Skip to content

On some people’s SKEPTICISM over Michael’s BEDROOM ISSUES

June 7, 2010

Great.  Skeptic has just called me wacky saying that all Michael Jackson’s fans are nutty.  Sort of an honor I would say – reminds me of Jesus’s desciples who were also crucified following their teacher…

Well, this kind remark shows me that this blog which was temporarily occupied by my numerous well-wishers should be requested back and taken solely into my hands again. And the first question to deal with will be exactly the one asked by Skeptic concerning why Michael allowed children into his bed:

“There’s no way to go round the issue – Michael was partly to blame for this. If he hadn’t slept in the same bed as that boy then all of this would not have happened. Him being the adult – he should have set some boundaries. One could argue this was down to his naivity – however after 1993 he should never have let a child sleep in his room, period.

If your child said to you that they had been molested and you knew they had slept in the same room as the alleged abuser – would it be absurd to believe that they might be telling the truth? …I don’t think so.

Fact is, he wasn’t just accused twice but 5 times (that I definately know of – this is stated in the Aphrodite Jones True Crimes documentary) – so you have to ask yourself why didn’t he stop allowing children to sleep in his bedroom? A lot of people keep saying that people who believe he molested boys have no foundation – but as you can see, what I have said above raises some doubt.”

Let me tell you one thing first – no matter what great proof of Michael’s innocence is found in this blog or anywhere else NOTHING will ever convince the skeptics of Michael’s innocence if they don’t want to believe it.

Skepticism is a way of life, it is a stance taken once and forever, a comfortable couch from which a choosy idler picks at the gifts brought to him by a hardworking researcher. It is a capricious laziness waiting to be entertained with facts of 24 carat value only – but even if it gets them it will still yawn at all the boredom of it and ask for more facts, miracles and overseas treasures.

“What about this boy? And that boy? And what about that maid who worked at Neverland for half a minute? And about that passerby who wanted to make a couple of millions from some trash lying on the ground? And what about that journalist who showed somebody’s dirty underwear on TV? Oh, you think she took it from the first rubbish bin? Prove it pleeeeease, or otherwise I won’t be convinced”…

This won’t do, dear skeptic. Sometimes people need to think on their own and decide for themselves, for ex. whether it is possible to believe at all a person who is capable of such unbelievable public ‘underwear’ tricks.  The answers you get in the process of thinking are incomparable to anything which is given to you ready-made. No magician will ever be able to prove to you anything which you haven’t earned yourself and received free of charge without working.

Thinking together – this is what is awaiting you now. Don’t expect any facts to be put into your mouth any longer – you’ve had so many of them that even half the amount would be enough to prove Michael’s complete innocence and convince any nitwit that Michael’s harassment by the media and prosecution was deliberate – meant to drown him in the mud in somebody else’s interests.

You mentioned five Michael’s accusers. Actually I don’t remember five of them but let it be the way you say it – in Michael’s case the number is of NO importance anyway.

Why is the number of accusers not important in Michael’s case? It’s because he should have had hundreds of them considering his lifestyle and all his hospitality, generosity and trust he had in people flocking into his house and living there as if it were their own. Yes, one would expect a whole crowd of them which surprisingly he didn’t have

By the way how many accusers did a self-confessed pedophile Thomas O’Carroll have? None as far as we know??? But if the experience is there where are the actual victims? Why did they have to jail him for keeping children porn only which was found not even in his own, but his friend’s (Anglican minister) house? Do you remember me telling you why? Because according to the police Thomas O’Carroll and his friend were very frequent visitors to Eastern Europe where they gained their pedophilic experience and returned to the UK innocent as babies to share their impressions and photos at numerous pedophile sites.

Do you see any difference between these two types of behavior or is it all the same to you? I mean one being completely OPEN and the other being completely CLOSED and SECRETIVE?

Isn’t it one thing to have a couple accusers in a situation when a criminal hushes up a crime in one place, gets a job in another, leaves numerous dirty traces here and there and finally disappears with no clue as to his whereabouts ? Or lives his life quietly as a mouse presenting to the world the standard picture of a completely normal man so that no one ever, never notices anything at all? God forbid inviting any children to his home! (as if it can be done only at home…)

But isn’t it another thing to have a couple of accusers in a situation when a person speaks about his love for children openly, gives them free access to his rooms and says to the sheer horror of his supporters that he will not drive a child out of his bed if he accidentally crawls there – as if inviting the money-greedy applicants to accuse him of every unspeakable crime?

Twenty accusers (not that Michael had them!) in such a situation would be a mere nothing as compared to one real victim of a real criminal whose ‘activities’ are so covered up that even their immediate neighbors would never know for decades what kind of hell is going on behind that fence of theirs…

You asked why he allowed children into his room at all.

Do you want me to answer? Or will you try it yourself just for once? As to me I can give you a dozen reasons which you won’t believe anyway, so I really don’t know whether the job is worth doing…

Well, I am the only child in the family, and I don’t have five brothers, and I’ve never tried to live with them all my childhood and adolescent years in one room in a small house or at a hotel.  If I did I would probably like all the noise and commotion it brings about and would be even frightened of the stillness of the night – especially after the roar of the concert I’ve just given. If this was my life experience I would probably want other people to stay at night with me and replace them with full-size mannequins if real people were not available to me for some reason.

But since my life experience is different my habits are different too and I like to enjoy a little quiet for my sleep.  But again what I feel is of no importance at all because I have my life and Michael had his.

Why didn’t he have a woman by his side? A different one after each concert as some of us would prefer? Well, having one and the same girl would be committing himself too much and would be verging on a marriage already (he did practice it though with LMP when it came to that). Having a different one each time could end up in reading the Bible to them every night (remember that beautiful story of him being locked by his brothers with two prostitutes and the effect it had on all the three?). Having sex with someone new, glamorous, but money-greedy could result in a grandiose story in the next morning’s press, while not having sex with the same girl could result in a twice as grandiose story in the same morning press. No, whichever way you look at it, it doesn’t work out…

What about having a male friend accompanying him on a tour? Well-well, shall I do it for you or will you do the job yourself elaborating on the beauty of the situation and its impressive media consequences?

uncle and niece

My last suggestion is a relative, let us say a girl (to avoid suspicion of a male-boy love), say, a niece some 15 years… no, 10 years…. no, better 6 years old…. No good either? AGAIN? Oh, I see your point… Well, Michael would probably not be too frantic about the idea anyway as keeping company with girls isn’t so much fun – they like playing dolls and things like that, no climbing trees, no water fights, no nothing…

the unvincible

A careful scrutiny of all the candidates leaves us with guys like Macauley Culkin as the only choice for a companion – this way you are guaranteed a hundred pranks a day, not a moment of quiet any more, fun round-the-clock and numerous common interests like throwing water balloons from the balcony and so on.

You wonder why he needed any companions during his tours at all? And why did he take his own children everywhere he went? Do you take your children with you each time you go on a business trip? By the way have you ever spent half a year all alone in a 3-room suite of different hotels while being on a tour – sorry, business trip?

Shall I remind you of the funny remark Dr. Klein made to Larry King about Michael’s habits when they were on a tour and his whole office had to sleep together with Michael to make him fall sleep? (“Once we were on tour with him, we were in Hawaii. He couldn’t get to sleep, so me and my whole office went to sleep in the room with him”). What a ridiculous method of fighting sleeplessness none of us ever heard before…

But it was nevertheless this method that Michael evidently used when they were in Las Vegas with June Chandler, Jordan and Lily – you’ll be surprised to know that the first night all of them slept in ONE room of their three-room suite as June Chandler described it in her testimony:

Q. Now, when you got to Las Vegas, did you have — obviously you had a room —

A. Correct… Well, there were approximately three bedrooms in that suite at the Mirage Hotel. Lily and I were staying in one bedroom, Jordie had another bedroom, and Michael had another bedroom.

Q. — in The Mirage. And who was in your room when you first got there? Who was staying in your room?

A. Jordan, myself, Lily and Michael.

Q. All in the same room?

A. Correct.

So was it because of his sleeplessness that he always needed some companions around him? WHAT A GREAT VERSION I HAVE HERE – and mind it that it is also a much more grounded one than those horror fairy-tales told before me by thousands of Michael’s detractors.

I know I didn’t convince you (I was prepared for that), and these reflections were not really for you, skeptic. They were meant for those who even at the age of 80 can still remember what it is like to be playful in life and not take it too seriously…

Finally some of you say he should have stopped “it” after 1993.

What EXACTLY should he have stopped, please? Hugging a child? Kissing him/her on the cheek? Allowing him to watch TV in his bed and fall asleep there? And why should he have stopped it? Let those who are guilty stop their atrocities… Why should the non-guilty stop anything at all? Because someone with a dirty mind demands it – even in spite of the fact that the children and their parents look forward to all the joy and willingly participate in it?

Was Michael’s home and life in general a public theatre which the audience hungrily watched and hissed at in case they didn’t like the play?

If so, why don’t they hiss and throw rotten tomatoes now at those who commit REAL crimes against children? Why do they let them write BOOKS and recommend their filth as a must read to normal human beings? Why do they keep shy silence when someone ‘renowned’ speaks of these crimes as sheer POETRY, says that ALL of us are ‘like that’ and propagates this practice at every corner as something ‘rich and rewarding’ for everyone to try?

These are just a couple of questions for your homework…

P.S. As a special bonus for skeptics here are two articles to prove that firstly, there were really more than two accusers in Michael’s life and secondly, that the craziness of it all is simply unbeatable:

1) The first accuser claimed (among other things) that Jackson subjected him to unnecessary cosmetic surgery, burned, tortured, beat him, sexually assaulted him for 12 years by the year 2008,  had him ejaculate into a jar to later use his semen for impregnating his wife Debbie and also stole songs from him.  The case was dismissed after the applicant failed to show up for the commencement of the trial:

2) The second accuser claimed emotional and physical trauma as he was kidnapped and molested by the singer at gunpoint for several days in New Orleans while all this time Jackson was in California receiving an award from President Reagan and rehearshing for his Victory Tour in 1984:

The craziness Michael went through is unbelievable…………

82 Comments leave one →
  1. Susanne permalink
    June 8, 2010 6:19 pm

    Uuh, I like so much what you wrote. That’s really perfectly written – for all those hypocrites who refuse to understand!


  2. Suzy permalink
    June 8, 2010 8:29 pm

    “Skepticism is a way of life, it is a stance taken once and forever, a comfortable couch from which a choosy idler picks at the gifts brought to him by a hardworking researcher. It is the capricious laziness waiting to be entertained with facts of 24 carat value only – but even if it gets them it will still yawn at all the boredom of it and ask for more facts, miracles and overseas treasures.”

    Wow, you said it beautifully! And it’s so true!

    I think to evaluate the possible validity of an information, you always have to check out the messenger first! Investigate the source! That usually helps a lot to decide whether I believe something or not.

    In the case of Michael’s accusers (and I know only three of them: Chandler, Arvizo and Francia) ALL had serious credibility issues! Gavin Arvizo already lied under oath (instructed by his mother) in another case before they even met MJ. Michael was not even the first guy this family accused of sexual molestation. They accused a JC Penny guard of molesting Janet Arvizo (when he escorted them out from JC Penny after Gavin was caught shop-lifting….). And half a year after the MJ trial Janet Arvizo was charged with welfare fraud:
    They also had a history in trying to extort money from other celebrities, like Jay Leno or Chris Tucker.

    So why should I believe these people, when they have a long history of criminal activity and lying for money? What makes them credible in anybody’s eyes? They have “gold-digger” written all over them…..

    Another guy was Jason Francia, who was called in as a prosecution witness for the 2005 trial. His mother, Blanca Francia was a maid at Neverland before the 1993 allegations (I’m not sure if she was fired by the time, I think she was). After the Chandlers made their allegations in 1993, she too made hers which was that Michael molested her son too. But the first thing she did with that wasn’t going to the authorities but going to a tabloid and selling the story for money…..
    Then the sheriff questioned her son, Jason, who, at first, denied he was ever molested by Michael. Then the sheriff started to pressure him and play on his guilt by telling him that other boys, like Macaulay Culking and Corey Feldman have been molested by Michael too (which was a lie, both boys denied any wrongdoing on MJ’s part) and they won’t be able to help them if Jason doesn’t confess. Only with this burden placed on his shoulders Jason started to tell what the sheriff wanted to hear from him…..
    In the 2005 trial he was a pretty useless witness for the prosecution. His answers were mainly “I don’t remembers” and what he told was deemed non-credible by the jourors (as they told after the trial). Jason and his mother among others claimed they saw Michael molesting other boys too. Boys like Culkin or Wade Robson. These boys then were called to the stand by the defense and they all testified they were never molested by Michael…..

    And then there is Jordie Chandler. It’s a shame that case never went to trial. I think if it had, the Chandlers’ credibility would be just as exposed as the other two accusers’. We know that it was a troubled family and there was a custody battle going on for Jordie. We also know that Evan Chandler desperately wanted a Hollywood career as a screenwriter and was pressuring Michael to help him. We know that he was bi-polar. We know (and thanks VindicateMJ) how Jordie’s description of Michael’s penis looked like. The media kept telling us all these years that the description matched, now decide it for YOURSELF if it indeed did (and keep in mind he couldn’t even tell if Michael was circumsized)…..
    We also know that after the allegations Jordie got estranged from his parents and legally emancipated himself from them as a teenager. And we know that when he was called to testify against Michael in the 2005 trial, he vehemently refused. He actually moved to another country for the time of the trial. Thomas Mesereau, Michael’s lawyer, claims he had a witness who would have testified that Jordie confessed to him that he was never molested by MJ. They would have called that witness on stand in case Jordie had come to testify. (IMO it’s actually pretty telling he didn’t. If I had been molested by someone I sure would want that bastard in jail and would help others in a trial against him…..)

    “My last suggestion is a relative, let us say a girl (to avoid suspicion of a male-boy love), say, a niece some 15 years… no, 10 years…. no, better 6 years old…. No good either? AGAIN? Well, yes, and Michael would probably be not too frantic about the idea – keeping company with girls isn’t so much fun – they like playing dolls and things like that, no climbing trees, no water fights, no nothing…”

    Actually it’s a myth made up by the media that Michael only befriended little boys! He also had lots of little girls for those sleepovers and in his bed. Even when he was hanging with Jordie Chandler, he was actually a lot more affectionate with his little sister:

    I have also read an account not long ago by a girl who spent time at Neverland when she was a child (unfortunately I didn’t save it). She said there were girls and boys too. She too slept in Michael’s bed with Michael. She said when they played Michael spent a little more time with the boys, but it was natural since it were the boys who played boyish games, while the girls played with dolls and things those were obviously less interesting for him. But that’s all! It’s not true what the media were telling that there were only boys. It’s not true what the media were telling that girls were treated as second class citizens by him. It’s not true what the media were telling that only boys were allowed into his room and in his bed. This girl said she couldn’t swim so when they were playing in the pool, Michael picked her up and walked into the pool with her sitting on his neck.

    And here’s another girl who spent time at Neverland as a child – doesn’t seem like someone who was treated as second class citizen by Michael either:

    (As for Dr. Klein – I think he was Dr. Murray before Dr. Murray and that’s why he “slept” in Michael’s room together with his whole office. But that’s another story….. Generally, it’s true that Michael slept in a room with people all the time, not just children, but also adults – and it was not sexual or romantic. I remember his make-up artist Karen Faye mentioning too she slept with Michael in his bed. And they never had a sexual or romantic relationship, they were just friends. I think Michael was simply trying to treat his loneliness that way.)


  3. Skeptic permalink
    June 8, 2010 9:18 pm

    Ok, let’s get one thing straight – I said you were slightly wacky because you sometimes state opinions as if they are fact (for example; that homosexuality is a mental disorder – who are you to make such an assumption – have you studied homosexuality?)

    I said it’s no wonder people think Michael Jackson fans are crazy I did NOT say that Michael Jackson fans are crazy. Sometimes you go beyond stating the facts. For example, you start to guess things that you have no way of knowing. If you simply state the facts it would make for a more compelling argument.

    But your lack of objectivity shows more and more in every article you write – for example – saying things like “it’s obvious he is completely innocent” – when the truth is exactly the opposite – it is not obvious what happened. You keep saying you have proof of his innocence BUT all you have is facts that SUPPORT his innocence – they are not the same thing!

    And like it or not, while there is no proof of any wrong doing, there is also facts that support the possibility that there was wrong doing. Sleeping in the same bed is one of them. That’s just the way it is. And my sentiment is shared by quite a few of the comments I have read.

    And you keep giving weak excuses as to why Michael continued to share his bed. Whether this was completely innocent is irrelevant – if you choose to share your bed with a child after being accused several times – then you have to live with the consequences. If he really wanted to have sleepovers – why not have the parents of the children accompany them at ALL occasions when they sleep? That’s what a responsible adult would do.

    If you let yourself become vulnerable by doing this, you have no-one to blame but yourself. Knowing its going to be one person’s word against another – you should make sure you have safeguards.

    Let me ask you again – if your child had slept in the same bed as Michael and he later says he was molested by him – then would you believe him or would you believe Michael. So stop attacking these parents – June was told by Jordan that she was molested – what did you want her to do?

    And in the case of Evan – what if he really believed that Michael molested his child?

    In fact, have you ever thought what if Michael did molest this child – has that ever entered your head – because people looking at this objectively would think about both possiblilties that Michael may be innocent and that Michael may be guilty – and this is the reason why I don’t outright say he is guilty or innocent.

    You fail to acknowledge that Jordan was the real victim here -whether he was molested or whether he was coerced into saying this stuff. In 1993, he was a 13 year old boy – Michael was a 35 year old man. Spare a thought for him.


  4. Emma permalink
    June 8, 2010 10:57 pm

    I agree that Jordan was A victim, not the only one. Michael was too. Also, June Chandler stated in the 2005 trial that she NEVER believed that Michael abused Jordie.


  5. Skeptikos permalink
    June 9, 2010 1:44 am

    @ Skeptic,
    Isn’t it amazing how people can manipulate things into what they want? You for example!

    i) Homosexuality is indeed a mental disorder. According to recent studies and also the Pentagon’s directive 1332.38, on “physical disability evaluation,” which includes homosexuality in a list of “mental disorders,” along with mental retardation and personality disorders!

    ii) MJ’s fans are not crazy and do state facts! I’ll give you these 2 examples:

    FACT 1) Americans (as well as Europeans) eat up all the junk that the media feeds them because they are looking for entertainment rather than actual truth. Consequently, we all live in a world of stories, not a world of events!

    FACT 2) When a bunch of people looks at the problems of another bunch of people, always ask: How can we make their problems all about us and profit? Global capitalists, governments, politicians, lawyers, industries/corp./media, unions and other powers like parasites, sharks, vultures and leeches (lobbies and mafias) are the REAL Story-Tellers, who tell us (common folks) their stories, so they can profit all sorts of goodies for themselves.

    So, these 2 basic principles of post-modernity explain why each day poor people are poorer and rich people are richer and richer, as well as why whenever Michael Jackson gave millions to charity MEDIA focus on lies, rumors and gossips!

    As you can see MJ’s fans know exactly that we all live in a world of Stories that serves ONLY Market Interests, being the packaging more important than the product itself. In other words, crap, bullshit, trash will always sell bigger than blunt truth!

    YOU also said: «But your lack of objectivity shows more and more in every article you write – for example – saying things like “it’s obvious he is completely innocent” – when the truth is exactly the opposite – it is not obvious what happened. »

    The Truth is the opposite?? How can you say such a thing?

    In 2005 MJ was acquitted of all charges.
    However, the TRUTH just didn’t fit in with the media’s definition of Michael as guilty (regardless of facts or evidence – the media had already convicted him in the ‘court of public opinion‘).
    «Is it merely a coincidence that all of the people who have accused Michael Jackson of acting inappropriately with a child are connected to one another? Every accuser, every professional who has worked with each accuser, every tabloid hack who has reported negative stories about Jackson – literally all of the players involved in both the 1993 case and the 2003 case are related to one another.» See more here:

    Please don’t shame skeptics anymore!


  6. Lynette permalink
    June 9, 2010 3:12 am

    To Skeptic: I just finished watching the Aphrodite Jones True Crime show again (I saved it in my DVR) and at no time does anyone state on the show that there were five accusers so don’t use that show for a reference. Frank Dileo did say in the show that they had evidence against the Chandlers that was considered illegal taping therefore rendering it inadmissible in a court of law. Everyone close to Michael knew of these tapes and knew the truth of the extortion claim. They were tapes that Anthony Pellicano made during his surveillance of Evan Chandler. The book All That Glitters by Ray Chandler is 50 % rant about what a bad guy Pellicano is but they tell you why in the book. They hate Pellicano because he was the one that knew with his illegal tapes that their story was the world worst and biggest lie.
    As the above entry in this blog, shows there were many people hoping to get rich by accusing Michael Jackson of everything from child molestation to he stole the song Billie Jean from me.
    I have actually read the book All That Glitters by Ray Chandler, Jordan’s uncle. I believe that this is the book that they were originally trying to sell within days of the settlement being reached with additions to include events that happened in the following decade. These chapters that were added allow the writer to include a personal rant against everyone from Lisa Marie to Anthony Pellicano. I would like to acquaint you with some excerpts from that book which I believe show that Michael was a victim of extortion as he always maintained.
    Excerpt from All That Glitters page 28 paragraph 2 starts with May 21st. This is their first physical meeting and the first time he talked to Michael directly. Evan and Cody had gone to Michaels Century City Condo. He writes about gifts given to Cody and a watch that Michael had given him. He talks about the artwork displayed in the condo and then says he had concerns about Jordan’s relationship with Michael so on page 29 paragraphs 8 Evan says to Michael “Can I talk to you for a moment”?
    They sat close, Evan poised on the edge of a couch, Michael deep in a velvety chair.
    “I had planned to work up to it,” Evan recalled,” kind of beat around the bush for a while. But face to face it seemed phony, and I found myself at a loss for words.”
    After an awkward silence Evan decided the best thing to do was to jump right in, like he would with Dave or mark or any good friend. Michael would either be offended or he’d appreciate the honesty.
    Locking eyes with the star, Evan blurted right out. “Are you fucking my son up the ass?”
    Supposedly” Michael giggled like a schoolgirl and said” “I never use that word”. If I had been Michael I would have considered this the first accusation.
    The next weekend he lets Michael and Jordan sleep in the same bed at his house saying that it was trundle bed that Michael was in the same bedroom occupied by Cody Jordan’s 6 year old brother. Before Michael sleeps there that night he is gets a headache according to Evan and he has his friend Mark Torbiner (Same Mark Torbiner that administered the sedative to Jordan to pull his tooth) come over and gives Michael Toradol for it. Michael became very groggy and Evan was stroking his head and quizzing him about whether or not he was gay. Even in a drug induced stupor Michael denied it but he did give out names of high powered people in the entertainment business that were according to Evan. This is the night that he supposedly sees Michael “spooning” with Jordan in the same bed. How can he ask Michael that question a week before he sees this when this is what made him suspicious of their relationship?
    The next morning is when Evan suggests that Michael build on a wing to his house and Michael finds out that he can’t so Evan asks him to just buy him a new one so he and Jordan can live in the same house. So how do you take that? This man thinks his son is being molested by Michael Jackson so he wants him to buy him a house so they can live together? If that isn’t the ultimate pimp I don’t know what is.
    This is when Michael stops talking to him and who could blame him? He becomes angry about being cut out of Michael’s life and then he is taped by Dave, Jordan’s stepdad going on and on about how Michael had no right to just cut him off like that and we know the rest of the tape. He has an attorney that he hired on June 13th officially. What nobody knows is that Mark introduced them at a party along with the psychologist Stanley Katz a year earlier. The plot is beginning to thicken. The lawyer Barry Rothman calls a psychiatrist Dr. Mathis Abrams and gives him a hypothetical situation and what no one knows is that Dr. Abrams is not only and MD he is a lawyer as well. He sends them information on how to report child molestation via a third party so there is no liability to the parent.
    It goes on for little while about different things, nothing exculpatory for their side just more about how he wants to talk to them to get this thing cleared up, but the gist of the story happens when he and Jordan finally meet with Michael and Pellicano at a hotel. This is where he walks in and gives Michael a hug and hands Pellicano a letter spelling out the law about taped conversations and their legality and hand him the letter from Abrams. It says of course based on the hypothetical situation, that if the child was sleeping in the bed with a 35 year old man there was reason to be suspicious that there was molestation occurring. It also included the laws about molestation in the state of California which state;
    Section 11166(a) (of the penal code) requires the reporting to a child protective agency by a health practitioner (inter alia) who has knowledge of … a child whom he or she… reasonably suspects has been a victim of child abuse. Child abuse is defined (11165.6) as including sexual abuse of a child. Sexual abuse is defined in 11165.1 as sexual assault or exploitation as defined therein, which includes 11165(a) conduct in violation of 288, relating to lewd and lascivious acts upon a child less than 14 years of age. Such conduct is described to include, but not limited to. Those examples in enumerated in 1165.6(b) 4: “the intentional touching of the genitals or the intimate parts (including the breast, genital area, groin, inner thighs and buttocks) or the clothing covering them, of a child, or of the perpetrator by a child, for purposes of sexual arousal or gratification… These events as presented above provide the basis for the conclusion that reasonable suspicion would exists that sexual abuse may have occurred. Because such a reasonable suspicion would exist, such awareness by a health care practitioner (defined in 11165.8) or other required reporter would require the reporting of the suspicion to the required agency. In addition, these circumstances raise the possibility of issues regarding, but not limited to, child neglect and /or prostitution (aiding and abetting) not addressed further herein.
    Does anyone see a similarity between the above description of sexual molestation and Jordan Chandler’s sworn “detailed description of the molestation” that can be found on the smoking gun website.
    This letter and their hypothetical situation are how they eventually got June on their side as well I’m sure of it. In the letter the situation that was described to Dr. Abrams was that June was allowing this therefore the thing about aiding and abetting, prostitution and the like. I’m sure if she would not have gotten on board they were going to say that she was pimping Jordan to Michael. How ironic if what they had said before was true about his suspicions and when he asked that question and then when Evan asked for a new house. Does anybody see something wrong here?
    Other things that they write about, the conversations with Larry Feldman that make me believe in the extortion. On page 207 chapter 22 they write about the now infamous description of Michael’s genitals and how it took Jordan hours to get the markings correct. They say “But they pressed on and eventually arrived at a description that turned out to be an accurate match to the photos taken by the Santa Barbara authorities a few days later.” However what they were doing in the book was misleading. They were getting everyone to focus on the markings of Vitiligo and not on the discrepancy of circumcision the TRUE exculpatory evidence.
    Evan Chandler shows how devious he was he even thinks ahead to the possibility that the markings didn’t match when he says that they were aware the discoloration markings can change in a very short time so they were ready to say they had just changed. On page 202 his conversation with Larry Feldman:
    Larry: Oh yeah , Lauren Weis told me today that this disease Michael says he’s got , this Vitiligo , that it’s capable of changing anywhere you look , so anything Jordie says is irrelevant. It can change very quickly with this disease”.
    Evan: Shit, these guys seem to have an answer for everything.
    Larry:” No, that’s good for us.
    Evan: Why?
    Larry: Because if he’s right he’s right and if he’s wrong we’ve got an explanation.
    Evan: Ha!
    Larry: It’s a no loser for us.
    Why did the police ask for description of Michael Jacksons private parts? Is this standard practice in child sexual abuse? No! It was actually offered by the Chandler side by Jordan through Stanley Katz their psychologist, as definitive proof. Guess what it wasn’t. Only a couple of reputable newspapers picked up on the real discrepancy, the circumcision, and reported it. Why? That should have been a larger headline than the accusation but it wasn’t. I will always wonder why they wanted Michael hurt that way. Funny thing happened with Larry Feldman too. He actually petitioned the court for copies of the photos of Michael’s genitalia. Now if he got them and they are such a wonderful match why didn’t he put them out there for the world to see? Why didn’t he push Jordan to testify in criminal court? They even say why Michael Jackson didn’t give them their money in August when they asked for it. If he had he would have spent the next 10 years as the most famous entertainer in the world instead of the world’s most infamous pedophile? I would say the reason Michael didn’t succumb to their demands for cash was because he wasn’t guilty. All the chandlers did was out lawyer Michael with the help of judges denying all their petitions. God Help the American Justice system.
    As for Jordan, he’s 30 years old now, no more excuses as far as I’m concerned. The ones we should feel extremely sorry for are Michael’s children having to live with the stupidity of the people out there like you who like to believe an ugly lie about their Daddy.


  7. Carm permalink
    June 9, 2010 3:18 am

    Actually I’m surprised as to how ill-informed you people are when it comes to Michael Jackson and children in his bed. Actually after 1993 he NEVER was alone in bed with a child and when children insisted on sleeping in his bed, MJ slept on the floor. His friend and Neverland security guard Frank Cascio slept on the floor with him, to make sure there was at least a third party present. Often there were a few people sleeping on the floor. Also, if children wanted to sleep in his bedroom they needed to get permission from their parents and the parents were also invited. This information comes from legal sources. Geraldine Hughes also mentions this, after having done her research.
    MJ wasn’t as stupid as a lot of people think–he knew he had to protect himself and so did his legal advisers.
    This “sleeping with boys” business is largely spin by the prosecution during the 2005 trial. Incidentally girls and entire families sometimes slept in his room.
    By the way if you want to molest a child do you need to have a bed to do it? Actually all you need is to be alone with a child. According to the logic of “Skeptic” many of us are therefore child molesters unless proven otherwise.


  8. Lynette permalink
    June 9, 2010 4:44 am

    I couldn’t agree more Carm. If it was true Michael Jackson was the only pedophile in history to molest children only at night and only in his own bed.


  9. Suzy permalink
    June 9, 2010 7:48 am

    @ Skeptic

    “Whether this was completely innocent is irrelevant – if you choose to share your bed with a child after being accused several times – then you have to live with the consequences.”

    “If you let yourself become vulnerable by doing this, you have no-one to blame but yourself.”

    I think it was stupid from Michael to expose himself to false accusations. But I don’t think this stupidity or naivity justfies false accusations. And I definitely don’t think it’s “noone but him to blame” when somebody is falsely accused! That’s actually a ridiculous statment, which totally excuses the false accusers on the basis that “oh well, Michael was stupid enough to set himself up for them, so he deserved it”! This kind of argument reminds me of when rapers say the woman they raped was to blame because she was dressed seductively.

    I understand that you are undecided on whether the accusations are true or false, while I consequently used the term “false accusations”. That’s because after thoroughly researching these cases that’s the consequence I came to. And that leads us to the next point.

    You said: “In fact, have you ever thought what if Michael did molest this child – has that ever entered your head – because people looking at this objectively would think about both possiblilties that Michael may be innocent and that Michael may be guilty – and this is the reason why I don’t outright say he is guilty or innocent.”

    I know you addressed it to Helena, but I will answer too, because you seem to think MJ fans can’t look at this objectively and don’t look at facts from every possible angle. It’s just an assumption on your part. The community of MJ fans and admirers of his art is not a homogeneous community. We talk about millions of people from every part of the world, every walk of life. Yes, there are fanatics. But not everybody is. There ARE people among us who did let the thought enter their mind: “what if it’s true?” I am one of them.

    I was a big fan of Michael as a teenager, but by the end of the 1990s I was detached from him (and showbusiness in general), so when he got accused in 2003 and went on trial I decided to follow it with an open mind. I did not want to defend him by any means, I just wanted to know the truth about him. I was even leaning towards “maybe he’s guilty”, simply on the notion “where there’s smoke there is fire” and this was the second time he was accused of this crime.

    While following the trial I read the testimonies, looked at the evidences, I researched the background of witnesses, and with each passing day I came to the conclusion he was not guilty of it and he was a victim of a greedy family and a vengeful DA. Apparently that’s the
    conclusion the jourors came to also, which is not an insignificant FACT, and you cannot accuse them of being biased fans.

    I personally think many MJ fans know a lot more about the details of this case than self-proclaimed “objective sceptics”, simply because they took the time and effort to research more than most non-fans do. Most non-fans just repeat what the media told them (yes, things like “if he is not guilty why did he share his bed with kids”) without ever really going into in-depth research on the case.

    I think it’s funny how you accuse Helena of lacking objectivity. She may lack objectivity as a fan, but you cannot deny every time she states an opinion she backs it up with thorough reasoning, research and data – unlike you. But instead of reflecting on those, you just keep repeating the same old thing again and again.

    Let me tell you something: objectivity is not equal to undecidedness. If Michael indeed didn’t do it then your arguments are not objective, they just reflect on your thoughts, your feelings like, “sleeping in a room with children is suspicious”. To whom? To YOU. Michael on the other hand maybe didn’t think of anything sinister when doing so.

    Like Helena pointed out, being on the fence is something very convenient. It’s a good starting point (I was on the fence too when I started to follow his trial), but after looking at the facts of the trial, you will have to at least lean to either direction and have your arguments for why you came to that conclusion. If you don’t, that means you were not really willing to listen, or you are too lazy or convenient to make a decision.

    The argument for your undecidedness is basically that “everything is possible”. It’s possible he was not guilty and it’s also possible he was. That’s actually a pretty convenient position to be in – which spares you having to think, to look at the facts thoroughly and make a decision. But that position is not constructive at all. It’s just the easy and convenient position in a debate and actually in this case I don’t even see the point of you going to a site to debate a case if your basic argument is only that “everything is possible, maybe he did it, maybe he didn’t”.

    While we are at it, according to quantum mechanics EVERY outcome of events (even those which we think to be impossible) actually ARE possible – only with a very small probability, but the probability is never zero. So according to this, it IS possible that from 10 minutes now I will be sitting on Mars. Just not likely, but it is possible. But there are factors which help you decide what is more likely and what is less likely. So yes, it is possible (as everything is) that MJ molested these children. But if you follow the trial, do your research, consider all pros and contras, there will be more and more details at your hand helping you decide what is likely and what is not. And by that I don’t think it is likely he committed this crime.

    “You fail to acknowledge that Jordan was the real victim here -whether he was molested or whether he was coerced into saying this stuff. In 1993, he was a 13 year old boy – Michael was a 35 year old man. Spare a thought for him.”

    Hm, that statment again is based on your assumption that Michael was guilty. If he wasn’t then, sorry, but he was a bigger victim than Jordan (while I acknowledge that Jordan too was a victim to some extent). A 13-year-old boy is not incapable of telling right from wrong. A 13-year-old boy knows that falsely accusing somebody with a serious crime is not right. Yes, in this case, he was “a” victim, because he was manipulated by his father, but he was not “THE” victim. He could have still said “no” to his father. THE victim was Michael! And it has nothing to do with who was how many years old.


  10. Suzy permalink
    June 9, 2010 9:07 am

    @ Lynette

    Thank you for those details from Ray Chandler’s book.

    “How can he ask Michael that question a week before he sees this when this is what made him suspicious of their relationship?”

    Also, how can you let your son sleep in a room with a man about whom you already have suspicions he was “fucking” him? (And what does it tell about Evan to ask that question of Michael that way, to talk about his own son that way?)

    And then Evan even insists on Michael buying a house for them where he can live with Jordie?

    “The next morning is when Evan suggests that Michael build on a wing to his house and Michael finds out that he can’t so Evan asks him to just buy him a new one so he and Jordan can live in the same house. So how do you take that? This man thinks his son is being molested by Michael Jackson so he wants him to buy him a house so they can live together?
    If that isn’t the ultimate pimp I don’t know what is.”

    Yes, by this, it almost seems Evan actually hoped MJ was gay and had feelings for his son, so that he can pimp him out to him! To which Michael’s reaction was to cut ties with them. I guess, a real pedophile, somebody like Thomas O’Caroll would have been happy about such a suggestion.


  11. Susan permalink
    June 9, 2010 1:14 pm

    Let’s not forget that not only did Jordan Chandler REFUSE TO TESTIFY AGAINST Michael in the 2005 trial, but, in fact stated he would take legal action against the state if he was forced to testify – this according to the FBI files – just one of the many details the media chose to ignore in their one-sided reporting when the files were released in December, 2009.


  12. June 9, 2010 4:59 pm

    Your words were psycologically shouting in your frustration! I wanted to do the same thing!
    She and her opinions are very frustrating! However she is entitled to them. I just hope I never meet her.
    How much clearer could you be in your explanation??
    She probably started writing with skepticism in her mind and heart. If a person has that ingrained in them they won’t be convinced by abybody’s words, no matter how well researched and thought out.
    Unfortunately there are still so mant people who would rather read a tabloid and believe that because it is titillating. Unfortunately, most of ou main-stream media contains too much of the tabloid mentality anymore. Walter Cronkite may have been the last journalist who actually checked facts, 3 times, before he would read a story on air!


  13. Lynette permalink
    June 9, 2010 6:00 pm

    I have a link to a Frontline documentary about the role of Tabloid news in the Michael Jackson case. In it you will see that Anthony Pellicano did have other tapes of the Chandler/Rothman conversations. He probably taped them all. Evan Chandle was sly very sly and devious to the point of scary. He did know just exactly what to say to keep from having a blatant extortion claim out there. To do this you really need great control of your emotions, you can’t get angry and let your mouth loose, and I don’t know a single parent that was truly concerned that their child was being molested that could keep that calm. This is great to watch because it really does show how the tabloid media hunts these people down and how every one of their witnesses took large amounts of money for their stories. I don’t know about any one else but I am always suspicious of a story for money.


  14. June 9, 2010 6:40 pm

    MY BIG THANKS to everyone for your great comments and valuable contributions. You are filling in some gaps I’ve really left out – like another adult always being in Michael’s room after 1993 (I’ve heard of it and am surprised no one really talks about it!), about Michael’s loneliness which was surely the reason why he always needed somebody close by and about his love for all children – naturally not only boys!

    1) I mentioned boys for one reason only. When thinking of the right companion for Michael on all those tours it was a funny thing to realize that characters like Macauley Culkin were really the best choice. IT IS NO JOKE – I am being completely SERIOUS when making a statement like that.

    Michael needed someone to really hang out with – someone who would ride golf-carts with him along empty hotel corridors at night, play crazy tricks on other visitors (like ordering huge meals to their rooms, for ex.), have water fights, play video games, practice karate or learn new dance moves with him.

    All of us are overlooking the fact that his lifestyle was unique (due to his unique fame) and completely different from anything any of us ever experienced. I keep reminding myself of it all the time but in spite of all the effort often forget and start asking stupid questions.

    For example, it surprised me a lot to hear many (adult) people say that when they were on a tour with Michael they would spend the whole day in his bed, eating popcorn and watching cartoons on TV. Why not go out and enjoy themselves there? OMG, he COULDN’T go out, I would suddenly remember – for fear of being smashed by the crowd, journalists and curious onlookers. He was practically confined to his suite as if it were his prison – and I can imagine how lonely and maddening it was for him to stay in those spacious rooms.

    Of course he needed company – the bigger the better and the wilder the better – so that it could bring some variation into his life and make it a little more tolerable. I truly believe that having a boy companion for such an experience is REALLY the best choice. No woman, no adult male friend, no girl can be as much help in ‘hanging out’ as someone of a Macauley type and age. I don’t know whether all boys who sometimes accompanied Michael on a tour were like that but some surely were.

    2) I’ll give an answer to Skeptic a little bit later – it is business (I mean our investigation) which should come first.

    What Lynande told us about the way Evan Chandler treated Michael the first time he visited his home provides very much food for thought. I’ve heard some of the story before but only now noticed a few things:

    So it was during their first personal meeting that Evan asked him if he was f….g his son up his a..? What an incredible thing to say when you meet someone for the first time! Only a true paranoiac who worked himself up to compete lunacy can do that. It means that by the end of May Evan was already consumed by all those suspicions and it was a LIE when he said he first started suspecting them after seeing them in bed together (which had not taken place by then yet).

    And in reply to that Michael supposedly ‘giggled’ and said he never used that word? Well, none of us would believe our ears if we heard anything like that, especially during the first meeting. My reaction would be staring at a person with an open mouth attempting a sort of a smile (in the hope it might still turn out to be a joke) and saying that I don’t use words like that (I never do and hear that Michael didn’t either). Michael probably shook his head in complete disbelief at what he was hearing and tried a feeble smile which was interpreted as a ‘giggle’ and I don’t blame him for NEVER wanting to have anything to do with Evan after that.

    the story about Toradol for Michael’s headache given by an invited anesthesiologist sounds strange to me to say the very least. Whatever Michael asked for (could be an innocent thing like a painkiller or a sleeping pill) why would a professional anesthesiologist do the job? And why did Toradol make Michael ‘groggy’? I looked up this drug and its side-effects do include dizziness, drowsiness, headache, slurred speech, blurred vision, stomach bleeding and heart problems (as if Michael needed all that). But can we be SURE that Evan didn’t ask Mark Torbiner to give him the sodium amytal ‘truth serum’ to interrogate him the way he later did it for Jordan? And he did interrogate Michael while he was under sedation – he asked him if he was gay and Michael said that he wasn’t! Good news, by the way…

    Now if a person is in a state like that would he be the one to choose where to sleep? Am I inventing things or did Evan INTENTIONALLY put Michael into the boys’ room for an experiment? And was it a chance occurrence that he opened the door into their room at 2 or 3 a.m. to see what was going on there? You know, with a near-psychiatric extortioner like Evan Chandler one should be prepared for anything, just anything, and I mean it.

    – That conversation with Larry Feldman about Jordan describing Michael’s vitiligo in his private parts is a complete MARVEL! “If he’s right he’s right and if he’s wrong we’ve got an explanation”. “Ha.” “It’s a no loser for us”.

    Well, Evan Chandler was a scriptwriter-of-a-dentist and he got so carried away by the plot that he couldn’t refrain from mentioning its most spectacular details no matter how damaging they are for him and his case…


  15. Suzy permalink
    June 9, 2010 7:35 pm


    I had the exact same thoughts about the Taradol part! Like you, I too looked it up and its side-effects and it isn’t mentioned anywere it causes groggyness or an abnormal state of mind where you would blurt out information that otherwise you wouldn’t. But if what is being told by Ray Chandler is true, then Michael was in an abnormal state of mind after being given this medicine and Evan expected to get information out of him. If it’s true I don’t think it was Taradol. And since it’s the same doctor who gave Jordan the sodium amytal, it makes you wonder…..


  16. June 9, 2010 8:36 pm

    Suzy, after everything we’ve learned about Evan Chandler I can’t believe that anyone can be still fooled by his crap about Michael.

    The evidence against Evan and the whole family is simply overwhelming and one should be blind as three blind mice not to see how dirty their side of this business is.

    No wonder Jordan refused to testify when he was approached by the prosecution in 2005 and said that he would sue them if they insisted on it and that HE HAD DONE HIS PART.

    To me it definitely sounds like ‘I’ve done what you expected of me and don’t you EVER come up near me to ask for more”.

    What else are we waiting for from Jordan Chandler? He has practically said it…


  17. June 9, 2010 11:01 pm

    Sorry to butt in. Are you all talking re the Ray Chandler book? I haven’t seen or read that thing. What caught my eye was the med mentioned called Taradol.
    I’m a nurse and the only med with a similar name is Toradol. It’s an anti-inflammatory in the class of Ibuprofen, Naprosyn etc. It’s a stronger formulation usually given by injection. There would be absolutely no reason for mental after effects.


  18. Lynette permalink
    June 9, 2010 11:37 pm

    Hi, I’m a nurse too. Yeah I’m the one that read Ray Chandlers book. I thought the very same thing when I read it too. In the book he says that first he gave him 30 mg IM in his gluteous and when that didn’t work for Michael he gave him another 30 mg IM, supposedly that was when he really started acting strange,babbling incoherently and slurring his speech, he also had a serious case of dry mouth when he started coming ou tof it 4 hours later.. Well we know that part isn’t true but if there is a shread of truth in it I bet it was Amytal Sodium the same thing he used on Jordan. His friend Mark was known all around Beverly Hills for going to peoples houses and giving them this stuff.


  19. Lynette permalink
    June 9, 2010 11:51 pm

    Some more important news from The Diane diamond book yes I have read them both I’m ashamed to say. I had to get some of the documents theywere raving were so detailed and theyweren’t. They both support each other and yes in Jordans statement to the police and DCFS he said the first molestation took place just before the awards ceremony. I don’t know if it is posted on this site but you can see a you tube of that awards ceremony and you tell me if you think that boy shows any sign of discomfort in sitting between Michael Jacksons legs because I sure don’t. You know I don’t know if he was given a drug and then made to lie about Michael or not. I’m starting to lean toward he knew just what he was doing when he accused Michael. I’ll bet theyknew that Michael had a reputation for not sticking with one friend for too long and they knew their time was almost up. The so called experts always say that he was so consistant with his story well guess what that can come from rehersal too.


  20. June 10, 2010 1:34 am

    I’ve missed a lot!! Have to catch up!
    I never heard about Michael getting an injection-was it for a headache or what?? What was the ruse?

    Bad dry mouth sounds like something of an anti cholenergic type, Although a lot of things can give me a dry mouth. That’s a pretty good size dose!

    I”d love to find that video of the awards. What year was that and which award. Anyone know?


  21. Suzy permalink
    June 10, 2010 4:24 am

    @ SB

    If you roll down to my first post under this article, there are three links in it: the second one is the video mentioned by Lynette.

    Watching it I also thought that boy was sure NOT molested by Michael! I think that’s why they had to claim the molestation occured after this award ceremony, because nobody would have believed them if they said it was before.

    But you know, I was reading June Chandler’s testimony in 2005 yesterday. She never once claimed Jordan was molested by Michael. What was in that testimony was only that Michael spent a lot of time with them at the time, regularly slept in the same room as Jordan and always bought a lot of gifts and jewelry to June. And that he wanted to be a family with them.

    When asked if the friendship to Michael changed Jordan’s behaviour, June said yes, he became sort of “smart-alecky”, started to dress like Michael and always wanted to be with Michael and not with them. I don’t know but if I was molested at the age of 13 my reaction wouldn’t be to want to be with my molester all the time…..


  22. Suzy permalink
    June 10, 2010 6:20 am

    @ Lynette

    WAIT! They said the first molestation took place BEFORE the award ceremony? That’s ridiculous! Look at the boy, his body language and his interaction with Michael in that video! That boy was never molesed by him!


  23. Lynette permalink
    June 10, 2010 2:01 pm

    I have another thought here too. They said that Jordan had gotten kind of smart alecky and started dressing like Michael. Well… Lets think about this for a second . In the beginning of the book they write about how Michael and Jordan actually met 3 times before this . When he was a toddler and then when he was about 5 when Michael got burned and then in 92. They also say how he was always dressing like him and imitating him even up to the age of 8. An another thing that people seem to forget. JORDAN was 13, he was not a little boy and I wish people would stop and think about that. I don’t know a single 13 year old that doesn’t start about that time getting mouthy with their parents and not wanting to be around them. Everything they said is perfectly natural. Second Jordan helped Evan write the screen play for Robin Hood Men In Tights. Has anyone seen that movie it is full of sexual inuendo are they going to try to tell us that he thought it was funny without knowing what it meant?People need to stop giving this kid a break. If he thought Robin Hood Men In Tights was funny he knew better than to allow the molestation to keep happening.


  24. Suzy permalink
    June 10, 2010 4:06 pm

    That’s a good point about Men in Tights! The media liked to play the “sweet innocent little kids” card for both Jordan and Gavin, but were they really that innocent? And they were definitely not little and clueless! I remember Gavin in the Larry Nimmer documentary saying he didn’t know what ejaculation was, acting like a 5-year-old, when he was 14 or 15. I was like: give me a break, Gavin!

    I didn’t think anything bad of the dressing like Michael and “smart-alecky” behaviour of Jordan. Like it was pointed out in cross-examination, Jordan used to dress like Michael even before they met. He was a big fan! But even if he had started dressing like Michael after they became friends, does it supposed to have some kind of significance? I don’t think so. And about the smart-alecky behaviour: June complained that he was not as sweet any more as he used to be. Hello?! He was turning to a teenager! He was 13-year-old! This is exactly the age when young people stop being sweet and start being smart-alecky. Completely normal. But I can imagine maybe it also had to do with Michael: which teenager wouldn’t turn a little big-headed if his best friend was the world’s most famous pop star? I don’t think any of these details have any significance. The one that has is when June says Jordan wanted to spend all his time with Michael. I don’t think that is the behaviour of a molested kid – especially one who knows exactly what is being done to him (and like you pointed out the kid who co-wrote Men in Tights definietly would have known)….


  25. June 10, 2010 5:28 pm

    Lynette and Suzy
    Some of your info and insights are new to me. They’re very good. I’ve read tons of stuff re the Chandler case and hadn’t thought about Jordan helping with that screenplay for that movie. It had a lot of sexual situations and innuendo. If he read that he did know a lot. I also read the theory that June was the initial one who was into Michael and used Jordy as a hook. It sure back-fired. At the ’95 trial she said she hadn’t seen or talked to Jordy for 10 or 11 yrs. He declared emancipation as soon as he was old enough. “She seemed like a shell of a woman.”

    Also I never considered that Michael was not a big guy at all. On the stage he took up the whole thing with his personna, but was not a husky guy. I can’t believe that any 13-14 yr old boy could be forced by him to do anything! His gentle nature was not an act either!

    I never believed he had done anything wrong and I never will! Well back to those links above-some of it is too absurd to read but I scan.


  26. Lynette permalink
    June 10, 2010 8:02 pm

    I’ve read about the 2 cases above. The one with Daniel Kapon is interesting because he was a patient of the Psychiatrist Carol Lieberman, a ” famed” Hollywood Psychiatrist with a radio talk show. She and the attorney Gloria Allred had petitioned the court in 2003 after the airing of the Basir Documentary to have Michaels children taken away from him because of the “Baby Dangling Incident”. He supposedly recalled all of the events including writing Billie Jean when he was 3-4. He ” remembered” all this during regression therapy. Enough said about that fool. The second one Michael’s Lawyers knew about in advance because apparently this guys girlfriend went to the police and told them about his plan to blackmail Michael with this story. He was very abusive and threatening to her attempting to force her “eye witness ” testimony. He had planned it for over 2 years before filing a lawsuit aginst Michael. So let’s see can they be believed ? I hope not! There are a lot of ways that I have searched for all of these. If you type in Carol Lieberman/ Michael Jackson or Michael Jackson/ New orleans case you’ll find them if you read enough of the articles.


  27. Susan permalink
    June 11, 2010 1:48 am

    Hi everyone;

    I think Geraldine Hughes (Barry Rothman’s legal secretary) stated that she didn’t necessarily believe that Jordan Chandler was actually administered sodium amytal. She mentioned that one evening while working late she went into Chandler attorney Barry Rothman’s office and saw Jordan there who acted quite surprised and nervous to see her and Rothman was annoyed that she just barged in. They were the only two in his office and she felt something just wasn’t right. Would it really be a stretch to think that Evan and Jordan Chandler would lie about the sodium amytal, considering the whole scenario was the lie of an extortionist and his imaginative son?


  28. June 11, 2010 2:11 am

    Suzy- I found only 2 links and no video re the awarda show. They were about the two even crazier accusers! I wonder how that trend ever got started. I’d never heard of these 2 before and I’ve read a lot!

    Poor Michael!!


  29. June 11, 2010 2:22 am

    @Skeptic permalink
    June 8, 2010 9:18 pm

    You said
    “You fail to acknowledge that Jordan was the real victim here -whether he was molested or whether he was coerced into saying this stuff. In 1993, he was a 13 year old boy – Michael was a 35 year old man. Spare a thought for him.”

    But Michael Jackson is the one that is dead.


  30. June 11, 2010 2:52 am

    The 1993 case and what I believe (as of today)

    I too have always wondered whether Michael Jackson could have molested Jordan Chandler, and I try to apply evidence and common sense. Is there hardcore evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that he did it? No, there is no DNA, or forensic clues, but that does not mean molestation did not occur. Strangely it was not the writings of Diane Dimond, or the tabloid press that raised doubts in my mind, but that of the June Chandler. During the 2005 trial it was revealed that she had not spoken to her son in 11 years, he did not want anything to do with her. This made my blood run cold because I know no mother would be comfortable being separated from a child she had raised for 14 years, and for all intents and purposes was a good mother. That was when I started having serious doubts about MJ’s innocence.

    Still it would be unfair of me to just take the prosecution’s case and not apply logic. It is said that while on a sleepover at Evan Chandler’s house Evan walked into the bedroom and found Michael in a compromising position with his son. This is according to Ray Chandler. What did Evan do? He closed the door. Common sense tells me that a caring parent seeing their child in such a situation would confront the man, not shut the door. This for me laid the foundation for Michael’s extortion claim which I 100% believe, but still extortion does not mean molestation did not occur.

    To entertain the allegation without evidence 2 objectives had to be met for me: 1. prove Michael Jackson was a pedophile, and 2. He was gay. To believe Michael Jackson molested any boy one, or both ideals have to be true. There is simply no getting around it. IMO pedophilia is a mental illness, also sexual orientation. Pedophiles are who they are, they cannot be rehabilitated, or cured, they are attracted to children the way I am attracted to men; however, theirs is a criminal desire. So, is there any evidence to prove he was a pedophile? Not as far as I know. The best evidence is that he slept at times in the same bed as children, but that does not mean he molested anyone. I eagerly awaited the FBI files because I knew they would answer a lot of questions. The most glaring to me was after 12 years of being investigated by SBSO, FBI no child porn was found in his possession. I don’t know of a pedophile that doesn’t own child porn. If fact it is a calling card, and impossible to have a pedophile not possessing child pornography. So what about him being gay? Since his accusers were all males then that would lead one to surmise that homosexuality was his orientation. Maybe he was not a pedophile, but someone who found himself in a forbidden relationship an Elvis with Prescilla, Roman Polanski, etc. He somehow found himself attracted to Jordan Chandler, it’s possible, but that would mean being gay. However, during the raid heterosexual porn was found at Neverland. If he were gay shouldn’t that be reflected in his taste in porn? Sure Jason Pfeiffer claimed to have had a sexual relationship with Michael, but we are focusing on the 1993 era, and there isn’t any credible or non-credible evidence to support such a claim at this time. BTW I do not believe Jason’s claim.

    Here is my take on what happened in 1993. IMO June believes her son was molested her words, but more importantly her demeanor proves it. Raymond Chandler, Diane Dimond, Tom Sneddon and Jordan Chandler believe he was molested. Maybe even Evan. I think Evan had suspicions of impropriety, but I don’t think when he walked into Jordan’s room he saw anything alarming, knowing his personality he would have injured Michael. I think he wanted to get to the truth, and that is why he gave the kid sodium amytal. The use of the drug would explain everything. Jordan sincerely believing he was abused and the family supporting his accusations.

    The use of the drug is controversial. Diane Dimond and Geraldine Hughes don’t believe it was used. However, I watched a documentary on the Biography channel where they interviewed the private investigator hired by Thomas Messereau, and he confirmed that the drug was used. It was only after this drug was used that Jordan started making claims of molestation. I think this is when Evan hatched the plan to get tons of money from Michael before justice for Jordan. I truly believe Michael Jackson when he said it was extortion. People always brush over the sodium amytal role, and only mention it in passing, but for me, and the research I have done it is paramount to MJ’s defense. I have moved passed Jordan Chandler, because if this drug is involved I don’t think he can provide any truth. It is Mark Torbiner that can clear things up.

    I have an opinion on why he settled, but this post is long enough as it is already.


  31. Suzy permalink
    June 11, 2010 6:34 am

    @ SB

    Here is the link again to that video about the award ceremony:

    @ Teva

    Your reasons of not believing the allegations are similar to my reasons: lack of child pornography in Michael’s posession, while lots of adult heterosexual pornography, pictures of naked women found in the form of magazines, videos or on the hard drives of his 16 computers. I don’t think this fact can be played down, because it is a very strong indication on what his sexual interest was.

    It’s a fact that in the vast majority of cases they do find child porn in the posession of a pedophile. If they don’t that’s because he isn’t interested in pornography in general (just “the real thing”), but since there was a lot of other, legal porn found in Michael’s posession he obviously was interested in porn. It just doesn’t make sense that as a pedophile he would have almost a hundred heterosexual and girlie magazines, but not a single child porn material. Or that while he visited adult heterosexual porn websites, there was not a single trace to pedophile or “man-boy love” sites on his computers, not even to adult gay websites.

    As for the second part of your post, I’m not sure who from the Chandler family believes what, but in my opinion Jordan knows he wasn’t molested. There is a reason why he was so adamant NOT to testify against Michael in 2005. Also Messereau said that if he had testified they would have called a witness on the stand who would have testified Jordan confessed to him that he was never molested by Michael…..
    (I’m not totally sure of the sodium amytal thing.)

    Evan was a psychiatric case, so I don’t know if he worked himself up in a state of mind where he actually believed his own fantasy story. And I think June is unsure. (Did she actually claim in his testimony in 2005 that Michael molested Jordan? I don’t think she did.)


  32. Suzy permalink
    June 11, 2010 10:10 am

    But let me be clear: one or two factors (like Michael’s porn) would not be enough for me to think he was innocent. These are important signs but alone in themselves they wouldn’t be enough! But everything put together and considered I don’t think he committed this crime: his accusers have serious credibility issues and a shady past (and even after the trial were involved in criminal activity), his pattern (and that includes the porn he was interested in) isn’t consistent with that of a pedophile. He was so thoroughly investigated as hardly anybody else in similar cases! Yet, what we saw on the trial is all what Sneddon and the FBI could come up with!

    I cannot see a single GOOD argument for why I should believe he did this.


  33. Susan permalink
    June 11, 2010 7:16 pm

    Hi everyone;

    Does anyone have any knowledge as to why Evan Chandler was not called to testify against Michael in the 2005 trial? We know June did. We know Jordan threatened to sue if forced to do so. So why didn’t Sneddon use Evan Chandler? Was he perhaps too unstable, even for Sneddon’s mad vendetta? But even that doesn’t make sense when you consider he used the delusional Janet Arvizo and clan. Can’t figure that angle out.


  34. Truth permalink
    June 11, 2010 8:09 pm

    Teva, I agree with you – this is why I am inclined to believe that MJ may be innocent.

    I believe Jordan Chandler was administered Sodium Amytal – Mark Torbiner kind of admitted this saying “if I gave anything it was for anaesthetic purposes”.

    I also feel that Evan Chandler suspected that MJ was molesting his son and so set out trying to get Jordan to admit it.

    I agree with Skeptic 0n one thing – Jordan is a victim – he may even think that he has been molested due to the drug or maybe even he doesn’t know for sure, due to the drugs memory-altering effects. Also, remember June said that it must be true if Jordan said it as you can’t get Jordan to say otherwise – so I doubt that Jordan would willingly lie and lie on MJ of all people.

    One thing I find interesting is in the Aphrodite Jones documentary, Frank Dileo say he heard some tapes which prove MJ’s innocence – it seems like he may be talking about some other tapes, different to the Chandler-Schwartz phone call – this is because he says Pellicano recorded them – and we all know Pellicano has a penchant for recording things.


  35. Lynette permalink
    June 11, 2010 8:12 pm

    That is the number one question about Evan Chandler and Tom Sneddon pepople should have. We have two men who wanted to get Michael Jackson to ruin him. I would think that Evan would have jumped at the chance to go testify in court, to get on a witness stand and tell his story. He wasn’t bound by the settlement agreement to not appear in a criminal case we all know that. Why wouldn’t Sneddon call him? I think it was because they knew he would blow that case too. Sneddon had already sworn under oath that the photos of Michael Jackson was a match according to him he had determined it. If they allowed Evan to be cross examinaed in court by Tom Mesereau the world would have found out that Tom Sneddon was a perjurer because the photos did not match and they knew it. The number one difference and the most exculpatory evidence in that case were those photos because of the circumcision versus uncircumsized difference. Nobody should ever even have to go beyond that one point to know that Michael was innocent. They didn’t have him come in to testify because he would have blown apart their lie. Tom sneddon wanted to get Michael for his own personal what I believe were political asperations perhaps attorney general or even govenor if he had won that case. He had political friends that wanted Michaels property Neverland and this had been in the works since 1992. Brooks Firestone wanted Neverland to expand his vineyard/winery business. This isn’t a conspiracy theory it was witnessed by people during a political fundraiser how they should approach the Michael Jackson problem. The problem of how to get rid of him and get Neverland. Tom Sneddon even maliciously prosecuted the Dr. that witnessed this discussion jus tot make sure he didn’t talk about it..


  36. Lynette permalink
    June 11, 2010 8:19 pm

    I have a link to a Frontline documentary about the 1993 Michael Jackosn case and the manipulation by the tabloid media. It has a portion of one of the other tapes that Anthony Pellicano had on Evan Chandler that were not admissable evidence because he didn’t have a federal warrant for wiretapping.


  37. Suzy permalink
    June 11, 2010 11:34 pm

    @ Truth

    “Also, remember June said that it must be true if Jordan said it as you can’t get Jordan to say otherwise – so I doubt that Jordan would willingly lie and lie on MJ of all people.”

    We do not know Jordan and if he would or wouldn’t willingly lie. That’s just what June said – she could lie or be mistaken about it too…..

    Like I said to me Jordan’s behaviour – the fact he was hell-bent against testifying in 2005 -, rather suggests he knows he wasn’t molested. Also the fact he emancipated and distanced himself from his parents. And Mesereau said they had a witness to whom Jordan admitted he wasn’t molested…..


  38. David permalink
    June 13, 2010 5:45 pm

    Here is a clip from Larry King Live in May 2006, where Elizabeth Taylor explained and defended MJ’s “bedroom issues”, and discusses how MJ would probably never live in the USA again. When asked to clarify, she says “Why should he? He’s been treated like dirt here!”


  39. Susan permalink
    June 13, 2010 7:16 pm

    Hi everyone;

    Thank you David for the Elizabeth Taylor clip.

    A pity most people today are so cynical they see something evil in everything. Dame Elizabeth was one of the rare ones who always defended Michael – because she knew him and knew he was not capable of doing what he was falsely accused of.

    The US of A should be ashamed of how they treated their own son. Acquitted 5 years ago today, but still mistreated by a disgusting, dishonourable media and the ignorant who are too lazy to search out the truth of his innocence.


  40. David permalink
    June 14, 2010 6:16 am

    This is a great post because it clears up the misconceptions that people have about the sleepovers at Neverland. Even when we are able to fully exonerate MJ of the molestation allegations, MJ haters still cling to the tired argument that “he’s still a pedophile because he admitted on national TV that he sleeps with boys!”

    Peter King was on Bill O’Reilly last year parroting that lame excuse. When O’Reilly played devil’s advocate by stating how MJ was acquitted, King spewed some nonsense about MJ “molesting the psyche of those little boys by telling them it’s OK to sleep with a grown man”. And to top it all off, he used Maureen Orth’s slanderous Vanity Fair articles to justify his calling MJ a pedophile. Garbage in, garbage out!

    He described how MJ had “alarms” set up outside of his bedroom so that he could molest kids and be alerted to when an adult was approaching (which is the same lame tired argument haters use.) The funny thing is that Larry Nimmer (in his documentary) did a demonstration to show that the alarm helped VINDICATE MJ because if he was truly molesting Gavin, then he would have heard Star approaching the room. (Remember, Star claimed to have entered the room and witness the molestation).

    Once again, great post, and keep up the good work!


  41. Suzy permalink
    June 14, 2010 8:48 am

    A wonderful article by Charles Thomson on the 5th anniversary of Michael’s acquittal:

    A couple of days ago “Skeptic” claimed, based on the Aphrodite Jones documentary, that there were five accusers. Some of us were wondering about that claim, because we never heard of five. So here is the solution from Thomson’s article:

    “Watching their case crumble before their eyes, the prosecution applied to the judge for permission to admit evidence of ‘prior bad acts’. Permission was granted. Prosecutors told the jury they would hear evidence of five former victims. But those five prior cases turned out to be even more laughable than the Arvizos’ claims.

    A parade of disgruntled security guards and housekeepers took the stand to testify that they had witnessed molestation, much of it carried out on three boys; Wade Robson, Brett Barnes and Macauley Culkin. But those three boys were the defense’s first three witnesses, each of them testifying that Jackson had never touched them and they resented the implication.

    Moreover, it was revealed that each of these former employees had been fired by Jackson for stealing from his property or had lost a wrongful termination suit and wound up owing Jackson huge amounts of money. They’d also neglected to tell the police when they supposedly witnessed this molestation, even when questioned in connection with Jordy Chandler’s 1993 allegations, but subsequently tried to sell stories to the press – sometimes successfully. The more money on the table, the more salacious the allegations became.

    Roger Friedman complained in an interview with Matt Drudge that the media was ignoring the cross examination of the ‘prior bad acts’ witnesses, resulting in skewed reporting. He said, “When Thursday started, that first hour was with this guy Ralph Chacon who had worked at the Ranch as a security guard. He told the most outrageous story. It was so graphic. And of course everybody went running outside to report on it. But there were ten minutes right before the first break on Thursday when Tom Mesereau got up and cross examined this guy and obliterated him.”

    The fourth ‘victim’, Jason Francia, took the stand and claimed that when he was a child, Jackson had molested him on three separate occasions. Pushed for details of the ‘molestation’, he said Jackson had tickled him three times outside his clothes and he’d needed years of therapy to get over it. The jury was seen rolling their eyes but reporters including Dan Abrams heralded him as ‘compelling’, predicting that he could be the witness who put Jackson behind bars.

    The media repeatedly claimed that Francia’s allegations had been made in 1990, leading audiences to believe that the Jordy Chandler allegations were predated. In actuality, although Jason Francia claimed that the acts of molestation occurred in 1990, he didn’t report them until after the media storm over Chandler’s claims, at which point his mother, Neverland maid Blanca Francia, promptly extracted $200,000 from Hard Copy for an interview with Diane Dimond and another $2.4million in a settlement from Jackson.

    Moreover, transcripts from police interviews showed that the Francia had repeatedly changed his story and had originally insisted that he’d never been molested. Transcripts also showed that he only said he was molested after police officers repeatedly overstepped the mark during interviews. Officers repeatedly referred to Jackson as a ‘molester’. On one occasion they told the boy that Jackson was molesting Macauley Culkin as they spoke, claiming that the only way they could rescue Culkin was if Francia told them he’d been sexually abused by the star. Transcripts also showed that Francia had previously said of the police, “They made me come up with stuff. They kept pushing. I wanted to hit them in the head.”

    The fifth ‘victim’ was Jordy Chandler, who fled the country rather than testify against his former friend. Thomas Mesereau said in a Harvard lecture later that year, “The prosecutors tried to get him to show up and he wouldn’t. If he had, I had witnesses who were going to come in and say he told them it never happened and that he would never talk to his parents again for what they made him say. It turned out he’d gone into court and got legal emancipation from his parents.”

    June Chandler, Jordy’s mother, testified that she hadn’t spoken to her son in 11 years. Questioned about the 1993 case, she seemed to suffer from a severe case of selective memory. At one point she claimed she couldn’t remember being sued by Michael Jackson and at another she said she’d never heard of her own attorney. She also never witnessed any molestation. “


  42. David permalink
    June 16, 2010 8:18 am

    Hey, here is a clip of Macaulay Culkin’s 2004 interview with Larry King. Mac explains and defends the sleepovers, and clears up a huge misconception that many MJ haters have. They think of MJ’s bedroom as actually being a small cramped “room”, when in fact it’s a two-story duplex that size of an apartment! It even has 3 bathrooms! If it had a kitchen, you could literally live inside of it!

    Also, he brings up the 93 accusations, and says what many SANE and RATIONAL parents would say: if someone molested his kids, he would NEVER accept a settlement! He would put that person in jail!


  43. June 17, 2010 8:49 pm

    Suzy, I am slowly catching up with things. Thank you for the article – it surely deserves to be turned into a post! I love Charles Thomson…. He is what a journalist should really be like – fair, thorough and brilliant.


  44. David permalink
    June 23, 2010 4:26 am

    Hey guys, here is Mesereau’s 2005 interview with Jay Leno. He completely DESTROYS the myths that “MJ only invites little boys to sleep with him”. This is critical to properly explaining MJ’s “bedroom issues”, as well as Larry King’s interviews with Macaulay Culkin & Elizabeth Taylor that I have already posted.

    What’s ironic is that Mesereau originally posted this interview in two parts on his youtube channel, and it’s in part 1 that he explains MJ’s bedroom. But recently NBC put a copyright claim on part 1 (but NOT part 2!), and I believe (as does MJ-777) that it’s the media’s attempt to remove anything from youtube that would make MJ look “normal”. That video totally eradicates one of the main talking points that MJ haters use against him.

    Fortunately, the MJ-777 blog was able to post their own version of the video, which is free from the clutches of the media! Ha ha ha!

    He also bashes Sneddon and the media for trying to spin a conviction!

    [video src="" /]


  45. David permalink
    July 19, 2010 1:27 am

    Helena, I saw a documentary called “The Last Days of MJ”, and at 3:15 several friends of his talk about MJ sharing beds with children, and Dr. Firpo Carr confirmed that MJ would try to sleep on the floor, but they would ASK HIM to sleep with them in the bed! (I suspect that it wasn’t so much that they wanted to sleep next to him, but because the bed was so huge and they didn’t think it was necessary for him to sleep on the floor.)

    This is consistent with Gavin Arvizo, who asked MJ to sleep in the bed in 2002, but of course MJ refused (which shows that he heeded the advice of his friends, because if he had slept in bed with Gavin, it would have made him look worse then he already did!)


  46. David permalink
    July 21, 2010 10:03 pm

    Here’s another point that I want to make: haters are always trying to play the “he sleeps with little boys” card when attacking MJ. It’s a scare tactic that they use because when they say it, it implies that MJ coerced or threatened boys to sleep with him, and people will have an emotional, knee-jerk reaction and automatically think that MJ is a pervert, even if he didn’t molest the kids.

    Here’s an example of how that card is used. Geraldo Rivera interviewed Mark Furhman, who still “believes” that MJ was guilty. In this clip, he tried to state that MJ sharing beds with kids is reason enough to think he’s guilty, and that MJ should be arrested for it.

    Listen to Furhman’s reaction to Geraldo’s defense of MJ! He just brushes it off! And then Furhman goes on to contradict himself by saying that “most mothers lie on the stand”, which would confirm that her story was full of lies! How can you say you felt MJ was guilty, but then excuse Janet Arvizo’s testimony by saying “well, most mothers lie to protect their kids”.

    By the way, Mark Furhman is a racist cop, and he is the PRIME REASON why OJ Simpson was acquitted in 1995! So instead of blaming the justice system, blame Furhman! The jury believed that he planted evidence to frame OJ!


  47. Suzy permalink
    July 21, 2010 10:19 pm

    I was just going to ask if this is the guy who falsified evidence in the OJ Simpson trial (and yes, that’s why OJ was acquitted). Why is he even on TV as if his opinion would matter to anyone?


  48. David permalink
    July 21, 2010 11:22 pm

    @ Suzy

    Yes, Fuhrman has a checkered past as a police officer, and he was single handedly the reason why OJ was acquitted. He probably got a job at FOX News for the same reasons that Martin Bashir got a job at ABC: cronyism! He probably knows people in high places at FOX. Who knows? He certainly doesn’t have any credibility.

    As we all know, the OJ trial was the biggest media circus in history, and it’s EXACTLY what MJ’s insurance carrier wanted to AVOID when they settled the civil case. Obviously, they have no control over the criminal case, but after 6 months of tabloid garbage dominating the airwaves, they didn’t want to put MJ through back to back civil and (possibly) criminal trials. They also didn’t want to expose MJ’s defense strategy to the prosecution. In retrospect, I think they made the right decision.

    Haters will say “why didn’t MJ fight the charges?”. If he had gone to either criminal or civil court and won, then they would have said that he “paid off the jury”, or it was “celebrity justice”. (The same things they said in 2005.) So it was a lose-lose situation either way.

    The only thing the MJ and OJ trials have in common is that they were high profile, and that’s it! Anyone could easily prove the OJ was guilty; I’d LOVE to hear someone thoroughly explain how MJ was guilty! Every time they try, they use the following sound bites:

    “He paid off Jordie Chandler!”

    “He got away with it like OJ!”

    “The victims were scared of media coverage!”

    “The jurors were too stupid to convict him!”

    “Nancy Grace says he’s guilty, therefore he’s guilty!”

    “His high priced lawyers were able to raise enough reasonable doubt to get an acquittal!

    “Just because he’s not guilty, it doesn’t mean he’s innocent!”

    Wanna hear something funny? I asked Desiree if she had read “ATG”, and she said no. So I asked her how could she believe the Chandler’s story, if she doesn’t even know what their story is? She said she ordered it, and would let us know when she’s finished reading it.

    We’re still waiting………………………


  49. lcpledwards permalink
    August 19, 2010 9:07 am

    Here is an interesting interview from the late, great singer Rick James, who was a friend of the Jackson family.

    In November 2003, after MJ’s arrest, he did an interview with CNN defending MJ and his sleepovers. He said that he’s had the same type of sleepovers with children, and he also blasted the media for ignoring Elvis Presley’s relationship with Priscella when she was a teenager. Here is a brief excerpt:

    PHILLIPS: You’re looking good. Now, you and I were talking yesterday, we were talking a little bit this morning. You’re in support of Michael Jackson. Tell me why.

    JAMES: Because I love him. I think he’s fantastic. I love his whole family. I’ve been knowing Michael since he was a kid. I’ve know his whole family. I know his mother. I know his father. I know the brothers. I know the sisters. And I have nothing but complete love, and respect and admiration for the whole family.

    PHILLIPS: So, Rick, why do you think authorities are going after Michael Jackson?

    JAMES: Because he’s black, he’s rich and he’s famous, and they got nothing else better to do.

    PHILLIPS: Has Michael ever talked openly with you about his relationship with children, or his love for children, or even Neverland?

    JAMES: Look, Michael loves children, OK? I mean, to be — I mean, I look at it like this. I mean, all this pedophile crap, you know, why didn’t they go after Elvis Presley? He was the biggest pedophile at all. He had Priscilla when she was 14, 15. Why didn’t they go after Jerry Lee Lewis. He the second biggest pedophile of all. He married his first cousin. She was 13 years old. Why don’t they go after Santa Claus? Why don’t they do psychology references on him? They don’t know who he is. He’s 100,000 different cities and kids sit on his lap, telling him what they want for Christmas.

    PHILLIPS: I don’t know, Rick, i’ve sat on Santa Claus’ lap, i’ve never had any issues with Santa Claus.

    JAMES: But never mind, Santa Claus, what about Elvis? They didn’t do anything to him. He had Priscilla when she was 14, 15 years old. Nobody said a damn thing. Then as soon as you get famous and black, they go after you.

    PHILLIPS: Well, let me ask you, let me ask you, you know the documentary that came out, OK, on BBC with Michael Jackson. He talked openly about, hey, I love children, we sleep in the same bed, it’s nothing sexual, I just love them and like to take care of them. Is there anything wrong with that? Do you see anything wrong with that?

    JAMES: There ain’t nothing wrong with that. Look, I have a house, 8,000 square feet. I have children come by. I have grandchildren. They come by and they bring their friends. They sleep in my room. I got a great big giant bedroom. They watch TV. They lay on the floor. Sometimes I wake up, kids are laying in my bed because they’re scared or something, whatever. I have candles going. What, what does that make me, a pedophile, because kids follow my bed, fall to sleep, whatever? I love kids. I’m (UNINTELLIGIBLE) pedophile as Larry King. I mean, come on now.


  50. lcpledwards permalink
    August 23, 2010 12:29 am

    Here’s another example of someone explaining the whole ‘sleepovers” nonsense: Debbie Rowe! Beginning @ 2:55, she explains how she also invites company into her bedroom, and that the whole thing is a just being blown out of proportion.

    Later on in the video, you hear Maury Povich reading Janet Arvizo’s press release describing the true relationship between MJ and her kids, and her desire to take legal action against Bashir for including Gavin in his documentary without her permission!


  51. lcpledwards permalink
    August 31, 2010 9:21 am

    Here is yet ANOTHER example of a parent who knew and TRUSTED MJ and allowed her DAUGHTER to sleep in his bed! Her name is Lottie Rose, and she was his hairstylist for years, and when she and her daughter slept over at Neverland, she let her daughter sleep in his bed.

    This is another blow to the myth that “only little boys” slept in MJ’s bed.

    Click to access MJEbony-1.pdf

    Oh, and on a side note: This video series is called “The Feminization of MJ”, and describes how the media did everything to strip MJ of his masculinity. This is part 1, which highlights his voice by playing some songs a cappella in order to prove that he was a natural tenor.

    In part 2, they show the quotes of different media critics throughout the years that have mocked him (most disappointing is the quote from music critic Toure’, who has since given MJ much respect since his death.)

    Surprisingly, they also include a quote from current Chief Justice John Roberts, who made a derogatory statement about MJ using female hormones in 1984 after he accepted his award from President. Reagan at the White House.


  52. August 31, 2010 6:44 pm

    “In part 2, they show the quotes of different media critics throughout the years that have mocked him”

    There is only one word for the way they behaved towards Michael – SHAME SHAME SHAME – and the sooner they realize it the better it is for themselves.


  53. Suzy permalink
    August 31, 2010 7:47 pm

    Here is another girl who spent time with Michael at Neverland as a child. Her name is Kellie Parker and she played the role of “Kathy” in Moonwalker:

    I have also read a story once about a girl who spent time with Michael as a child and she even slept in his bed, along with other kids (unfortunately I didn’t save the link). It were never just boys. That’s another media myth. The girl who told this story was around Michael right before the Chandler scandal broke. She was younger than Jordan. I can’t remember if she mentioned she ever met Jordan, but she mentioned that when the scandal broke the adults around her went nuts and they asked her a lot of questions about the sleepovers and whether Michael ever touched her sexually and penises and so on. And she was little…. Of course, nothing ever happened during those sleepovers. She just talked about funny stories how she and another girl woke up Michael by tickling him and how he jumped out of the bed and laughed hard and so on.

    She refuted the media myth that girls were second class citizens at Neverland. She said, of course Michael would play with the boys a bit more, simply because they played boy games, not girl games, like them girls, but that’s all. Otherwise she told a story about how when they played with the bumper cars Michael sat next to her in the car and she cracked the biggest smile at him. Or when the kids were playing in the pool but she didn’t go in because she couldn’t swim, Michael took her and walked in the pool with her sitting on his neck.


  54. lcpledwards permalink
    September 1, 2010 12:50 am

    @ Suzy
    That video with Kellie Parker was great! Would it be possible for you to send a copy of that video that is in English? I couldn’t understand the language that they used. (I think it’s either Japanese or Chinese, based on the letters in their alphabet.) If we could get that video in English, we could use it as another weapon against the media’s lies.

    Also, I think the fact that her and many other kids were questioned by the adults in their lives after the scandal broke, yet NONE OF THEM CAME FORWARD WITH ALLEGATIONS, further demonstrates MJ’s complete innocence. If any of those parents thought for a moment that their child had been abused, they would have went straight to the police. Period. Same thing with the 2003 allegations. Sneddon asked for any other victims to step forward against MJ at his press conference, but guess what? There weren’t any credible victims, which absolutely stunned Sneddon!

    And if there were, then why would Sneddon need to solicit them? Wouldn’t they come forward on their own initiative? LOL!


  55. Denise permalink
    September 1, 2010 1:16 am

    Has anyone ever heard David Martinez? He concerns Michael, and I think he has connection’s with mark schaffel.


  56. Suzy permalink
    September 1, 2010 4:22 am

    @ David

    The video was up on YT with English subtitles but it’s down now. This is the only site I found it now. I don’t speak the language, but I will try to remember what she says and give a little transcript.


  57. Suzy permalink
    September 1, 2010 4:42 pm

    So more about that Kellie Parker video:

    At the beginning they talk about Neverland and how Michael bought it, how big it is etc. Then they introduce Kellie Parker and ask her to show them around.

    She explains what was where in the house. She is obviously someone who spent a lot of time there. She talks about how Michael came every morning to the guest house and woke them up by knocking on the door. She is visibly moved as they go into the main house, she says she remembers it very well. At 3:40 she talks about how they were sitting there at a table eating and outside there were elephants walking and how surreal it was. She is asked if her parents didn’t worry to leave her alone with Michael and she says they didn’t have any problem with it since they trusted him. She talks about the “secret” passages that there are in Neverland (like the one they show). She talks about it as being something for fun. Remember how the media were trying to make things like that look something sinister and dark….
    They talk about how in the movie theatre there was a place for sick children with beds. In the garden, that hole in that rock a 5:21 – there was a TV there, says Kellie, so that they can watch it from the pool as well. Then they talk about the Moonwalker video game which had Kellie’s voice in it shouting “Michael, Michael”. Then they say Michael left NL after the trial when he was charged with CM. Then Kellie shows a watch that she got from Michael. One day they were in Michael’s trailer and she really liked Michael’s watch, so Michael took it off and gave it to her. At the end Kellie says the whole experience was like a dream and when she’s asked how she will remember Michael, she is clearly moved and with tears in her eyes she says she will always remember the gentleman she knew.


  58. Eloise permalink
    September 2, 2010 2:11 am

    To suzy 😉

    My times at Neverland:

    I know I have never even mentioned this to any of you guys on here that I spent time in Neverland when I was a little girl. I dont talk about it too much to anyone. For the past years, with me it has been either you know or you dont know because I did not trust people. I have been afraid that people would twist the story around and it would be all over the internet. It is taking a lot out of me to reveal this, but I trust you guys and I feel it would be an honor to Michael that I reveal this to you guys and also on another board that I trust.

    Anyways, back when I was around five in 1992 I went to LA, or near there (forgot the exact name of the city) to visit my cousins. My uncle was a manager at Toys R Us and he would always supply me with some toys whenever I would come. One particular day when I he asked if I and my 8 year old cousin Damion would like to come with him at work. He had never asked us before to join him at work. I remember us being a bit hesitant at first because we had just started summer vacation and were not in the mood to work. He insisted that we wouldnt be working and that we would have a big suprise waiting for us there. So we said okay we’ll go. When we got there we didnt notice anything special and as the minutes ticked we began to get bored. Then it happened! We saw a dark colored van pull up in the parking lot. A lot of big guys walked out first. I remember being scared because I didnt know what was going on. The big guys entered and then we saw a smaller man. Damion walked forward to get a better look and then came running back. He told me it was Michael Jackson, but I didnt believe him until my Uncle introduced us to him. Strangely the only memory I have of him that day is that he was very tall and he was wearing a big red jacket. He was also with a kid but I dont remember if it was a boy or a girl.
    I didnt see him again until one day my uncle said that we were going to Neverland for two weeks. At first I thought it was a different country but my uncle told me we were going to visit Michael Jackson. We packed out bags and got ready. A large black van came to pick us up I remember being disappointed when I saw that Michael wasnt in it.
    So we arrived to the gates and I remember me asking my uncle when are we going to see Michael Jackson because looking at the gates i thought we were at a park or something. When we went through the gates I was completely in awe. It was the most beautiful place I had ever seen(it still is). The grass was the most beautiful shade of green I had ever seen and the flowers were very beautifully colored and arranged.
    We enter the house and we see Michael, I dont remember where he was exactly but he was sitting down with some kids. My memory is a blur until we all head outside. I think we went to the guest house first before we went to the backyard. Anyway he took us on a tour of the whole ranch on a train. I remember him blowing the horn a lot. I had to cover my ears. When we were done with the tour he asked us what we wanted to do and we all said Bumper Cars so we all ran to them. Michael, I remember was much faster than us. I think he was racing with my cousin and two other kids. I think he won. I hurried and claimed a car, I think it was gold or yellow color. Then the most amazing thing happend Michael got in the car next to me. I remember starring at him and I remember exactly what he looked like. His hair was curly but it was pulled back in a pony tail. He was wearing a long sleeved black shirt and black jeans. He looked down at me smiled and patted my head. I smiled the biggest gapped tooth smile(I had just lost my front tooth) that any five year old could ever smile. That was the best moment of my life to this day.

    Back to the story…Michael helped me drive the bumper car because I was too little to control it by myself. After that we went on this pirate ship ride that went back and forth. I didnt go on all of the rides because I was too small and too scared. Instead me and a couple other girls got snow cones. After everyone was done riding we went into the theater. I remember there was lots of candy and popcorn and Michael said we can have whatever we wanted. I think we watched Aladdin but I am not sure. I remember sitting with the same girls I ate snow cones with. Michael and some other kids sat in the row behind us. Through the movie Michael started throwing popcorn at us, then the other kids joined in, then we started throwing back at him, it was so funny. I didnt pay any attention to the movie, none of us did really. After that we went into the game room. This place is just like an arcade it had a whole buch of games, pinball machines and my personal favorite table hockey. I think what made me love this game was Michael because I saw him get really into it. I dont know whether he won or not I just remember him laughing alot. I belive he played that game the entire time we were in there. Then we ate(dont remember what) and then Michael showed us around the inside of his house. The one thing that stood out was this larger than life painting of Michael reading to children all around him. It was so beautiful. He also had a lot of maniequins which I thought were real people scattered around the house. He showed us pictures of his family and everything. He introduced us to his housekeepers. They smiled alot I remember and were very friendly. After this I believe my uncle left although I am not completely sure he may have left before but I was having too much fun I really didnt even notice. The house keepers guided us to our guest units to get ready for the night because it was getting dark. I have no idea of what the guest suites looked like because I rarely was in it. Me and Damion rushed back to the main house and to Michael’s room. His room is huge. I dont know if any of you have seen when the Today show gave the tour of his room but imagine that room filled with games and toys and pictures and posters. It was amazing. It acually reminded me of Damions room if he was rich. His whole house is like a kids paradise. Everyone was in their pajamas including Michael. We played hide and seek in a couple of rooms on the top floor. Then the boys and girls started doing separate things. Michael and the boys started wrestling and pillow fighting, while me and the girls were playing with dolls.
    By the way I have just have to say this; I dont know who started the lie that Michael only allowed boys in his room because we were in the room just as much as the boys were. Yes, Michael talked and played with the boys more than the girls but I dont know why that would alarm anyone. Michael is a boy himself so it makes sense. I was never into wrestling, I did enjoy pillow fights but Michael and the boys were doing it a little to rough for my liking. Anyway I just thought I should say that.
    What you all are probobly wondering is did I see Michael sleep in the same bed with children. Yes, but we were all in the same room together and Michael and the some kids were watching cartoons on tv and they were on the bed and others were on the floor. I and my cousin were on the floor.Oh I just thought of another moment. This was too cute. One morning, I dont know if it was the following morning or not but us kids were awake and playing a video game. Michael and some other kid were still asleep in the bed when a little girl came up beside me and asked if I wanted to wake Michael up. I said yeah and we both walked up to the bed. I remember he was sleeping on top of the covers. The girl told me to tickle him. I was shocked and said no because I didnt want to make him mad. I think the girl must have been there before because she was older than me(I belive I was the youngest kid there) and she assured that he wouldnt get mad. She told me that he was ticklish everywhere but not to tickle his feet because he would kick me. So I ran my fingers from his armpits down to his stomach. He started giggling so loud and moved around on the bed and I jumped on the bed with him and continued, and then the other two girls joined, one I think started tickling his feet and Michael laughed even louder. After a minute or two he managed to get up off the bed away from us.
    From that moment on I started having a little girl crush on him. Not in a romantic sense of coarse but I wanted him to be my boyfriend(without even knowing what that was)my brother, my cousin, my father, best friend or anything.
    Everytime I see the final part of the making of thriller where John tickles Michael’s foot and on the private home movies water balloon fight it takes me right back to these days.
    We had a water balloon fight too. It was the boys against the girls and guess who won? Michaels team of coarse. We played in the pool. Yes, Michael did get pushed in alot. I really didnt get in the water because I couldnt swim. But one time, acutally a couple of times Michael let me ride on his shoulders as he walked in the pool. I remember being so scared. I yelled dont drop me dont drop me and Michael said not to worry. Another thing, at that time I really didnt know too much about Michael and I was quite confused because I didnt know if he was a kid or an adult because he played with us like he was one of us but yet he was taller than all of us like an adult. I also remember him reading to us, just my cousin and I in the living room. I asked him if he would read to us like he did in the picture. This was nightime I believe. He sat on the floor I on one side of him and my cousin on the other. The other kids must have alread heard the story. They went up to his room. I am not even going to tell you what the story was, I believe it is pretty much obvious what it was :enamorado: . Anyway a funny, funny story; after he got done reading a few chapters he closed the book and told us that he was the happiest when he was around children. And my cousin asked him ‘you mean you are not a kid?’ I remember that so clearly. Michael laughed so hard. But then he replied ‘I dont know am I?’ At that time I didnt know either but when i realized he was an adult I laughed about it with my cousin so much.
    There was another time when he said that he didnt ever want to grow up and all of us said me niether!
    I totally forgot to tell you about the animals. Michael had a LOT of animals. One that clearly stood out for me was a huge albino python although I cant think of the name I remember holding on to its belly and my cousin grabbed the head. There was also a giraffe, deer, elephant, a llama(i dont know if it was his famous Louie the llama, this was in 1992 so he might have been dead) 2 or 3 monkeys(not bubbles). The monkey’s were also very popular with us. We would all try and mimick the sounds they made and Michael did too, it was soo funny. He had some other animals but I dont remember what.
    Bill came over one day. We would call him Mr. BB. He was very fun and Michael would always play jokes on him like he would snatch his hat off and throw it in the pool, the deep end. But Bill would just push Michael in the pool so he would have to get it. Michael was a great swimmer. Bill was actually the only adult I ever saw him interact with at that time (I went back when I was 8 Lisa was there). Although the house was filled with adults he never really interacted with them at all just us.
    When the first molestation case happened, me and my cousin were put through the ringer. Everyone at home asked me tons of questions. I didnt even know what they were talking about. My uncle called me and he too asked me tons of questions. My cousin, I think got it the most because he acually, got to spend time with Michael and Jordan Chandler because he lived closer. He was acually supposed to go on tour with Michael and Jordan but unfortunately he got sick and wasnt able to make it. It was absolutely the most horrible thing I ever went through. I feel so bad for Michael cause I know he went through worse. I mean, just think of asking a five or six year old about seeing a man naked and penises and touching them inappropriately. Lets just say I found out a lot about the male anatomy at six. I was made to watch my friend Michael almost cry when he made that famous statement to the world.
    Anyway, to a much happier time I went back when I was 8 and to my astonishment someone had stolen my boyfriend from me! I was so jealous of Lisa. She was really pretty and nice. Me and my cousin were there when Michael held a Childrens conference at Neverland, this event
    We werent in this group, we were in the house with Lisa’s kids and a couple others. Michael and Lisa’s interaction was that of a normal married couple at times. I saw them sitting and talking, hugging and snuggling. I really hated to see that. Lisa can cook, one day she made us all omlets with cheese, peppers and ham. All the things she said in the Primetime Live interview about Michael and children was right. We did follow him everywhere he went. I think she got annoyed by it sometimes especially when it was bedtime and we jumped in there with him causing her to sleep on the other bed he had in his room. One night I slept in the bed with him. I acually snuck in the bed with him because he was already in there with 2 other kids I think it was Lisa’s son and daughter, I am not completely sure. Anyway I stayed awake until Michael fell asleep and I crawled inbetween him and Lisa’s daughter. Back then, it didnt mean that much to me looking at him sleeping but, I havent been able to get that picture out of my head to this day a complete 14 years later. :wub:
    Getting back to Michael and Lisa’s interaction well, let me put it like this, Michael really loved her, but it seemed as if he put us kids before her. I cant say that for sure, but the fact that he allowed us to in a way push Lisa out the bed, looking back says a lot to me. Michael’s interaction with adults wasnt as open as it was with kids. I saw more of his interaction with adults during this time but it was nothing compared to the way he was with us.


  59. Suzy permalink
    September 2, 2010 10:05 am

    Eloise! Thank you! Yes, this is the story I read!


  60. Suzy permalink
    September 2, 2010 11:12 am

    And here is another story of Michael befriending families with female children:

    That Michael only liked male children is really just another media myth.


  61. September 2, 2010 5:30 pm

    What a beautiful story it is about those Taiwan twins! You know, reading about Michael after all those “splotches” is so refreshing – like breathing in some fresh air at last…


  62. lcpledwards permalink
    September 3, 2010 1:22 am

    @ Helena
    When you emailed me a few days ago, you mentioned that there was an email that I sent you a few weeks ago about a young female protege of MJ. I sent it to you before I became a co-admin, thinking that you might want to do a post on it. But Seven Bowie already did a post on it, and in case you haven’t read it, here it is!

    This young lady, Nisha Kataria, was supposed to perform with MJ at his “This Is It” concerts. She and her family moved into Neverland in 2003 shortly before he was arrested.

    And speaking of females at Neverland, here are a few clips of the Oprah show that aired right before her big interview with MJ in 1993. In clip #5 she interviewed a young girl and her parents about their relationship with MJ.

    It’s really sad when you see the complete 180 degree turnaround that Oprah took after the allegations. She wouldn’t touch MJ with a 10-foot pole! She repeatedly mocked him on her show when Lisa Marie Presley and her mother were guests in 2005. But the biggest example of her hypocrisy is the fact that she did NOT invite Mesereau to her show after the trial, and she rejected Aphrodite Jones’ offer to come on her show and promote “MJ Conspiracy”.

    However, Oprah had nooooooo problem letting convicted rapist, wife beating, drug using, washed up, overweight boxer Mike Tyson appear on her show! And boy did she regret it! While discussing his domestic violence against his ex-wife Robin Givens, he joked that he wanted to “sock her” after their infamous interview with Barbara Walters, and he and the audience laughed, and Oprah did NOT reprimand him or the audience!! In fact, she enabled him by asking him if he really did “sock her”!!

    Robin Givens was devastated by this, and she wrote a letter to Oprah demanding an apology, and Oprah obliged by inviting her on her show and stating that she felt the audience laughed because they felt “uncomfortable” when Tyson said he wanted to “sock her”. So Oprah decided that she would play with fire by inviting Tyson on her show, and she got burned!

    So let’s get this straight: MJ is falsely accused of child abuse, is rightfully acquitted, and Oprah wants nothing to do with him (in fact, she didn’t even release a statement after his death, which is inexcusable!), and she only reluctantly did that “tribute” show to him where she repeatedly reminds viewers that her interview took place BEFORE the allegations (thus implying that she wouldn’t have considered interviewing him after the scandal).

    But Mike Tyson, who beat his ex-wife and many of his ex-girlfriends, sold drugs, robbed people, may have committed rape (a conviction doesn’t equal guilt!!) and was an overall juvenile delinquent who would have wound up dead or in jail if not for his boxing ability, gets an invite to go on her show just to talk about his life after boxing! He didn’t have a book to promote, or a product to sell, but just his life story!

    One last thing: there is a funny connection between MJ and Mike Tyson. Tyson was accused and convicted of rape in 1992, but as we all know a conviction doesn’t equal guilt! Tyson had an incompetent and inadequate lawyer defend him (so incompetent that he allowed Tyson to testify, and he came off as angry and combative, which hurt him in the eyes of the jury.) Plus, his image as a “thug” certainly didn’t help him, either, and he was convicted. After getting released in 1995, he was accused again of rape in 2001, and his accuser went crying to Gloria Allred to represent her, hoping that she could sue him either before or after a criminal trial.

    But Tyson’s lawyer helped to get the charges tossed by the prosecutor. And guess who represented tyson?

    Tom Mesereau!

    So Mesereau defended Tyson & MJ, and Allred tried to sue and did sue Tyson & MJ, respectively. It’s a small world after all! These two cases go to show that people can be falsely accused of the same crime multiple times, and just because there is smoke, IT DOESN’T MEANT THERE’S FIRE!


  63. Suzy permalink
    September 3, 2010 10:14 am

    Just a sidenote about Oprah: she may be huge in the US, but outside of it she is not significant. At least where I live people didn’t even hear about her before that Michael Jackson interview! Yes, that interview made her known world wide – and of course it wasn’t Oprah’s name why we turned on our televisions, but Michael’s.


  64. September 4, 2010 10:50 am

    “I know I have never even mentioned this to any of you guys on here that I spent time in Neverland when I was a little girl.”

    Eloise, to my great shame it is only now that I’ve read your remarkable story. It is so nice and so genuine that I’d like to post it in the Home page if I may. I hope you won’t mind it, will you?


  65. Eloise permalink
    September 4, 2010 1:34 pm

    The source of this story comes from this forum, 1980smjlover is the girl in question.

    It would be nice if you put it on the homepage. 🙂


  66. The 500 permalink
    September 4, 2010 4:19 pm

    Calling The 500

    The 500 is a group of dedicated writers – formed in response to the continuing erroneous assumptions and biased narrative about Michael Jackson that are still actively perpetuated by the media. We are looking for members to join us in this work.

    We are looking for 500 people who can write factually and intelligently, when asked to, with an eye on the pragmatic aspects of reclaiming Michael Jackson’s public image.

    What if around 500 people were to be made aware of misinformed, biased, or otherwise negative mainstream press about MJ, the kind that potentially influences much of Joe Public?

    What if these 500 could muster facts and cool persuasion to articulately respond to ‘MJ-bashing?’ What if 500 could refute the notion that anyone standing up for Michael Jackson is just another “crazed fan?”

    What would happen if instead, we turned out to be concerned and intelligent citizens who’ve had enough of this cess of judgment and persecution, this trampling of ethics in pursuit of profit, that characterized the media during Michael’s trial, and continues today?

    We think it’s possible that if 500 people were willing and able to write the occasional letter, post the comment, or make the call, they could actually function as a check upon the kind of irresponsible journalism that ruins lives unjustly. We’d like to gather a group that takes over the megaphone in the public sphere on Michael Jackson’s behalf.

    As a bloc, we would respond appropriately when we are made aware that a trash story is fed to a gullible public. We intend to call the media on their irresponsibility whenever possible. No longer will silence imply agreement with lazy or malicious reporting on the part of the mainstream media.

    We need good writers who can stay on message and write persuasively. We do have a fairly strong idea about what kind of writers will be most effective, but don’t intend to micro-manage anyone’s comments apart from offering guidelines.

    If you think The 500 is for you, please contact us at:

    so that we can add you to the newly formed Googlegroup The 500. From there, once we’ve built a little critical mass, we will get to work by issuing a set of guidelines and resources to our writing membership, to be followed by regular brief messages about where to direct your comments.

    Thank you.

    The 500 Team.


  67. lcpledwards permalink
    September 5, 2010 8:01 am

    Hey guys:

    I found an interesting article about Mesereau from November 2005. It’s just a retrospective on his career, and the admiration that he receives from the black community for the work he does helping poor and underprivileged clients, especially in the Deep South. There was a passage that stuck out to me, and I wanted to point it out to you guys:

    Mesereau quit his longtime membership in the First AME Church, where he helped run a free legal clinic, after the new pastor, John Hunter, refused to let the church send children to Neverland while Jackson was facing charges, and then spoke to Court TV about it.

    “I’m very disappointed in the church’s position,” said Mesereau, who also stopped doing his legal clinic work on Sundays at First AME and now offers his services at West Angeles Church of God in Christ. “I just thought it was inappropriate for kids to be going out there at any time,” Hunter said. “This is somebody that has been charged with child molestation, but more importantly has admitted to sleeping in the same room, if not the same bed, with children. And that is inappropriate by most standards.”

    Mesereau says Jackson has never acted inappropriately with children or allowed them to stay in his duplex-sized bedroom without parental approval. Nonetheless, Jackson “has to recognize what a target he is,” Mesereau said. “I have counseled him not to let families stay in his bedroom.”

    When Mesereau, who has no children, is asked how he would feel about his girlfriend’s young son staying in Jackson’s bedroom, he threatened to walk out of an interview.

    “I’m not here to be interrogated with sleazy questions like that,” he said.

    Later, he offered a more measured response: “I’ve been at Neverland with my girlfriend and her son. He has spent time playing with Michael and his children and his family. I am absolutely convinced that Michael has never molested any child in his lifetime.”

    That passage shows the great lengths that Mesereau has gone to protect MJ, and for him to take the unprecedented step of not only leaving that church, but canceling his free law clinic, simply because the pastor wouldn’t continue to let the kids visit Neverland, that just really blew my mind! Here’s my take on the situation:

    I understand where the pastor is coming from. He has a responsibility to protect those kids at all times, and he may have been reflecting the concerns of some of the parents of those kids who were heavily influenced by the biased media coverage. I don’ think that pastor had any malicious prejudice towards MJ, but he was just erring on the side of caution. But for the pastor to give an interview to Court TV (who no doubt spun this story to say to their viewers “Look, even the black community is turning its back on MJ because he’s a molester!”), was just an exercise in poor judgment. That was not something that needed to be broadcast to the entire world, and Court TV exploited it because it fit own agenda.

    I would have assumed that Mesereau would have understood the pastor’s position and would have complied, but obviously (based on his actions) he was very offended! The article didn’t elaborate about the specific details of this spat. Maybe Mesereau requested permission to speak to the parents and assure them that it was safe, but was denied? (Especially when you consider that the kids were only taking a field trip to Neverland for a few hours to play on the rides, and NOT to spend the night with MJ!) And I’m sure the Mesereau was upset that Court TV was able to exploit the story as well.

    I also like how he threatened to walk out of the interview after he was asked if he’d leave his kids around MJ. Wow! He was truly offended by that question, and I only wish that more of MJ’s supporters would have that same mentality!

    (For example, ABC News had their anchors ask MJ’s bodyguards, and Karen Faye & the his other costume designers, if they thought MJ was a pedophile. A CBS News anchor asked Ryan White’s mother if she had any problems with Ryan spending time with MJ, and Bill O’Reilly asked Aphrodite Jones if she would let her kids be around MJ.)


  68. Suzy permalink
    September 5, 2010 8:35 am

    Mesereau is a fantastic guy! You could tell it wasn’t just a job for him, he was totally, 100% convinced of the innocence of Michael and that he is serving a good cause here!


  69. September 7, 2010 7:52 pm

    I found an interesting article about Mesereau from November 2005. It’s just a retrospective on his career, and the admiration that he receives from the black community for the work he does helping poor and underprivileged clients, especially in the Deep South. There was a passage that stuck out to me, and I wanted to point it out to you guys:

    David, I am catching up with things bit by bit – thank you so much for the article about Mesereau. Thank God there was a man like Thomas Mesereau in Michael’s life. He must have been the sole reason why Michael didn’t lose faith in humanity completely. We should all learn from Mesereau – he can teach us a lot.

    “A CBS News anchor asked Ryan White’s mother if she had any problems with Ryan spending time with MJ”

    I once did a post about Ryan White and this question struck me as ridiculous at its most. Ryan White was ill with AIDS and everyone at the time was SO afraid of the disease that his classmates didn’t want to go to the same school with Ryan and breathe the same air with him. When both children and adults saw him they pressed themselves into the wall to keep as far away from him as possible.

    It was at the time of all that hysteria that Michael Jackson sat at the same table with the boy and had dinner with him. He wanted Ryan to feel like a normal child so badly that he asked Klein if there was a danger of catching AIDS if he went in the jacuzzi with him. Klein said it was okay and during one of Ryan’s visits to Nevertheland Michael and Ryan got in the jacuzzi together – there was a huge TV screen at its side and they watched it. If somebody has just thought for a second that it has to do with ‘molestation’ he must be crazy – getting in a jacuzzi with an AIDS victim at the time was like committing suicide and this was surely done FOR RYAN and NOT for Michael.

    Michael was evidently as scared of the disease as everyone else but he wanted to put Ryan at his ease and let him regain some of his dignity this way.

    So when that journalist asked Ryan’s mother if she ever had any worries about Michael and Ryan spending time together the journalist even didn’t understand how ridiculous the question was – it was Michael who should have been worried then, not Ryan or his mother! Michael did it in spite of his fear – and all because he wanted to boost the boy’s spirits and make him live one fraction longer than he was meant to.

    This was the reason why he presented to Ryan a red Mustang car when he was 16 or so. If I remember it right Ryan died some three years later.


  70. lcpledwards permalink
    September 7, 2010 9:39 pm

    @ Helena
    I made a slight change to your comment because you made an innocent -yet potentially dangerous!!- mistake of saying that MJ “asked Klein if there was a danger of taking a bath with him”. Obviously I know that you meant “jacuzzi” when you said bath, but not everyone will know that, so that’s why it was important that I make that correction.

    Remember, those lying “Neverland 5” employees claimed they saw MJ bathing and showering with young boys, and Jordie also claimed that he bathed with MJ while in those hotel suites, so we can’t give readers the impression that MJ wanted to or actually did take a “bath” with Ryan; they only went in the jacuzzi together, with their shorts on.


  71. September 8, 2010 5:06 am

    “they only went in the jacuzzi together, with their shorts on.”

    OMG, of course I meant that it was completely innocent amd just the fun of being in jacuzzi – this is exactly why they were so open about it. Thanks a lot, David! Please don’t hesitate to correct me whenever it is needed – sometimes I don’t feel the difference between words.

    I hope the reader will understand that going in the jacuzzi with an innocent AIDS victim (Ryan White was contaminated during a blood transfusion) was a fantastic and fearless gesture on Michael’s part meant to show everyone that the boy presented no danger to the rest. Its idea was to revive the boy’s spirits at a time when he was harassed virtually everywhere he went. People didn’t want to live side by side with the Whites and they shot a bullet through their window to drive them away.


  72. Eloise permalink
    September 12, 2010 10:27 pm

    Testimony of a man who knew Michael and stayed six weeks with him when he was 11 years. 🙂


  73. lcpledwards permalink
    September 15, 2010 8:39 am

    Guys, this is a very good interview with MJ’s mom right after the trial. She made some very good points, as she usually does. The most touching thing she said was that she regrets sheltering MJ so much as a child, because he didn’t realize how evil the world was as an adult, which made him too trusting of people.

    She also said that he’s going to help families “from a distance” from now on, instead of letting them into his life. This is truly sad, because there are so many other families who could have been helped by him, but the Arvizos ruined everything. She also clarified the “bed sharing” as well.


  74. lcpledwards permalink
    December 5, 2010 8:11 pm

    Hey guys, this is an amazing article that I found! It is from November 22, 2003, and it is from Ahmad Elatab, a 17 year old teen who defended MJ shortly after his arrest. (His mother also defended him as well!)

    This article debunks a lot of the myths surrounding Neverland. Here is a breakdown of the article:

    1. Notice how old Ahmad was when he befriend MJ in 2002: he was 16! that debunks the myth that MJ didn’t befriend anyone who had “facial hair”! (I.e., older teens who had completed puberty.)

    2. MJ insisted on getting the permission of parents before inviting kids to Neverland. This is consistent with what Carol Nilwicki said on the Geraldo show in 1993, after the scandal erupted. For more info on Milwicki, read bullet point #9 in this post:

    3. He says that MJ divorced LMP because she refused to have his kids, which is consistent with what Debbie Rowe and others have said, and what we have already analyzed elsewhere on this blog. MJ also called Madonna a “female dog”, although he didn’t explain why……..

    4. There were no rules whatsoever at Neverland, which is consistent with what we’ve already heard from dozens of other sources, included Mac Culkin, and Brett Barnes.

    5. His mother said: “Michael asked me if it was OK if Ahmad slept over and I said yes. I completely trusted him and I still do,” Fattouh said. “I’d let him go back anytime, I support him and don’t believe the rumors and accusations, never did.”

    6. MJ slept on a big, pullout couch, and not in the same bed as the kids, of which there were always multiple kids around!

    7. MJ wore surgical masks on days when he “felt ugly”.

    8. Some of the “nannies” who worked for MJ were actually women that he was sleeping with! He’s a big flirt, and he’s definitely not gay!

    9. Mj LOVES his father, and wouldn’t be the superstar he is without him. This is similar to what he said in the Bashir documentary, that his father was a “genius”, despite the abuse.

    10. He hates questions about plastic surgery, and the only time he ever got angry was when the subject of Bashir came up. (This was after the documentary aired.)

    11. He once gave the kids dance lessons, and used the music of everyone from the Bee Gees to 50 Cent, which shows how eclectic his musical tastes are.


  75. Truth Prevail permalink
    May 31, 2011 5:48 pm

    one skeptic once said mj is guilty because he releases statements when he is accused and thats a sign of guilt if he was innocent he would ignore it. When i read that i was thinking thats got 2 be the worst logic any1 has tryed 2 put 2gether Becuz i know 4 a fact if he said nothing and ignored it and stayed silent haters would still say thats a sign of guilt because if hes innocent why isnt he defending his name! tsk tsk!!!



  1. Sharing His Bed With Children « Michael…the Man
  2. When It Comes To Michael Jackson, Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge are Poles Apart! « Vindicating Michael
  3. How to Recognize and Refute the Fallacies Used By Michael Jackson Haters, Part 4 of 5 « Vindicating Michael
  4. How to Recognize and Refute the Fallacies Used By Michael Jackson Haters, Part 4 of 5 « Fan Blog for MJ
  5. Fact Checking Michael Jackson’s Christian Faith, Part 2 of 5: Michael Did NOT “Channel” Demon Spirits to Help Him Write Songs! « Vindicating Michael
  6. Summary and Analysis of the Testimonies of Stacy Brown and Bob Jones, the Authors of “Michael Jackson: The Man Behind The Mask”, Part 3 of 3 « Vindicating Michael

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: