges against MJ irrespective of the boy’s wishes.
This belief was based on the universal concept that prosecutors can file charges even when victims refuse to proceed with their accusations. Read more…
MICHAEL JACKSON’S 1993 CASE: Jordan Chandler’s declaration, Blanca Francia’s deposition and Tom Sneddon’s leaks to the press
This post is a review of some details around Jordan Chandler’s declaration about Michael Jackson made in 1993.
For those who don’t remember the most basic facts of that case let me remind them that the paper was part of the civil lawsuit against Michael Jackson which was running parallel to a criminal investigation.
The criminal investigation was carried out by four law enforcement bodies including the District Attorneys (Tom Sneddon and Gil Garcetti) and the Sheriff departments of Santa Barbara and Los Angeles counties.
Their 12 months investigation (August 1993-Sept.1994) ended in nothing as the two Grand Juries of both counties looked into all the evidence gathered by the prosecution but did not find anything to indict Jackson for.
The other bodies involved in the investigation were the Departments of Family and Children Services and the FBI. As a result of all this scrutiny in the Jordan Chandler 1993 case no criminal charges were ever brought against Michael Jackson. Read more…
FAKE vindicatemj blogs!
MICHAEL’S HATERS ARE IMPERSONATING THIS BLOG ALL OVER THE INTERNET.
Below is the list of the impersonators. More will be added as soon as I spot them.
To differentiate this blog which is telling the truth about Michael, from haters who trash and slander him, please remember that the only genuine blogs from Vindicatemj are the one where you are now and its reserve copy on vindicatemjj.wordpress.com
I don’t mean to say that there are no other blogs vindicating Michael (there are many and michaeljacksonvindication2.wordpress.com is an example of them), but haters seem to be especially preoccupied with the word vindicatemj which was a name I somewhat accidentally acquired three years ago as the author and admin of this blog.
In the first package of fakes Michael’ s haters use the same picture I use for this blog (only they make a mockery out of it) and use the same “Vindicating Michael” title thus leaving the only outward difference between us in the Blogger web site service which hosts them while this blog is hosted by the WordPress.
Unfortunately only an attentive reader will be able to see the deception at first sight, as everything else except this Blogger.com/Wordpress.com difference seems to be the same.
The big idea of the trick is to compromise this blog devoted to cleaning Michael Jackson’s name of all dirt and lure the unsuspecting readers into a fake one which is a lair of hate, lies and more dirt about Jackson and is a terrible source for manipulation of readers’ minds. Read more…
Michael Jackson’s “ABORTION PAPERS” Paradox
The recent release of Michael Jackson’s song “Abortion papers” produced a bombshell effect.
Upon recovering from the initial shock the media scrambled to come up with something coherent about it, but totally failed to do so, as the tide of admiration, anger and controversy around the song is really too big to place these entangled emotions into one basket.
The conservatives and liberals are both at a loss as MJ turned out to be the exact opposite of what they expected him to be, while the media isn’t capable of anything else but helpless reproduction of Michael Jackson’s song in the hope that someone tells them what to make of it.
The Christian U-turn
As Michael Jackson’s advocate who knows that Michael was a pure soul, incapable of anything even remotely close to what they lied about him, I cannot help rejoicing at all this turmoil. Those very Christian organizations which didn’t want to hear of Michael Jackson’s name only a week ago are now quoting his song on each of their sites and refer to him as a big authority in support of the Christian cause.
” I have to do it in a way so I don’t offend girls who have gotten abortions or bring back guilt trips so it has to be done carefully…I have to really think about it.” [from Michael Jackson’s note to the track]
Deborah Kunesh has sent a Facebook note that it is okay to share around her post on the “Abortion papers” song by Michael Jackson that was recently released in the Bad 25th album. The song impressed everyone so much that even Michael’s haters are silenced into a stunned confusion and have to admit that it is one of Michael’s best.
The subject of the song is the source of even bigger bewilderment for Michael’s fans and non-fans alike. So in order to clarify things I decided to post here Deborah Kunesh’s marvellous article as it is perfect to explain Michael’s views on this sensitive issue and shows the deepness of his faith in God (whether people like it or not).
This will be only part of Deborah’s post (for the full of it please go here). The reposting is done quite accurately with only one exception – one of her thoughts will come in bold type as it stands out to me as the most important one for understanding Michael Jackson’s religious views and manner of thinking in general.
Michael Jackson’s Bad Turns 25 SOMETHING SPECIAL IS GOING ON
Bad was re-released yesterday!
The Times said on August 22, 2012:
- “Bad’s quarter-century milestone will be marked with due pomp. Jackson’s estate and Epic/Legacy Recordings are collaborating on a three-CD release (BAD25, out Sept. 18), which includes the remastered original album, plus an album of additional tracks, including demos and remixes, and a live album.
- The package also includes a DVD of never-before-seen concert footage—Jackson’s own review copy of a July 16, 1988 concert at Wembley Stadium.
- In addition, a Spike-Lee-helmed documentary about the album, the similarly-titled Bad25, will debut Aug. 31 at the Venice Film Festival. And starting this spring, Jackson has even found his way onto 1 billion Bad-themed Pepsi cans.
http://entertainment.time.com/2012/08/29/michael-jackson-bad/#an-oral-history-of-bad
Well, the mills of God grind slowly but they grind exceeding small. What was due to happen is happening at last – Michael Jackson is returning to us in his full glory and splendor. Read more…
“If he pulled out of the tour, AEG would take control of his company and its catalogue of songs”
The above headline concerning Michael Jackson is a quote taken from a newspaper article recently published by musicweek.com. One of the readers accused me of not quoting the reference sources, so here it is (to read the article please click on the link).
A valuable discussion about AEG is now taking place in the post about Randy Jackson, however since it does not belong there I decided to shift some of the comments into a new post. These comments are my replies to Susan Joyce’s and other people’s questions about AEG.
If any other readers besides Susan have the same questions let me explain the way I’ve always seen the situation with Michael Jackson’s valuable assets and a possibility of AEG getting hold of them as a result of their “contract” with Michael. Of course this is my opinion only, but it is based on an extensive research I’ve made of the subject. Susan Joyce raised this question twice:
“AEG could only be reimbursed what they had paid out to date in production and advances to Michael. If MJ’s musical estate (ATV and Mijac) together were worth say…..$800 million and Michael owed AEG a total of $100K, that is all AEG could collect. AEG would never own any of Michael’s musical estate.”
… I will try and explain it using an example this time. If you owned a company with a net worth of $1 million and you defaulted on your home mortgage which carried a first loan of $200K and second loan of $100K, the mortgage company could only sue you for the total amount of loans only i.e., $300K. The mortgage company, by law, has no legal standing to take your $1 million business and could NEVER act on your behalf or your sole representative
Susan,
Report by the Estate filed on 17.02.11 says that after Michael’s death they owed AEG the sum in excess of $40 mln. The actual advance to MJ was only $6,2 mln. while the rest must have been the expenses on producing “This is it” show borne by Jackson (click to enlarge)
The overall sum which the Estate repaid to AEG on behalf of Jackson was in excess of $40mln according to their first financial report. This was the sum which Michael would have had to return had his contract with AEG been severed. Those millions were made up of the $6,2 advance given to Michael under the Promissory Note and production costs which were fully placed on Michael’s shoulders (which is a complete outrage in and of itself).
Under pressure from Chernoff Randy Phillips admitted at Murray’s trial that all production costs were full Michael’s responsibility. Read more…
VMJ: Let me introduce Susanne as our new author. The post she is making on Michael’s birthday will surely bring tears to your eyes and will explain a lot about how we feel.
Since early July 2009 I am on a journey of which I can tell precisely how it started, but of which I don’t know how it will continue and whether it will ever end, as I am still on my way.
When Michael Jackson died on June 25, 2009, I never thought that I would once delve so deeply into this person. I had been no fan – I am not a fan type of person – and I always was sceptical about artists who so much operate with emotions and show in order to influence people. I had a problem to take this seriously, it partly seemed false to me, spurious – just a show! I didn’t take Michael Jackson seriously in his desire to make the world a better place.
And yet: I regarded him as a musical genius, I always thought his music is – wow – unearthly great. And a concert that was aired on TV enthralled and fascinated me almost against my will. He had an undeniable charisma and talent.
With the scandals surrounding him I didn’t occupy myself. I never was gullible with regard to the media, but somehow eventually you come to think there might be some truth to some stories. To be sure, I never believed the two cases of molestation. I always thought that this was about money, but I had no evidence. So I did not speculate and separated these scandals from his artistic works. Today I know that it cannot be separated at all. When the trial took place in 2005 I only thought: Why does he always bring himself into such situations? But I didn’t want to know details. It was awkward, speculative and embarrassing. Read more…
JOHN BRANCA and RANDY JACKSON. Two advisors, two outcomes for Michael Jackson’s finances
The eve of Michael Jackson’s birthday is not the best moment for an article like this, but I still decided to post it before the birthday as after it would be even worse – let the time and our attention afterwards be spent on something better than this subject.
The information I am presenting here will start with a comment I made in reply to a screenshot taken by Shelly from the 2007 Prescient lawsuit against MJ http://i.imgur.com/JAU1Y.png :
Forget about the lawsuit itself for a moment – all we need from it now is the text which is retyped here:
- “Since inception of Sony/ATV, which was originally valued at $930,000,000, the partners have agreed to acquire about $400,000,000 of additional music catalogs. The MJ Trust has borrowed a total of $272,500,000 to support the purchase of additional catalogs at Sony/ATV, and to support other various working capital needs. Sony has provided the lenders to MJ Trust a credit enhancement (for which Sony receives additional payment of $9,000,000 annually).” Read more…
When “VALUES” are more important than THE TRUTH
Some fans say that the matter of Sneddon has nothing to do with Michael Jackson’s vindication and that “Michael was vindicated at the 2005 trial”.
Yes, he was, only the general public does not know about it.
My hair stands on end when I read some people’s comments on the trial – “the jury was starstruck”, “Sneddon screwed it up”, “it was only due to Mesereau’s skill that he got away with it”, etc… There is so much prejudice in these words, so much malice, so much ignorance about the most elementary things that I am surprised that Michael’s fans are not using the unique opportunity of William Wagener’s affidavit to dispel the cloud of misconception about Jackson by finally thundering the truth.
Sneddon had NO CASE against Michael. He simply concocted it from beginning to end. The case is a plain piece of fiction, where “witnesses” were invented or nominated for the job, and tacitly coached to say the right thing and where the dates of fictional crime constantly changed depending on the documents the prosecution illegally seized from the other side.
We live as if on top of a volcano and do not have a moment of quiet. Today we’ve heard the news that the Estate signed an agreement under which the Sony/ATV joint venture will take care of administering the MJJac catalog which includes all Michael’s own songs.
Since every move by the Estate comes under double scrutiny and the word “Sony” is still a fright for many Michael’s supporters the news initially put me very much on my guard. However a little thinking made me realize that Michael’s songs still remain in full Michael’s ownership and all we are talking of is the right to promote his songs which was passed over from Warner Chappell to Sony/ATV. Considering that the joint venture is only one half Sony and the second half Michael, it means that the right to promote the songs has been passed to partially Michael Jackson himself.
In my view this might only for the better as a powerful entity like Sony/ATV will probably popularize Michael’s music better than anyone else.
Here is the news of the event from MJ-Upbeat.com: Read more…
THE COURAGE OF TRUTH vs. THE FEAR OF TOM SNEDDON
It is good that Michael Jackson’s supporters agree over the need to have Tom Sneddon answer for his crimes against Jackson and are more or less in favor of William Wagener’s affidavit pursuing this goal. But I see some fans nevertheless shaking with fear that if Sneddon is found guilty of “fraud on the court” something might happen to Michael’s not-guilty verdict.
Well, two lawyers have already told us that nothing will happen to Michael’s not-guilty verdict. The verdict can never been overturned as a person cannot be tried twice on the same charges – guilty or not guilty – and nothing happens to the verdict once the jury reaches it in a criminal trial.
However despite all these assurances some disquieting rumors are circulating that in case Sneddon’s fraud on the court is brought out into the open the verdict may become void. All this talk as so serious a matter that I decided to single it out into a separate post, shifting there some of my earlier arguments and comments.
Lesson for the naysayers of William Wagener’s initiative: A NOT GUILTY VERDICT CANNOT BE OVERTURNED
UPDATED
Here is a quote from a site of Michael Jackson’s supporters:
- Let’s discuss this whole William Wagener affidavit to the court in the most calm way possible. We encourage discussion because it’s the only way to get to the essence of any issue in the MJGlobal community.
Okay, let’s discuss it in the most calm way possible. I agree that it is the only way to get to the essence of the issue in general and in the MJ Global community in particular.
The criterion for finding out the truth is very well worded by reader Krisheywood who looks at every action in the MJ fan community from the point of view whether it is harming or helping Michael Jackson’s legacy. This is indeed the best criterion for taking the right decisions and determining who is who among Michael’s supporters. Read more…
Still hesitating? And What If a Sneddon Comes After You?
Regarding William Wagener’s today’s affidavit about Sneddon’s criminal misconduct reader SMJ has left the following comment which was quite an eye-opener to me:
That’s an odd reaction from hardcore fans…but I’ll have to admit that I’ve been getting the same sort of thing from a couple of people…I think after the zoo that occurred the last years of MJ’s life, some fans feel like it’s a hopeless cause to pursue justice if the media had already conspired and dented public opinion. A lot of times people don’t look at little victories, and expect things to either turn around in an instant, or not happen at all. I don’t think a lot of them consider how integral Sneddon and his cronies were to forming and feeding that zoo, and how long it will take to set things right (maybe more than a decade).
To put Sneddon into jail would be, really, a very public and well deserved victory and act of justice. Maybe fans think that if this doesn’t succeed, society will NEVER give truth a chance, and they’re ashamed to take part in what they consider a “risk”. That’s what I’m getting from some hesitant people, at least. But it’s odd that they won’t even give an anonymous signature on a petition, even if they don’t want to send out letters. What’re they afraid of? Onslaught? How can you win if you don’t even try?
So some people are hesitating? And do not take action in support of William Wagener because they are afraid that the society will not give the truth a chance? And they even speak of some “risk”?
And who is the society I wonder? Aren’t these very people who are hesitating now part and parcel of the society and isn’t it their opinion which forms public opinion in the long run? Why do they think that their opinion does not matter? And where is the sense of responsibility of these people?
And what risk are they talking of? Do they risk their lives, health and freedom like some of our people do when they protest against the unlawful acts of our authorities? Read more…
Vindicating Michael 
