Skip to content

THE CHANDLERS: the history of lies and distortion

July 1, 2010

I am starting this new vindication season with some reflections on the Chandler family.

This post was inspired by Ray Chandler’s interview with Larry King and was initially meant to cover that interview only. However while looking for information here and there some new details began to emerge and fuse together with the facts already known to me, thus forming a vast and colorful picture of falsehood and deception on the Chandlers’ part – a picture so huge that discussing every bit of it would need a separate post of its own.

Though being appalled by the amount of work to be done I decided to look into each episode piece by piece, thus making my longest post ever and probably the most challenging one too.

Ray Chandler’s interview may seem a strange choice to make a start with – but I asked myself,  “Why not?”  We need something to start with, so let it be the interview, especially since the technology of lies employed there seems to me rather vivid and obvious to everyone.

The interview will be provided almost in full with some comment on my part. If some information is already known to you, please have patience with it – we need all the facts to be grouped together, whether old or new…

And mind it that these are only preliminary conclusions which need to be supplemented in the future.


Larry King talked to Ray Chandler on November 25, 2003 which was a week after the surprise search visit of 70 policemen to Neverland. It was followed by Michael’s arrival home from Las Vegas the next day to ‘surrender’ to the authorities (Nov.20, 2003) and his later release on bail for some $3mln.

In connection with these recent events Larry is speaking to Ray Chandler about the past accusations:

"I speak on my own behalf only"

KING: Joining us now is Ray Chandler, the uncle of the boy who accused Jackson back in 1993. Ray Chandler, by the way, is not speaking on behalf of the brother or his nephew, just as himself. They have a confidentiality agreement concerning the settlement of the case. It does not affect Ray Chandler, but he is not speaking on behalf of any of the parties.

It is both terribly wise and tale-telling to start a conversation with pointing out that Ray has nothing to do with the settlement agreement. The message thus sent to the public is that no one should ever, EVER think that Ray Chandler may be representing the family and that he is actually ACTING AS THEIR SPOKESMAN.

Why is it so top important for Ray Chandler’s name to be never linked with the names of the other Chandlers? Because both parties to the agreement (Evan, June, ‘Minor’ Jordan Chandler on the one side and Michael Jackson on the other side) were bound hand and foot by that document to never talk to journalists about the case. They could naturally speak up in court but under no circumstances could they discuss their mutual accusations (molestation and extortion) with the media and the press.

The agreement says about it:

“The Minor…, Evan Chandler and June Chandler, and each of them individually and on behalf of their respective agents, attorneys, media representatives, partners, heirs, administrators, executors, conservators, successors and assigns, agree that they will not at any time in the future…enter into any contract…or other obligation, with any media, including…recording, audiotape, compact disc, videotape, program, television or other public or private appearance, interview or broadcast, related to Jackson in any capacity…Jackson’s relationship with the Minor or Evan Chandler or June Chandler, the allegations made in the Action, any information revealed through discovery in the Action [Case], or the Claims” (this clause is followed by an identical clause for Jackson concerning the Chandlers).

Please remember that the above restrictions were for talking to the media only. A separate point of the agreement says that both parties can surely speak in court:
…the parties “agree not to cooperate with, represent, or provide any information, to any person or entity that initiates any civil claim or action which relates in any manner to the subject matter of the Action [Case] against Jackson… except as may be required by law”.

The fact that Ray Chandler wasn’t covered by the agreement is very much disputable as he can still be regarded as the family’s ‘agent’ and point 11 of the agreement concerns him directly as it says:

“The Minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Evan Chandler, June Chandler, the Minor’s attorneys of record in the Action and the Minor’s legal representatives, and each of them individually and on behalf of their respective agents, attorneys, media representatives, partners, heirs, administrators, executors, conservators, successors and assigns, agree to keep the terms and conditions of this confidential Settlement strictly confidential.  Each of the aforementioned individuals agrees that they will not at any time disclose any information concerning the contents of this Confidential Settlement to anyone, including, without limitation any investigator (current or former), expert or consultant hired in connection with the Action, representative of any media, family members and friends; provided, however, that the Parties may make disclosures as may be necessary or required by law to tax advisors, accountants, taxing authorities, insurers, or the consultant hired in connection with the Settlement Payment to the Minor as provided in paragraphs 3.а. (1}-(5) hereinabove.”

They should have stated Ray Chandler’s name directly in the document to make it known to him that he was also bound by the agreement, but failed to do it obviously thinking that any layman would be able to understand the message  – let alone Ray Chandler who (by the time of this interview) had finished the Santa Barbara Law College  and was already a lawyer.

If Ray argues with us that his name was not mentioned in the agreement I will agree with him –  same as the names of Jackson’s siblings were not mentioned there either.

Yes, it wasn’t Evan Chandler only who had a brother to speak at public forums. If all Michael Jackson’s brothers and sisters had been as talkative as Ray Chandler was the media would have been overwhelmed with stories about Chandlers’ extortion scheme and Michael’s relatives could have made an impressive presence at every TV show to state their caseif they had ever been invited there of course and if Michael had ever allowed them to do so, both of which I DOUBT very much indeed…

As far as I know Jackson’s side observed the terms of the agreement in an impeccable manner and the most Michael allowed himself was to say that he was innocenthowever even that little was regarded by Evan Chandler as a breach of the agreement as a result of which he sued Michael again (this time for $60 mln.) and lost the case.

But let us go on with Ray Chandler’s interview:

KING: …And I understand you’re not in contact with your brother or nephew at all.
RAY CHANDLER: No. I haven’t spoken to them for quite a while. I haven’t talked since long before these allegations came out. They don’t know I’m here.
KING: Why? What happened?
CHANDLER: It’s sort of personal, but basically, it’s not that we don’t care for each other or love each other, but they’ve sort of kept to themselves. And every time since the Bashir interview, in February, you know…
KING: The interview with Jackson?
CHANDLER: Yes. Every time Jackson is in the media, it affects them quite severely.
KING: So you stay way.
CHANDLER: I stay away.

I am not surprised that Jordan Chandler is no longer on speaking terms with his uncle. Ray Chandler’s preparations for releasing his All that Glitters masterpiece are in full swing at the time of the interview. The book was written long time ago but is being updated now in connection with the new investigation opened against Jackson. It will be published in September 2004 and will contain sordid tales of Jordan’s alleged molestation as well as doubts about his sexual orientation.

Ray Chandler also claims that he hasn’t spoken to Evan Chandler for a long time and that his brother “doesn’t even know” that Ray is speaking to Larry King today…  Whether this is true or not is not a matter of huge importance – what IS important though is the impression he is thus producing on the general public. Stating some kind of alienation or lack of contact between Ray and Evan is actually in the interests of both Chandler brothers.

Why so? Because this way the family is much better protected from suspicions that Evan Chandler could have anything to do with Ray Chandler’s book (now in preparation) and with his non-stop talk on TV and in the press. This way the risk of a possible legal action against Evan Chandler arising from breaking the agreement is becoming virtually non-existent or minimal  thus safeguarding the family’s money and quiet – of course only on condition we share Ray Chandler’s opinion that he was not bound by the agreement…

Evan Chandler’s fear of losing money was largely unfounded, as the agreement says the family will receive the money in any case, even if they breach the agreement:

“Jackson’s obligation to make the Settlement Payment when due is absolute; notwithstanding any claimed or actual breach of the Confidential Settlement… Jackson shall not withhold any portion of the Settlement Payment”.

However if the fact of a breach is proven by the arbitration court the Chandlers can be requested to return some of the payments – which is a perfectly natural thing to do if they did violate the very essence of the agreement (i.e. the requirement never to speak to the media).  So it was actually parting with the money already received which Evan Chandler was so terribly afraid of…

Victor gutierrez

As Evan Chandler wanted both money and ‘talk’ and also a chance to get away with it, this was the exact reason why his brother Ray Chandler had to make all those “I-am-acting-on-my-own” passes before the interview and further manouvers about “not-talking-to-his-brother” business.

This was also the reason why Evan Chandler himself kept silence about Michael Jackson and why both brothers tried to act via a third party like Victor Gutierrez to see what happens to him as a result of their trial test.

Well, the experiment showed that Victor was sued for his lies about Jackson and had to file for bankrupcy and flee the country not to pay $2,7mln. in damages. This outcome somehow chilled the Chandlers’ ardor for several years  – money was always a powerful argument for these guys…

Now HOW DO I KNOW that Evan Chandler was party to the plan to kill two birds with one stone – I mean, take the money and talk?  How dare I make such allegations with no evidence proving my point? Shouldn’t we refrain from repeating someone else’s malicious hearsay?

Yes, we  should – only this information is not hearsay but an established fact. I don’t know why no one has yet paid attention to it but Ray Chandler SPOKE  about his brother’s involvement in the project HIMSELF and was quite OPEN  about it too.

See what Josh Mankiewicz of Dateline NBC writes about his interview with Ray Chandler on the eve of the release of  All That Glitters book (source :

“Now for the first time the boy’s father talks about his son’s relationship with Michael Jackson. That comes not from third parties or court records, but from the father’s own lips, from portions of private audio tapes that have never before been heard outside his family.

Ray Chandler had no part of the multimillion dollar deal between his brother’s family and Michael Jackson, but he was at his older brother’s side as the scandal broke, and he sometimes recorded private conversations between the two as the family was pulled deeper and deeper into the international fury. Ray says his brother knew the conversations were being recorded because even then, Ray Chandler was laying the groundwork for a book.

Mankiewicz: “You tape recorded a number of conversations with your brother?”
Chandler: “There were some conversations that we taped in order to preserve ideas in order to preserve what had happened”.

Using notes, documents, and those recordings he says he made in 1993, before his family’s settlement with Jackson, Ray Chandler has written and self-published “All That Glitters: The Crime and the Cover-up,” the story of his family’s struggle with Michael Jackson”.

Sure Ray Chandler collected all those materials before the settlement – otherwise he wouldn’t have had a chance to offer the book immediately after the trial. Judith Regan says that Ray Chandler approached her with a book proposal before ‘the ink was even dry” on the agreement:

“I received a call from Jordan’s uncle. He wanted to do a book in which he would describe in detail the allegation of molestation against Michael Jackson…. He said that Jordan’s father had given him all the information he needed for the book and he believed he was outside the bounds of the Confidentiality agreement because he would be the author. At the time I had the impression that the Chandlers were brazen opportunists and I found the entire proposal by the uncle to be distasteful. They enter a Confidentiality agreement and before the ink is even dry they are shopping a deal that violates this agreement?”

Later Ray Chandler would present his failure with the publishers and the need to self-publish the book in a totally different way.  See what his says about it in the same 2004 interview with Josh Mankiewicz:

Ray Chandler: “…look, you know, if money were my motive, I could have gone to a major publisher and gotten a big fat advance. ( if any of them had agreed to pay it which they didn’t). But if I had done that, I wouldn’t be able to publish the book that I wanted to publish.”

Mankiewicz: “Because a major publisher wouldn’t have been willing to put in print the charges that your are making?”

Chandler: “When it comes to Michael Jackson, people are still afraid.” (afraid of the man who was humiliated beyond any measure by being photographed naked and drug through the mud by every newspaper and every willing maid or bodyguard whom the media paid to? Come on, Ray…)

Mankiewicz further makes an important note:

“Chandler argues that father and son at first cooperated with a criminal investigation, even AFTER they settled their civil suit with Jackson. But as time wore on, criminal charges against Jackson were never filed (why not, I wonder, if Jordan willingly cooperated with them? Didn’t the authorities like his declaration?), and the family received numerous death threats.

Chandler says the boy and his father asked to be placed in the witness-protection program and that when that request was denied, the family stopped cooperating with investigators”.

After making a round of publishers and realizing that none of them were willing to participate in a breach-of-the-agreement process the Chandler brothers refrained from publishing All That Glitters in 1994 (apparently deciding in favor of Victor Gutierrez’s variant instead) and withdrew the book until after the new allegations against Jackson arose in 2003.

Now that the singer’s hands were full with new accusations it was just the right time to burden him with the past woes too. Defamatory information was in so much demand then that all previous fears of breaching the agreement could be now (cautiously) disregarded:

KING: Then how much do you know about the events of 10 years ago?
RAY CHANDLER: I was — I know a lot about the events of 10 years ago. When it first became public, it was August 17th, 1993. About three or four days later, I got a call from my brother he was crying. I’d never heard my brother cry. He is very strong man. He had just been beat up walking into his — in the lobby of his office building he’s a dentist. And he was crying, he was sobbing. I packed up — I live in Santa Barbara, he was in L.A. I packed up some close real quick, went down there. I was there for almost six months just before the settlement was signed in January of 1994.

KING: Do you think he was beat up in connection with it?
CHANDLER: I don’t think — we don’t know — I wasn’t there. He we believe it was actually tabloid media who did it. He got smacked in the back of the head. The guy in front of him had a camera. He thinks they were trying to slow him down, but he was really bruised.

I didn’t know that the ferocious Evan Chandler who wanted to ‘turn Michael’s life into a massacre’ was such a frightened little fawn. What is this soap opera all about? Is it a subtle hint to explain why Ray Chandler stayed at his brother’s place and worked for six months on a tell-all book together with him? Okay, okay… let us not be petty and  mean… the poor guy was beaten up… with a camera…by a tabloid journalist…fortunately not by fans…

It is really a big relief to learn that it wasn’t Michael’s fans who were responsible for ‘beating up’ Evan Chandler and with an expensive camera too. But at another point of the interview Ray Chandler presents Michael’s fans in a somewhat more sinister light:

KING: There were death threats to the family?
CHANDLER: There were lots of death threats.
KING: By fans, I assume.
CHANDLER: Yeah. By fans. It’s funny. You know, again, not funny but you know, here we are now with terrorism, something that Americans know about. Michael Jackson has a corps of fans. And those that want to march and support of him in Europe, fine, that’s their right. There’s a hard core group, there was and probably still is, of fanatical fans who see him as a deity, and they will — some of them will go to any lengths that, you know, there’s some who will just go as far as threatening, there’s some who will go — who will be violent, and you know, you never know how far it is going to go.

Well, I am aware that not all Michael’s fans are peaceful darlings, but the danger they presented to the Chandler family seems a little too exaggerated – after all, nothing terrible ever happened to Arvizos, didn’t it?  Even though their real names were displayed all over the internet? Despite the police efforts to conceal their identity and call them the fictitious Doe names up to the year 2005? Aha, so the police did try to provide witness protection for Arvizos? Which didn’t work much though – but in spite of that there was no harm ever done to the accusers’ family either then or now?

Ridiculous as it might seem but Ray Chandler CLAIMS in full seriousness that the DEATH THREATS  from Michael’s fans were the ONLY reason why the family REFUSED TO TESTIFY in court.

Thank you, Ray, for never saying a lie that the confidentiality agreement was in the way to your nephew’s testimony – evidently this version would have been so outrageous that it was too much even for Ray Chandler (though some haters are still praying to this theory). No, Ray Chandler named Jackson’s fans as the SOLE REASON for the family never going to court:

Good Morning America

December 6, 2004:

“One of the biggest myths that has been perpetrated since then is that the family refused [to cooperate with prosecutors],” Ray Chandler said in an exclusive interview today.

“They only refused because they requested protection. They wanted to be put in witness protection program, and that request was refused.”

The uncle of the alleged victim said the family decided not to pursue a criminal case against Jackson because of the multiple death threats received from his fans. The family, he said, was primarily concerned about its personal safety.

“Jackson fans had flown in from Europe and Los Angeles and had come to the father’s office, had phoned in bomb threats as late as April 1994, four months after it [the case] was settled,” Chandler said. “The father was forced to leave his dental practice because his staff and his partner would no longer allow him in there because fans were coming to the office. It was a very serious threat.”

“Michael could have made a statement asking his fans to back off,” Chandler said. “I’m sure he must have been aware of the pressure on the family. But I don’t think he was organizing it, no.”

Chandler said his nephew, who is now in his mid-20s, has recovered from his ordeal because he received a lot of therapy very quickly. “He dealt with that very quickly and he’s fine. … This family (in the current Jackson case) is being very well-protected, very well-sequestered. They are going to need protection after this is over, and they are going to need a lot of help.”

So Ray Chandler knows that the Arvizos are being very well-protected… But if the protection is so good THIS TIME why doesn’t Jordan Chandler testify NOW?

By the way Ray Chandler will also be subpoenaed to speak up at the 2005 trial (and by Michael’s defense team by the way). The defense will ask him to speak as a ‘custodian’ of valuable documents which he said his book was based on – but nothing came of it as far as I know, except that Ray Chandler complained to Diane Dimond about having been harassed by Michael’s lawyers.

In the TV “TODAY” interview below Ray Chandler does not yet know about his own future subpoena to the trial, but even without the need to answer that evidently difficult question for him he is clearly being uncomfortable about the plain and easy question why his nephew is refusing to testify in court.

In this interview Ray Chandler announces Jordan’s decision for the first time (I’ve tried to make a transcript of it as best as I could – please correct):


VIDEO see here:

March 28, 2005

Matt Lauer: Do you think the fact of that previous case should be admitted with the current trial?

Ray Chandler: Well, I think some of the fact should be submitted (?) to the judge… but there is some very damaging evidence. That is of course the reason why Michael Jackson settled. He likes to claim that, you know, he just wanted to get on with his life but as I detailed in my book, piece by piece, evidence by evidence, it was an amount of evidence which finally made him give up.

Q. If he were to testify in the current trial how damaging in your opinion would his words be?

A. Well, let me just say it here today that my nephew is not going to testify.

Q. Let’s talk about it, because we heard the reports that he did not want to testify but we’ve not heard any definitive statement on that.

A. Well, this is the definitive statement. He is not going to show up. He is out of the country where he cannot be found. He doesn’t want to be a Michael Jackson boy. He doesn’t want the involvement.

Q. So even if he is subpoenaed by the prosecution he will not return to this country to testify?

A. Whether the prosecution subpoenaes him or not, I don’t know, but I can tell you he’s not dropping (?) in for this trial.

Q. What are his reasons?

A. …He is sick of it. I’ll be honest with you, he’s hounded by the media, he’s had to move several times and because of being Michael Jackson’s… he doesn’t want to be the Michael Jackson kid any more.

Q. How do you feel about that decision?

A. ….I think his testimony would be crucial to this case.

Q. And have you spoken to him directly about that?

A. No, I have not.

Q. His parents, I would imagine have been in constant contact with him. How do they feel about it? How does the mother feel about it?

A. You know, I don’t know how his mother feels about it. I could tell you I am pretty sure his mother can be called to testify and give some very damaging evidence.

Q. What would she say?

A. She’s got to be able to place her son in the bedroom with Michael Jackson at about conservatively 50 or 60 nights, so this is not just an impromptu sleep, this is a relationship in her home for 30 nights, in Michael Jackson’s apartment in Los Angeles, at Neverland, in hotels in Las Vegas, New York, Paris, Monaco, every night, night after night alone in the bedroom, so that can be very damaging.

Q. Alone in the bedroom, spending time together. Did she ever witness any sexual act between Michael Jackson and her son?

A. To my knowledge, no.

Q. I’m curious. Your nephew doesn’t feel any obligation to testify even considering that perhaps it might prevent future victims?

A. I think it was probably a very tough decision for him to weigh both sides. But obviously the side that he doesn’t want to be involved and he doesn’t want to be the Michael Jackson boy, have the picture taken… obviously he wants to move on with his life.

Q. Does he feel any guilt about his decision.. does the family feel any guilt that perhaps had they testified in the criminal investigation or trial then this current case could have been avoided?

A. You know the decision was not really his at the time because he was a child. It was a family decision, the parents’ decision, but actually that’s one of the biggest myths that stuck around for 12 years – that they refused to testify in the criminal trial. Actually they agreed to testify in the criminal trial provided they’d be given witness protection. The death threats were so serious – you know, animals with their heads cut off left at the door, telephone threats coming in, people trying to get into the house, into the place of business, bomb threats… Last year a spokesperson for the LAD (?) office confirmed that in fact the request was made and then denied. Had it been approved and had they got the protection the criminal trial would have got forward.

Q. Michael Jackson’s side says that these cases are all about money. People try to get money from Michael Jackson. By now not agreeing or refusing to pariticipate in this current trial do you think your nephew risks that allegation cropping up again? That he was willing to settle out of court for money and was not willing to go to the criminal process?

A. Right. Of course this is an allegation. That’s one of the reasons I’d like him to testify and obviously to prevent other boys from spending night alone with Michael Jackson. That’s the most important thing. My nephew has his own concerns and they are a priority to him.

Q. Let’s  make sure we understand the headline that comes out of this interview. You’re guaranteeing that your nephew, the alleged victim in the 1993 sexual molestation case against Michael Jackson will refuse to testify in the current criminal trial?

A. That’s what I am saying. Barring piffany (?) on his part…sort of revelation that he’s wrong… change his mind.. but yes…

Q. He is not in the country at this point where the prosecution can try to reach him?

A. No, he is not.

ISN’ IT CLEAR now from both this interview and the talk with Josh Mankiewicz that there were negotiations with the family about their participating in the criminal process even after the settlement agreement and that they even “agreed to take part” in it according to Ray Chandler?

ISN’T IT SOMETHING NEW and DIFFERENT from what the prosecutor always told us that it wasn’t Jordan’s decision not to testify in the criminal investigation but the decision of his parents?

ISN’T IT RIDICULOUS to claim that the powerful District Attorney Tom Sneddon was unable to provide any ‘protection’ for the Chandlers from whatever people the family was afraid of  –  though he was in desperate need of Jordan’s testimony and repeatedly said that lack of cooperation on his part was the only reason why the criminal case fell apart in 1994?

ISN’T IT IMPORTANT for us to have a comfirmation, this time from Ray Chandler as a member of the family,  of what we’ve known all along – that June Chandler never saw anything suspicious between Michael and her son despite the recent ‘evidence’ obtained from our newly-emerging ‘witness’?

ISN’T IT FUNNY that the man who was supposed to talk neither to Jordan nor to his brother Evan “for a long time’ was selected as a spokesman for the family to officially announce the crucial news about his nephew’s decision not to go to court?

(to be continued)

39 Comments leave one →
  1. David permalink
    July 1, 2010 10:56 pm

    Hey, that was a good post! You should use those emails that I sent you on Ray’s book in part 2 of this post, because it shows that Evan certainly had the ability to drug Jordie with sodium amytal because he claims that he drugged MJ with Toradol as well!

    I hope you’ve been able to keep up with all of those emails! They have a lot of valuable information!


  2. Truth permalink
    July 1, 2010 11:17 pm

    “Actually they agreed to testify in the criminal trial provided they’d be given witness protection.”

    I find it very hard to believe that they would refuse to provide protection, especially where a child’s safety is at risk. And with all those millions you would think they could afford a bodyguard or two.

    “KING: So you think he didn’t bring the charges because?

    CHANDLER: No, I think he didn’t bring the charges because he did not feel that he could get a conviction against a man of that stature on the same evidence he could get against me or any normal person.”

    What kind of reason is that – isn’t he under an obligation to file charges if this is what he believes. More like he didn’t charge because of lack of evidence!

    “CHANDLER: They found, according to Morty North (ph) in the “Vanity Fair” article, hard-core commercially produced child pornography”

    How can you ‘commercially produce’ child pornogrphy – you can’t commercially produce anything illegal.

    “KING: You also had serious concerns about Anthony Pellicano, who is now in jail, the private detective for Michael Jackson? What did he do that concerned you?

    CHANDLER: …Now, he never went to the police and filed a charge. He never went to the police and gave them the tape.”

    Hmmm… maybe because he illegally taped these conversations – so why would he take them to the police?

    “CHANDLER: …He is out of the country where he cannot be found.”

    Well that’s funny, he was in the United States during the duration of the trial, he was in the United States when prosecutors attempted to get him to testify.

    “Michael could have made a statement asking his fans to back off,” Chandler said. “I’m sure he must have been aware of the pressure on the family. But I don’t think he was organizing it, no.”

    Why on earth would he want anything to do with them, what does he owe them – they seem to forget that they’re the ones that screwed him over!

    “….I think his testimony would be crucial to this case.”

    Well he can’t think it is that important because he himself refuses to testify!


  3. Incognito permalink
    July 1, 2010 11:29 pm

    @ Helena

    Great post as usual! I’ve been away so got alot of catching up to do!

    I’ve got one question, I have not read All That Glitters, so does Ray try to make out that Jordie is gay?
    >> “The book will be published in September 2004 and will contain sordid tales of Jordan’s alleged molestation as well as doubts about his sexual orientation.”

    Well I don’t think he is, he has a girlfriend. Does Ray think if he portrays him as gay people will think Michael molested him?!

    @ Truth

    You took the words right out of my mouth!


  4. David permalink
    July 2, 2010 12:11 am

    @ Incognito
    I have the book, and Evan was suspicious that both MJ and Jordie were gay, so he asked them both MJ and Jordie in order to confirm his suspicions.

    MJ woke up one morning and complained about having a massive headache, he asks Jordie to tell his dad that he needs medicine. While MJ is in the bedroom, Evan specifically asks Jordie “Are you and MJ doin’ it?” Jordie flatly denies it! What kind of father asks his son that, if he TRULY suspects something is going on? (And this was after he had already asked MJ if he was “screwing” Jordie several weeks earlier).

    Since his doctor was on vacation he wanted Evan to give him something very strong to deal with the pain. So Evan calls Dr. Torbiner, and he stops by and delivers Toradol to Evan, who then injects MJ with 60mg. MJ is sedated for the remainder of the day, and while under sedation Evan asks him if he’s gay, and MJ flatly denies it! Also, Evan checks up on MJ and Jordie 3 times that night, to make sure that MJ doesn’t wake up and try to take more Toradol on his own. It isn’t until the 3rd time that Evan checked on MJ that he allegedly catches him spooning with Jordie in the bed. So according to Evan, Jordie must have climbed in bed with MJ between the 2nd and 3rd time that Evan checked on them.


    I think that Evan & Dr. Torbiner used sodium amytal on MJ, and then asked him if he was gay. I don’t beleive that any sane doctor or dentist or whatever would use 60mg of Toradol to relieve a headache!

    One last thing: if there is any doubt in your mind that this was an extortion attempt, here is what Ray says verbatim on page 128:

    “Had Michael paid the twenty million dollars demanded of him in August, rather than the following January, he might have spent the next ten years as the world’s most famous entertainer, instead of the world’s most infamous child molester.”

    That says it all right there, folks!


  5. lynande51 permalink
    July 2, 2010 2:37 am

    Hi I have page 13 paragraph 11 a of the settlement:
    The Minor, by and through his Guardian ad Litem, Evan Chandler, June Chandler, the Minors attorneys of record in the Action and the Minors legal representatives, and each of them individually and on behalf of their respectives agents , attorneys, media representatives, partners, heirs, administrators, executors, conservators, successors and assigns agree to keep the terms of the conditions of this Confidential Settlement strictly confidential. Each of the aforementioned individuals agrees that they will not at any time disclose any information concerning the contents of this Confidential Settlement to anyone, including, without limitation any investigator ( current or former ) ,expert or consultant hired in connection with the Action, representatives of any media, family member and friends; provided however, that the Parties may make disclosures as may be necessary or required by law to tax advisors,in connection with the Settlement Payment to the Minor as provided in paragraphs 3.a (1)-(5) hereinabove.
    What does this paragraph mean? Theyweren’t supposed to talk to their family members about the settlement. If he didn’t talk to Ray about this how did Ray get the information? Was it written down for him?


  6. Suzy permalink
    July 2, 2010 8:39 am

    Ray Chandler is full of contradictions.

    He says Jordan doesn’t testify because he’s had enough of being viewed as “Michael Jackson’s boy”. Yet, it doesn’t stop Ray from publishing a book which will do exactly that: positioning Jordan as “Michael Jackson’s boy”.

    As for the Chandlers not testifying in 1994 because they weren’t granted witness protection: I don’t buy that at all!

    I don’t buy that Tom Sneddon wouldn’t have done ANYTHING for these people to testify – and I’m sure he could have and would have put them in the witness protection program, if that had been the only obstacle for them. Remember, this is the same DA who put an awful lot of tax money into these cases, and an awful lot of effort to see MJ behind bars. I can’t imagine that then he would deny such a simple and easy thing as witness protection from the Chandlers.

    BTW, Jackson fans were by far the least dangerous people in Jordan’s life as shown by the fact his own father attempted to kill him in 2006.


  7. July 2, 2010 9:54 am

    Guys, thank you very much for your contributions.
    Lynande, I completely overlooked point 11 in the agreement mentioning family and friends and have now included it into the post (thanks!!!).

    The biggest problem with me is that I haven’t got the book and have to quote other people’s quotations. I did find 17 pages of it as a Google advertisement (which was very valuable), but this is not much, you understand. Not that I terribly want to read it – this is just a necessity as while reading the Chandlers you see SO MANY DISCREPANCIES that the whole thing turns into something completely laughable.

    Suzy, I think the family is full not only of contradictions but of LIES in the first place. And this is what makes them contradict their own and each other’s statements – when you lie lots of things do not match, you forget what you said before, you forget what other people were supposed to lie, etc.

    David, I am so sorry again – time is an absolutely critical factor for me – I wish each day could be 48 hours – sorry again… When you say (repeating Ray Chandler’s story) that “one day” Michael woke up, etc. please immediately stop and ask a question – WHEN EXACTLY? The thing with these Chandlers is that they are so carried away with their stories that if you try to cram them into the period of Michael’s “relations” with Jordan you will hardly find any time for it.

    I know that Michael stayed at Evan’s home (in May) on two weekends only, so this makes 4-5 days at the most. And Evan saw Jordan getting into Michael’s bed on the last day of his stay there, is that correct? So let us speak no more of “one day this and that happened” – it is fairy tales only which start with “once upon a time”. Though Ray Chandler’s book IS a fairy tale or a fiction story (even with the cast of characters provided on the 1st page of it as if it were a script!).

    If only I had the book the first thing I would do would be to make an exact timeline for each day he describes there. I bet you will be amazed at the result…


  8. Susan permalink
    July 2, 2010 12:06 pm

    Hi Everyone;

    So when Jordan Chandler was requested to testify by the FBI agent (as per the FBI released files) at Michael’s 2005 trial, it does not mention that he asked to be placed in the witness protection program at that time. Perfect opportunity to do so I would think.

    From 1993 to 2005, I am not aware of any incidence of harassment or attack on this family, and from 2005 to present either. The only attack I was aware of was Evan trying to harm Jordan. Was it public knowledge of where they lived or what they looked like? I think Ray Chandler is a bit of drama queen. If he was that concerned, then what’s he doing showing his mug on every available media program drawing attention to himself and his family.


  9. lynande51 permalink
    July 2, 2010 4:11 pm

    Actually according to their book the first physical meeting that Michael and Evan had was on May 22nd at his Century City condo. This is when he asks Michael if he is “f****** my son up the**”. He had picked Jordan up at June’s house and gone there to meet Michael. The next day was Nikki’s (Jordan’s half brother) birthday. Michael did not attend the birthday party but he visited later in the day when the boy’s, Evan and Michael had a water gun fight in the backyard. Michael and Jordan went to June’s house that night. The next day Jordan, who had a history of asthma according to his father was sick with a cold when Evan called and he rushed over, with his stethoscope to listen to lungs and found Michael in there taking care of him. Michael was very protective of Jordan according to Evan, in the book, and this somehow made Evan even more suspicious of their relationship, because he thought he was too attentive to Jordan when he was sick. Their timeline is off if a person just pays attention to the chapter headings which are actually dates. The next weekend was memorial weekend in 1993 and Michael spent the night at Evans house that weekend and it was the second night of the stayover that he was given “Toradol” for his headache. It was that night after checking on them 3 times and finally the last time at 3 am he found Jordan in Michael’s bed. Michael actually only spent 2-3 nights at the home of Evan Chandler, not 2-3 weekend or several nights as is their premise. The amount of time is a complete fabrication on their part to make it appear as if Michael was on Jordan all the time.


  10. lynande51 permalink
    July 2, 2010 4:28 pm

    When he was talking to Josh M., Ray says they tape recorded their conversations to preserve IDEAS, in order to preserve what had happened. Why do you need ideas when your talking about the truth? The truth is not and idea, it is the truth. this man was/is a buffoon.


  11. Incognito permalink
    July 2, 2010 11:06 pm

    Thanks David!

    Evan was so full of sh** – if he had these suspicions then why the hell would he allow Michael to be alone with Jordie.

    I think the key thing to remember is the Pellicano tape transcripts that Lex provided in her post:

    Back when only Evan was accusing Michael, Jordan said he was only doing this because “…my dad’s trying to get money”

    Therefore, I know think that Evan didn’t really think that Michael was molesting his son at all and that money was on his mind from the beginning.


  12. Rosa permalink
    July 3, 2010 4:28 am

    Thank you for all the good stuff, in Mexico we think Michael was a nice man, and many of us women loved him. but did he sleep with a little girl?…..and is Warner Chappell part of Nichael’s history?


  13. lynande51 permalink
    July 3, 2010 5:20 am

    Warner Chappel is the name of a music publishing company.


  14. bnepi permalink
    July 3, 2010 8:54 am

    I’m in Mexico, and some of the Michael Jackson stories here, center around His murder being a big music business conspiracy……This line of thought is in part about race, and anti semitic anger at the music and film industry, being “run by Jews” …….but there are many Italians, and Germans, in the music business, but no reason to hate them, so they don’t count…..The sleeping with a girl thing is from NBC 2004, and is true, there is even some record of this, but the paper work was shredded or just thrown away, but several Neverland people have said it is true…..I hope this information will not offend anyone…it is all just things you can find online, and you don’t have to believe it…..Warner Chappell Music did manage the MIJAC catalog, for Michael Jackson, for many years….


  15. Suzy permalink
    July 3, 2010 10:12 am

    Brian (Rose, bnepi)

    No matter how many names you use that won’t make your fairy tales more believable!


  16. bnepi permalink
    July 3, 2010 10:51 am

    I’m not commenting on anything against MJ….I just found the question interesting…..the anti-semitic element of all major news stories, is of interest to me….I have nothing to say about Michael Jackson and his 1993 problems….


  17. lynande51 permalink
    July 3, 2010 6:04 pm

    Brian, don’t you think we can recognize your initials, we are all pretty smart people here.


  18. bnepi permalink
    July 3, 2010 8:18 pm

    I want to get information about the MJ movement, but one thing made it hard to do…my work on the 1993 case, so I don’t speak about that….when I stopped speaking about the 1993 case, I started using bnepi, but I didn’t think it would fool anyone….I want to know, and this group is the best place to learn it..”why is it so important, for the MJ fan’s, to say that MJ was not gay?”….


  19. Suzy permalink
    July 3, 2010 8:58 pm


    The question is more: why is it so important for you to say he was? Are you gay or what? You sure seem to be obsessed with the topic.

    And why is it important for you to spread lies about MJ and say he was having sex with little boys – and now also with little girls? And you have the nerve to call that “defending him”?

    And all your BS bla-bla about the Jews and so on.

    At least you could present us a coherent story but you aren’t even able to do that, honestly you sound like somebody on crack, and you wonder why nobody takes you seriously?

    Anyway, you are more than exposed as a liar and an attention seeker, so will you please spare us of your fairy tales and go away? Maybe your buddies at MJ Files are more willing to buy your fantasies than people here.


  20. Suzy permalink
    July 3, 2010 9:04 pm

    And Brian,

    if you didn’t want to fool us with your new nicknames then why did you also change gender under the name “Rose”?


  21. bnepi permalink
    July 3, 2010 9:26 pm

    Suzy I’m not “Rosa”….But I do live 50% of the time in Mexico….the RV parks are like small towns, and we share one WIFI system…and we all use the WIFI, at McDonald’s…but I’m not rosa!….and I think you know that…”why is it so important who is asking?…the question was: “why is it so important, for you to say MJ was not gay” ???


  22. Suzy permalink
    July 3, 2010 10:24 pm

    You are Rosa, and you know that, Brian. The same typos, the same style, the same use of punctuation, the same statements….

    Stop lying, you won’t fool anyone here!


  23. Kathy permalink
    July 3, 2010 11:06 pm

    This is BNEpi’s wife….if he is Rosa, then I must be gay….yes we use the same computer..[in our motor home]…it is time for you or some else, on this good site, to answer us……………….is it important, to the “Veritas Project”, if MJ was gay?…and if it is important, why?…please we would like to hear what you have to tell us….thank you for your answer.


  24. lynande51 permalink
    July 4, 2010 4:49 am

    Good Lord you underestimate us. How stupid do you think we are? Brian we are not interested in you, so don’t be interested in us, all you do is take up space.


  25. Kathy permalink
    July 4, 2010 4:52 am

    Thank You for Your answer… says it all…


  26. July 5, 2010 10:40 am

    “This is BNEpi’s wife….if he is Rosa, then I must be gay….yes we use the same computer”

    Kathy, Bnepi, Rosa – I didn’t know that the job of an admin was such a thrill. The wordpress system indicates to me that all the three of you have one and the same IP address/computer. Brian’s was slightly different but the first 6 digits are the same too – so it must be the same country and town to say the very least…

    What impresses me most is that Michael’s supporters have seen through all the three(four) of you immediately. The need to fight our way through the jungles of all these lies is a true way to turn us into a team of near-professional investigators! Great job, guys!


  27. July 5, 2010 11:47 am

    In reply to bnepi/kathy/rose’s question “Why is it so important, for you to say MJ was not gay?”:

    I would answer that it is important for us to know the TRUTH about Michael Jackson. And the truth is that he wasn’t gay no matter what anyone would prefer to hear. There are numerous facts to prove the point – the latest one was provided by Ray/Evan Chandler who said Evan asked Michael a direct question ‘stroking his hair’ when he was sedated by Toradol (or sodium amythal, or whatever) and Michael said he wasn’t gay though he mentioned someone in the music industry who was.

    What is more important though is that Michael said he wasn’t gay straight in the face of everyone who asked him this question – so why would anyone still doubt it I don’t know. In a society where ‘being gay’ is nothing special (an orientation, hobby, fashion, fun, distinction, pride, high class, etc.) I see no reason why anyone would keep it a secret at all. He would have been loved by everyone if he had said anything like that…

    The fact that Michael was not gay is also important for our investagation – WHY is Dr. Klein LYING about it? Is it because he wants to explain some of Michael’s visits to his office which he won’t otherwise be able to account for? No medical records made on those days and so on?

    (just an idea, but there must be something standing behind that lie)


  28. Suzy permalink
    July 5, 2010 12:30 pm


    I thought the same about Klien’s lie. This was actually the first thought on my mind the first time Pfeiffer came out with this story in an Australian tabloid paper last summer. I think it has to do with the fact Klein is investigated by the authorites and they need an “alibi”, so they throw MJ under the bus for it. Here is a recent article:

    The first time Pfeiffer came out with his lie noone seemed to care, so they went on shopping around with their story (TMZ admitted they too were approached by them with the story, but they refused to publish it at the time). Then they found a stupid enough junior jurnalist at Extra, who was willing to give them airtime. That’s when it became more publicized.

    The very fact they are in the tabloids, shopping around with this story exposes them as liars. They have the nerve to claim that MJ would have approved what they are doing. Anybody who knows just a little bit about MJ knows how passionatly he hated tabloids! (And how much he hated to be called gay, BTW.)

    I also noticed how contradictory and insecure they were about MJ’s sexuality:

    Pfeiffer said “I THINK he was bisexual.” Think? So you don’t KNOW? Considering he claimed they were “soulmates” it’s pretty strange not to know even such a basic thing about your lover. Then Klein at TMZ. First he claimed “he was gay”. Then a couple of sentences later he said: “I’m not aware of him having other homosexual relationships before this”. So which one is true? By this wavering and by I had the impression that they both know too well that MJ was NOT gay at all! Nor bisexual. Maybe they even know about girlfriends and because of the risk that someone of them may pop up and refute their claims they had to say he was bi, instead of gay. Or that this was his first ever gay relationship. Yeah, right.

    It’s also too convenient from them to claim that MJ (who even according to Klein never had another gay relationship before) suddenly turns gay in the last months of his life and all that for the sake of this ugly and fat guy? So doesn’t it sound a bit too convenient for Klein and his “alibi” for why MJ visited his office so often in his last months?

    (Even in the duration of the relationship Pfeiffer and Klein contradicted each other BTW, Pfeiffer said it lasted since 2008 ’til his death, while Klein claimed it lasted in the last 2 months of his life.)

    Alternatively, they are just lying why so many other people lie about MJ in the tabloids: money and/or attention. I think it’s probably a little bit of all of the above.


  29. July 25, 2010 11:47 pm

    Your articles are very very informative.

    I thank you all for all of this hard work.


  30. lynande51 permalink
    July 26, 2010 2:12 am

    I read another story on Anthony Pellicano’s website today where they were supposed to get witness protection but it was Jordan that refused it when he learned they might have to live like prisoners.Seems like there are so many, many, many stories out there. Can’t this family get anything right? They should have taken notes. Wait! I’m sorry they did take notes didn’t they.


  31. lynande51 permalink
    July 26, 2010 2:18 am

    Oh I forgot to add that the article was in …. (just letting it sizzle like MJ would say) Vanity Fair by none other than Maureen Orth. You know the one that thought she was the second greatest Michael Jackson expert after Diane Demon.


  32. David permalink
    July 26, 2010 7:19 am

    Hey, I found some more dirt on that episode of Dateline NBC! The reason that it seems like it came from tabloid trash is because IT REALLY DID COME FROM TABLOID TRASH!

    They interviewed the author f the book “Freak!”, which is literally a compilation of tabloid articles from the Star, the Globe, and the National Enquirer. There are some other examples that are listed in the article, and after you read it you’ll realize that NBC sunk to an all time low. They produced that episode with Victor Guiterrez in order to make MJ look guilty, so it’s only fitting that they would hire Martin Bashir. Remember, Tim Russert, who was the host of “Meet The Press” and had a lot of influence at NBC, was married to Maureen Orth. They also hired the ex-sheriff of Santa Barbara, Jim Thomas, as an analyst.

    NBC is infested with MJ haters!

    Another thing that is interesting about this episode is that NBC offered MJ $5 million dollars, and the cancellation of this episode, if he would do an interview with them in Feb. 2003, after the Bashir doc. debacle. MJ refused, so they retaliated by extending it to 2 hours!,2933,78862,00.html

    This was talked about this in more detail in this blog entry. Check it out!


  33. July 27, 2010 2:35 pm

    I think all of those people: The chandlers, Msnbc, The Arvizo’s, Tom sneddon, And Diane Diamond, all made his life a living hell! I wish Michael never met those two families. But his car went foop! and he needed servicing. See how fate is?

    I Appreciate all of the research that goes into this site. I am an mj fan, but even more of a fan who wants him to be left alone by his haters, and loather’s. He deserve’s peace.

    Best of luck to your site. I hope people come here and get a better understanding of what he had to go through. Not as a superstar, but as a human being with his life on the line.


  34. July 27, 2010 7:51 pm

    “Best of luck to your site.”
    Denise, thank you very much – this blog does need luck, same as all Michael’s fans.

    Please have a look at my “Breaking news” page – it is about Charles Thomson and new hate techonologies they subjected him to. Beware, dear Michael’s fans – haters are capable of anything, just anything…


  35. August 11, 2010 12:43 am

    Please check out this link: It seems that Evan laid great plans for promoting himself and Jordie due to the fact that his film Robin Hood Men in Tights was released around the same time. He was hoping to gain alot of interest from Hollywood. However the film was a big flop. Just two months later he gained the fame he craved by accusing an innocent man of the most heinous crime possible by using his son and ensuring that both he and the canny imaginative Jordie played the starring role in this great epic as both victims against the great evil. It was all part of his script. He clearly did not forsee the tragic ending for both Michael Jackson and himself. I hope the greedy vengeful bastard rots in hell.,1772293&dq=evan+ch


  36. Suzy permalink
    August 11, 2010 10:49 am

    @ Maria

    Sorry, but I’m not sure what we are supposed to see under that link.


  37. lynande51 permalink
    August 11, 2010 3:55 pm

    It is a newspaper clipping of a press release by someone about Evan and Jordie writing Robin Hood Men In Tights. Quite interesting I think. It shows that they were not amateurs when it came to the press either, how about that!


  38. Suzy permalink
    August 11, 2010 5:20 pm

    Thanks. I tried with another browser and now I can see it.

    Like someone pointed out some time ago “Men in Tights” is full of sexual references, so Jordi was not at all unfamiliar with things like this even at the age of 11, before he even met MJ.


  39. July 24, 2012 5:26 am

    Because this belongs here.

    Message from Ms. Geraldine Hughes author of book Redemption.

    “Redemption: The Movie project is underway and key players are coming to the table for production, director, casting agent, and budget. It’s time to clear Michael Jackson’s name of those horrible allegations for once and for all and protect his legacy. It’s time for that the untold story regarding the extortion scheme be told. It’s time for Redemption: The Movie 2013.”

    Between W. Wagener and Ms. Hughes I’d think some would begin to feel a squeeze. .
    Now all that is need is a documentary beginning with Bashir and some scenes showing how easy it is to manipulate film and which carries through the Grand Jury and Michael’s indictment. I already have a name picked out “False Justice A False Indictment”


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: