Skip to content

Ray Chandler SUBPOENA. Scared to death by the need to prove his lies in court

July 21, 2010

Guys, we are starting really serious business which will require our full attention now. The matter I’m referring to is Ray Chandler subpoena served on him by Michael Jackson’s defense team and Ray Chandler’s refusal to testify at the 2005 trial.

Since some people are new here I see that this announcement does not ring a bell with them – so let me point out the main reasons why this discovery is so crucial to us:

1)     Neither Jordan nor his father Evan Chandler ever gave their testimony in court – both in 1993 and in 2004/05 when they had a second (and perfect) chance to do it. This fact immediately raises questions about the veracity of their stories about Michael Jackson. Jordan Chandler’s  unwillingness to testify was so strong that when approached by the police in 2004 he said somewhat mysteriously that ‘he had done his part’ and would sue them if they insisted on his testimony.

2)     The only person who did testify in 2005 was June Chandler. However, she had never seen any molestation and could not say anything definite about her son’s alleged abuse. She was so also secretive about her part in that story that she even claimed she had “never sued Jackson” though her signature is found under the confidentiality agreement settling the case in 1994. Following that agreement the parties were not supposed to speak to the media, though they could very well speak in court (which she did, while her son and former husband Evan Chandler never did).

3)     Jordan’s uncle Ray Chandler is a complete opposite of the rest of the Chandlers. He has always been exceptionally talkative about his nephew’s alleged molestation and spoke about it on numerous TV shows – which was exactly the period when the criminal investigation against Jackson was in full swing (2004-2005).

4)     Despite the exact clauses of the agreement saying otherwise Ray Chandler didn’t consider himself covered by the confidentiality agreement and wrote a tell-all book about the case when the ink was not yet dry on said agreement.

5)     Ray Chandler claimed that the book told nothing but the truth as it was based on ‘authentic’ documents (legal documents signed by the Chandlers’ lawyer Rothman, various recordings, etc.)

6)     His book “All That Glitters: The Crime And The Cover-up” was published on September 12, 2004.

7)     A week later, on September 19, 2004 Michael Jackson’s defense team subpoenaed Ray Chandler as a “custodian of documents” on the basis of which the book was written with the idea to examine them in court. The subpoena was called “Duces Tecum” which means that the subpoena requests “the evidence (documents) be brought with the person”.

8)     Everyone would expect Ray Chandler to jump at the chance to present his documents to the jury to finally nail down the “predator” and have him imprisoned for the rest of his life, but….

9)   … but then astrange thing happened. Instead of collecting his documents and rushing with them to court Ray Chandler first asked for a 20 days extension of the period within which he was obliged to respond to the subpoena. In the meantime he (a lawyer himself) turned to a law firm which subsequently made an objection to the subpoena, supporting their case by a whole set of arguments totaling some 70 pages – all of them to the effect that it was absolutely impossible and totally unnecessary for Ray Chandler to go to court and submit his priceless documents there.

10)  This was followed by a good deal of motions (requests) between Michael Jackson’s defense team and Ray Chandler’s lawyers on the subject of why it was impossible and unnecessary for Ray Chandler to appear in court.

11)  In the end it was Ray Chandler who won. Not only was his subpoena quashed (declared invalid) but his request for putting his subpoena under seal was also met, so that the People were never to know that Ray Chandler had everbeen summoned to testify in court.

12) So now Ray Chandler was free again to make his rounds of the TV shows,  promoting his book based on ‘serious research’ and ‘genuine documents’ and dwelling on ‘unspeakable crimes’ committed by Michael Jackson. There was absolutely no need to prove either of the points now – the public didn’t know about the hushed-up subpoena and kept applauding dear old Ray for the ‘truth told’ about that awful ‘predator’. Happy end for Ray Chandler.

Here are the samples of the applause from the Amazon readers for Ray Chandler’s masterpiece (please note the admiration these people have for the ‘factual’ side of the story which is exactly the thing which the author so categorically refused to prove in court):

Reader C.Kelly:

  • “Finally the facts behind the original molestation charges against Michael Jackson come out in a book written by lawyer, Raymond Chandler, who is also the boy’s uncle. Written by one who observed it all, Chandler gives a fascinating but fact driven narrative of how the events played out in 1993. The facts: from the sleepovers, the Jesus juice, the almost near possession of the boy by M.J. to the powerful negative media blitz by the Jackson PR team against the family. This sounds all too familiar 12 years later.  Great page turner with the facts to back it up”.

Reader Raimond Baine:

  • “This book will probably be better known as “The Book MJ never wanted you to read.” The truth hurts and there seems to be a lot of truths in this book. I visited the website atgbook and read some of the documents that back-up Mr. Chandler’s claims, very strong stuff. I only wish his nephew would testify. Why is it when someone writes a book so strong the opposition always comes out with the same tired stuff…”You only wrote it for money”, think of something new to say that has some meaning”.

Think of something NEW to say that has some MEANING? Well, since you are asking, here is a documentary saga which shows the way Ray Chandler fought tooth and nail for the right to NEVER HAVE TO TESTIFY AND PROVE HIS LIES IN COURT.

The first document is Ray Chandler’s response to the Defendant Michael Jackson’s subpoena which is explaining to Jordan’s uncle what exactly he is requested to submit together with his persona:

DOCUMENT 1:

http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/102504verobjsnonpty.pdf

October 25, 2004

The people of the State of California (Plaintiff) vs. Michael Jackson (Defendant)

Verified Objections by Non party Raymond Chandler to Defendant’s Subpoena Duces Tecum

Assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Rodney S. Melville

Hearing Date: November 4, 2004

REQUEST NO.1:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussion or mentioning Jordan Chandler’s relationship with Michael Jackson since January 1, 1992 (though they met only in May 1992).

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.1:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that: (a) the request is overboard and burdensome in that the majority of these documents – numbering in the hundreds of pages – are newspaper and magazine articles and court pleadings; (b) these documents are public documents readily available to the defendant; (c) to the extent that any of these documents are unpublished they are protected from compelled production by the journalists shield law.

(“A shield law” is a law that gives reporters some means of protection against being forced to disclose confidential information or sources in state court. There is no federal shield law and state shield laws vary in scope. In general, however, a shield law aims to provide the classic protection of, “a reporter cannot be forced to reveal his or her source” law. Depending on the jurisdiction, the privilege may be total or qualified, and it may also apply to other persons involved in the news-gathering and dissemination process as well, such as an editor or a publisher).

To the extent that these documents are not newspaper or magazine articles or court pleadings readily available to the defendant, and are not protected from compelled production by the journalists shield law, production will be allowed subject to this Courts ruling on the Motion to Quash filed concurrently with these Objections and this Court’s in camera review of the documents.

(“In camera”: In camera is a Latin term meaning “in chambers”. It refers to a hearing or discussions with the judge in the privacy of his chambers (office rooms) or when spectators and jurors have been excluded from the courtroom. An in camera examination may be made of confidential or sensitive information to determine whether to introduce it to the jury and make it part of public record).

REQUEST NO.2

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any contract, consulting agreement, joint venture agreement, employment relationship, or services arrangement between you and Tellem Worldwide.

(Tellem Worldwide is a Century City-based publicity and public relations agency founded in 1994, Los Angeles, USA. The company provides media relations, event planning, and video/multimedia production to the health care, biotechnology, and consumer products industries, as well as to entertainment firms, restaurants, and non-profit organizations. It also offers crisis management advice to such clients as the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office in the Michael Jackson case. Other clients have included Clear Channel Communications, UCLA Medical Center, and Marriott. The agency is owned by MTA Films Entertainment, which gives Tellem access to a video editing facility complete with cameras, lighting gear, and other audio-visual equipment)

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.2:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that the documents requested are irrelevant to the issues in this case.

Notwithstanding said objections, Raymond Chandler is unable to comply with Request No.2 because no such documents have ever existed. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in an effort to comply with this demand.

REQUEST NO.3:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any communication, correspondence, notes, letters, memoranda, or discussion between you and Tellem Worldwide since January 1, 1992, or any of their representatives.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.3:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that (a) the documents requested are irrelevant to the issues in this case and (b) will not reasonable lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

(“Admissible evidence” is evidence which can be brought forward in a court of law to support or undermine a legal case. In order to be considered admissible, evidence must meet certain standards, with the standards being especially high in criminal cases. Concerns about admissible evidence are very important to the people who investigate crimes. They want to make sure that the evidence they handle is carefully documented and secured so that it can be used in court. For evidence to be reliable enough to be admitted, the party proffering the evidence must be able to show that the source of the evidence makes it so).

Notwithstanding said objections, Raymond Chandler is unable to comply with Request No.3 because no such documents have ever existed. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in an effort to comply with this demand.

REQUEST NO.4:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any communication, correspondence, notes, letters, memoranda, or discussion between you and any person, business, or other entity since January 1, 1992, where Michael Jackson has been mentioned or discussed.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.4:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that (a) the request is overbroad and burdensome; (b) are an invasion of privacy; (c) to the extent that any of these documents are unpublished they are protected from compelled production by the journalists shield law; and (d) will not reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

REQUEST NO.5:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning anycommunication, correspondence, notes, letters, memoranda, or discussion between you and enforcement agency, governmental entity, police personnel, sheriff’s personnel, child protective services personnel or any of their representatives, whether federal, state, or local, since Januray 1, 1992, where Michael Jackson or Jordan Chandler has been mentioned or discussed.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.5:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that they are not relevant to the subject matter at hand in that none of these documentation contain any information regarding any claims of child molestation or defenses of such claims.

REQUEST NO.6:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any compensation, payment, expense reimbursement, cancelled checks or other evidence of payment, for any speech, writing, manuscript, book, performance, consultation service, work, labor, or other assistance you have provided to any person where the subject matter of Michael Jackson or Jordan Chandler was discussed, mentioned, or involved.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.6:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that (a) the request is overbroad and burdensome; (b) are an invasion of privacy; (c) are irrelevant to the issues in this case; and (d) will not reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

Raymond Chandler is unable to comply with Request No.6 because no such documents have ever existed. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in an effort to comply with this demand.

REQUEST NO.7:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any discussions, letters, notes, communications, contracts, agreements, or correspondence between you and Jordan Chandler, or any of his representatives, where the subject of Michael Jackson was discussed or mentioned since January 1, 1992.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.7:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that (a) the request is overbroad and burdensome; (b) are an invasion of privacy; (c) to the extent that any of these documents are unpublished they are protected from compelled production by the journalists shield law; and (d) will not reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

Raymond Chandler is unable to comply with Request No.6 because no such documents have ever existed. A diligent search and reasonable inquiry has been made in an effort to comply with this demand.

REQUEST NO.8:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any discussions, letters, notes, communications, contracts, agreements, or correspondence between you and Evan Chandler, or any of his representatives, where the subject of Michael Jackson or Jordan Chandler was discussed or mentioned since January 1, 1992.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.8:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that (a) the request is overbroad and burdensome; (b) are an invasion of privacy; (c) to the extent that any of these documents are unpublished they are protected from compelled production by the journalists shield law; and (d) will not reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

REQUEST NO.9:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any manuscripts, manuscript, drafts, research notes, interview notes, interview audio and video recordings, correspondence with witnesses, and discussions with witnesses concerning or relating to the book “All that Glitters: The Crime and the Cover-up” by Raymond Chandler.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.9:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that (a) the request is overbroad and burdensome; (b) are an invasion of privacy; (c) to the extent that any of these documents are unpublished they are protected from compelled production by the journalists shield law; and (d) will not reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

REQUEST NO.10:

ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any contract, agreement, or arrangement for the printing, distribution, promotion, or sale of the book “All that Glitters: The Crime and the Cover up” by Raymond Chandler.

RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.10:

Raymond Chandler objects to producing these documents on the grounds that: (1) they are not relevant to the subject matter at hand in that none of these documentation contain any information regarding any claims or defenses to the action; (b) production of these documents is an invasion of privacy in that they reveal personal financial information.

Dated 10/25/2004

Law office of Herb Fox,

Herb Fox, Attorney for Non-Party Raymond Chandler

(Raymond Chandler declares in the “Verification” document that under penalty of perjury the foregoing is true and correct.)

*   *   *

A couple of notes on the above document:

  • Let me remind you of the astonishing fact that it is the DEFENSE team which is summoning Ray Chandler to submit all those documents in court. If Michael Jackson felt ‘guilty’ in any way submission of the documents testifying to his alleged guilt would be the last thing his party would be interested in. If THEY insist on these documents it means they are sure of their case and expect them to fully exonerate Michael Jackson.
  • In his TV appearances Ray Chandler always spoke about some  documents proving his case, however here he refers to “hundreds of newspaper and magazine articles or public documents readily available to the Defendant”. Does it mean that he has nothing else than newspaper cuts from the tabloid press?
  • The unpublished material is “protected by the journalists shield law”. Does Ray Chandler mean to say he is a journalist protected by the shield law from disclosing his sources of information?
  • Everything else he has is suggested for “in-camera” discussion only which is to be done in the privacy of the judge’s office rooms and where spectators and jurors will not be present. Interesting point… Especially if you consider that all the documents laying the basis for his book are displayed in a supplement to it in full view of the general public. Why all this discrimination for the jury then? Why can’t they see the documents too?
  • No wonder the Defense asked Ray Chandler about Tellem Worldwide. Michael Jackson’s team evidently had reasons to believe that  Ray Chandler was connected with this public relations agency,  conveniently founded exactly in 1994 (when the criminal investigation was still going on against MJ after the confidentiality agreement was signed). The Tellem agency says that they “offered crisis management advice to such clients as the Santa Barbara District Attorney’s office in the Michael Jackson case”. Why the prosecution would require a public relations agency is beyond my understanding – unless they wanted to make a worldwide show of it, of course? Ray Chandler naturally denied any connection…
  • As to law enforcement bodies Ray Chandler does not say he hasn’t had any communication with them – no, he only objects to producing the documents as they are not relevant to the case because “none of these documents contain any information regarding any claims of child molestation”. None of them are relevant? And none of them contain claims of child molestation? This is something new… So the Chandlers never made any claims that Jordan Chandler had ever been molested?
  • When asked by the Defense about his communication with Jordan and Evan Chandler and all the video and interview materials for the book “All that Glitters” Ray Chandler replies with a full cannonade of legal terminology – the request is “overbroad” (vague and not specific), invades privacy, is protected by the journalists shield law and will not lead to “the discovery of admissible evidence”.

The last point was not clear to me, so I looked up “admissible evidence” in Law encyclopedia. To tell you frankly, saying that something “would not make an admissable evidence” seemed to me an elegant and admirable way to say that you are not sure of your evidence at all.

The encyclopedia says that “admissible evidence” should meet two conditions – be relevant to the case and be reliable. As to it being relevant I have no doubts about it but as to its reliability… Doesn’t Ray Chandler admit it himself that even if he presents his documents they will not lead to the discovery of admissible evidence? Which, in plain language, means that the ‘reliability’ of his documents is such that it is better for the court not to see them?

Yes, all these maneuvers show that Ray Chandler was terribly unwilling to testify in court in order to prove that his book was based on authentic documents. The effort he took to avoid this sudden difficulty was simply unprecedented.

A mere annulment of the subpoena was no good for him either – it was necessary that no one should ever know at all that he had ever been subpoenaed, and in order to reach this noble goal Ray Chandler resorted to an extreme measure – he approached his opponent, Michael Jackson and his defense team for protection.

The thing is that there was a certain Protective Order for those witnesses who were subpoenaed by the Defense. I don’t know the reason for that Order (my guess is that some people were probably hesitant in taking part in that nightmare, and this order was a sort of a protection for their privacy).

Whatever the case the Protective Order said,

  • “Persons or entities subpoenaed by the Defendant shall not disclose directly or indirectly to the People the fact that they have been subpoenaed or the nature of the subpoena. Any appearance, objection, compliance, or other communication by a party subpoenaed by the Defendant shall be filed under seal” (not disclosed).

And our big lawyer Raymond Chandler was quick enough to find shelter under this very Protective order – which naturally included him too as he was also subpoenaed by the Defense. 

The above paradox is stated in the document provided below (don’t be afraid – this will be all for today).

DOCUMENT 2

http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/docs/ctdocs/102504appsealwonotpeop.pdf

October 25, 2004

The people of the State of California (Plaintiff) vs. Michael Jackson (Defendant)

Application to File Under Seal and Without Notice to the People;

Hearing Date: November 4, 2004

Judge: Honorable Rodney S. Melville

Raymond Chandler, a non-party to this proceeding, hereby submits this application for an order allowing him to file under seal a Notice of Motion and Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum served on him by the Defendant Michael Jackson, and allowing him to file that Application without notice to the People.

On or about September 19, 2004 Raymond Chandler was served, in his capacity as a custodian of records, with a Supoena Duces Tecum and related documents. The response to the Subpoena is due on October 25, 2004 at 9:00 a.m., in Dept. SM-2.

On July 9, 2004 the Superior Court, the Hon. Judge Rodney Melville presiding, issued a Protective Order Regarding Defendant’s Subpoenas Duces Tecum, a copy of which was attached to the subpoena identified herein as Exhibit 1. That Protective Order states, in part:

“3. Persons or entities subpoenaed by the Defendant shall not disclose directly or indirectly to the People the fact that they have been subpoenaed or the nature of the subpoena.

4. Any appearance, objection, compliance, or other communication by a party subpoenaed by the Defendant shall be filed under seal”.

Attached to this Application is a proposed Order.

Date 10/25/2004

LAW OFFICE OF HERB FOX,

Herb Fox,

Attorney for Raymond Chandler

*     *     *

If you haven’t read any of the above here is the gist in a couple of sentences:

  • Michael Jackson subpoenaed Ray Chandler as a ‘custodian of documents’ which laid the basis of his book politely requesting him to prove his lies in court.
  • Ray Chandler refused to do it under various pretexts and sought refuge from Michael Jackson’s subpoena under the rules protecting Michael’s own witnesses.
  • The WAY Ray Chandler managed to avoid testifying in court is not important to us. What is crucial is that he fought for this right NOT TO PRODUCE  his documents for court examination in a fierce manner comparable only to fighting for his life –  which sheds some light on the ‘authenticity’ of the documents he was so unwilling to show.

Now after this brief summary I wonder if there anyone here who is still thinking that Ray Chandler’s masterpiece ‘All that Glitters” is based on FACTS?  Show me these dinosaurs, please – I’d like to have a look at these rare species…

59 Comments leave one →
  1. nan permalink
    May 22, 2011 2:13 am

    I also think it is ridiculous that Ray Chandler would be on television saying his nephew is tired of being the Mchael Jackson boy etc, all the while this scumball uncle is using his own nephew name to sell his fantasy book.I notice how he sidesteps the information that June Chandler has not spoken to her son in years too..This family , including Jordan make me sick.

    Like

  2. nan permalink
    May 22, 2011 2:03 am

    Tthe entire chandler family is the scum of the earth. When you see Ray Chandler talking to Matt Lauer saying he wants Jordan to testify against MJ and you realize that at the same time he is also secretly fighting to stay OUT of court,himself, it is just incredulous how every word out of this person mouth is a lie!!.Lauer seems to think he is lying from the look on his face and how nervous Chandler is . No wonder we didnt see Chandler come out and speak after the 14 not guilty verdicts..
    http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/past-jackson-charges/6us8wst

    Like

  3. ZEROMARCY permalink
    April 22, 2011 11:10 pm

    i try to repost
    this article is very well written

    Like

  4. sassykk permalink
    September 27, 2010 10:15 pm

    Jordan Chandler and his money hungry crap face dad can die in a hole!!!!!! (His dad already committed suicide teheehee ^_^) these allegations were absolute bull crap!! Im 13 and i can handle my stuff better than these losers! If ur gonna say u got evidence u have to prove it with ya bad self !! They all know michael didnt do nothin and its a shame he had to go through that as if people werent all up in his kool aid enough! I hope they all go to hell for doing this to a person who was just minding their own freakin business and then all of a sudden he gets turned on by the people he least expected. That is bull! I wudve slapped that lil boy and his dad and mom so hard that by the time they come down, they’ll need a passport and a plane ticket back! I would have loved to c things their way but i dont think i cud stick my head that far up my butt

    Like

  5. visitor permalink
    September 18, 2010 4:06 pm

    In Pearl Jr’s dvd The Trial and Triumph of King of Pop it is mentioned that Evan made the drawing

    Like

  6. visitor permalink
    September 18, 2010 4:00 pm

    In Pearl Jr’s dvd the Trial and Triumph of King of Pop it is mentioned that Evan Chandler made the drawing

    Like

  7. visitor permalink
    September 18, 2010 3:58 pm

    In Pearl Jr’s dvd The Trial and Triumph of King of Pop it is mentioned that the drawing was made by Evan Chandler

    Like

  8. TINKERBELL permalink
    September 18, 2010 12:56 pm

    Thank you.
    If I remember correctly the drawing he made after he “confessed” against Michael, of a boy committing suicide is also available. It will be great if somehow we could find it and compare drawings. This one of the genitalia certainly looks like an adult did it. The handwritting as well. And I agree with you, what the heck is that about “My theory”???

    Like

  9. September 18, 2010 7:27 am

    “Here is the drawing made by JC. Anybody will think it was far more elaborate, if you go by all the bells and whistles they talk about this. Now, have anyone thought about this inconsistency: he writes the body oil stinks but he never said he performed oral sex to MJ. Am I missing something?”

    Tinkerbell, you’ve made a good point about it – nothing adds up here (as usual). Previously I thought that it was only the Arvizo case which was sheer nonsense but now see that the Chandler case is almost as ridiculous as the second one. I think they added that “stink” word in order to humiliate MJ – his life-long defamation campaign was aimed at his utmost HUMILIATION. That was the main idea (and how much humiliation can one person take?)

    And I am afraid the drawing was not made by Jordan Chandler either – the handwriting looks like that of an adult, not a teenager. “My theory” on the right shows that someone was unsure of what he was writing. He was sitting over this piece of paper, pondering over the situation and adding there whatever he thought fit to suit the case.

    Like

  10. TINKERBELL permalink
    September 18, 2010 2:54 am

    Here is the drawing made by JC. Anybody will think it was far more elaborate, if you go by all the bells and whistles they talk about this.
    http://www.box.net/shared/09zmi31anq/4/9455516#/shared/09zmi31anq/1/13513047/150508798/1
    Now, have anyone thought about this inconsistency: he writes the body oil stinks but he never said he performed oral sex to MJ. Am I missing something?

    Like

  11. Dialdancer permalink
    July 27, 2010 11:31 pm

    Hi, cleaning out my Inbox and came across this from May 2010. I have a friend with a golden shovel and will go anywhere for information when it comes to vindicating Michael Jackson.

    Michael Jackson FBI Extortion Doc:
    https://acrobat.com/#d=Z92mHewL8QB83zWisuxzMQ

    Like

  12. July 26, 2010 9:26 pm

    UPDATED
    David: “In February 1994, Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti was so desperate to force the Chandlers to testify in criminal court that he tried to get the law amended so that he would IMMEDIATELY be able to FORCE them to testify!”

    As to these and other details of the 1993 case there is a marvellous book available on the internet – The King of Pop’s darkest hour by Lisa D.Campbell written in 1994 which IMHO should be learned by heart by each Michael’s supporter. It says about the above Garcetti episode:

    p.163: “…the now five month investigation so far had yielded no evidence to justify filing criminal charges against Michael Jackson. One week after the settlement Garcetti announced that he would sponsor legislation to force sexual assault victims to testify in criminal cases even if they sue their alleged assailants for money. [] DeWayne Wickham, a columnist for USA today, asked, assuming Garcetti was successful in amending the laws of California forcing the boy to testify and he still refused, what would he do, put the boy in jail?”

    Here is the link to the book:
    http://books.google.com/books?id=n1S4bMjM8LoC&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+King+of+Pop%27s+Darkest+Hour#v=onepage&q&f=false

    Do you remember Ray Chandler saying in his interview with Larry King that they ‘had to’ settle because the authorities were not persistent enough in bringing criminal charges against MJ and that the Chandlers ‘were not asked to testify up to December 1993’ hinting at Garcetti being too weak to handle a celebrity like Michael Jackson?

    Garcetti? The L.A. District Attorney who wanted to change legislation to force Jordan to testify? Assisted by Santa Barbara D.A.Tom Sneddon, by the way?

    However there is some grain of truth in a statement that Jordan ‘never testified’ to the police.

    When leafing through Lisa Campbell’s book I suddenly found what I had been looking for so long – the confirmation that Jordan NEVER made an official deposition to the authorities and that all his declarations were just ‘interviews’:

    p. 183: [While the grand jury was being convened) a scandal TV show featured a dramatization (!) of the supposed seduction by Michael Jackson of the boy. The show’s host Maureen O’Boyle maintained that the dramatization, featuring a Michael Jackson look-a-like with a young boy, was based on the deposition of the boy. In a taped interview, Johnnie Cochran stated that there was never a deposition taken from the boy”.

    SO JOHNNIE COCHRAN SAID THERE HAD NEVER BEEN A DEPOSITION TAKEN FROM JORDAN. This makes the declaration which Michael’s haters refer to as Jordan’s “official affidavit” nothing more than just a ‘declaration’ the legal value of which is minimal (if people lie in a declaration they cannot even be found responsible for the perjury).

    If you read Tom Sneddon’s own declaration attentively you’ll see that he speaks of two Jordan’s interviews only.

    The first one was on September, 1, 1993 (in the presence of a woman police officer), another one – according to Tom Sneddon – was on December 1, 1993 (no mention is made about who was present, which is incorrect).

    UPDATE: The declaration each of us knows as Jordan’s main one was dated December 28, 1993 and was made AFTER the strip search. Tom Sneddon is not mentioning Dec.28 – not to draw attention to the fact that the basic declaration was made after the strip search. Instead he mentions December 1 (a date which can be easily confused with both September 1 and December 28 and which is clearly coming BEFORE the strip search). Of course it does not rule out the possibility that they had several other interviews with Jordan – some even after the confidentiality agreement as far as we know it from Tom Mesereau’s papers…

    So why only interviews? Why didn’t Jordan give his testimony under oath? The deposition and affidavit are documents which can be used in court even in the absence of the witness – as far as I understand – and could be reason enough to bring criminal charges against a person.

    If Jordan didn’t do that there must have been a reason for it. Could it be the police ‘who didn’t want Jordan to testify’ or was it Jordan who didn’t want to speak under oath?

    Like

  13. July 26, 2010 8:34 pm

    Suzy: “According to this very post of Helena the Ray Chandler book was published on September 12, 2004 and only a week later Michael’s defense reacted and subpoenaed him”.

    September 12, 2004 is the exact date given by Ray Chandler in his declaration which is provided in the pile of documents found on the site of Superior Court of California – http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/ctdocs.php (if you type Ray Chandler in the “search” section).

    We will need to talk about those papers in much detail. By the nature of your comments I see that you haven’t yet read them.

    Like

  14. zeromarcy permalink
    July 25, 2010 11:01 pm

    thank u very much for this post
    Btw I’ve read in other comments(regarding other posts) that someof u saw brian everett’s blog….
    I don’t like what he is doing and i must say that i had a confirmation that he is looking for “users”because i was reading about other celebrity (brad pitt) in a website and suddnely i’ve read a comment written by him….

    Like

  15. Tinkerbell permalink
    July 25, 2010 12:39 pm

    @Suzy
    Exactly. I agree 100%. And one thing is important too, he would have NEVER forgotten the look of an uncircumsiced penis! That is impressive when you come from the background of circumsiced ones which I assume he and his father both were. Can you imagine?
    The boy had this told to him word for word. It read6s like a romantic novel to me.
    Thanks.

    Like

  16. Suzy permalink
    July 25, 2010 12:29 pm

    @ Tinkerbell

    I agree that by his testimony Jordan must have seen MJ naked a LOT. He said they did it all the time, he said he saw him going in and out to the bathroom naked, he claimed he forced him to have oral sex with him, to watch him masturbate and so on. Whether MJ’s penis looked or didn’t look circumsized in an erect state, it’s simply impossible that he was always erect – and fully erect at that.

    Like

  17. Tinkerbell permalink
    July 25, 2010 11:49 am

    @Suzy
    Thank you for the information shared.
    However as a physician I have to differ. The uncircumsicied penis DOES looks circumscised in an erect state 90% of the time. What I’m saying here is how smart the remark is that if this boy got to spend such long periods of times with MJ as he says with so much sexual activity periods like showering together and hours into days together how come he never saw the non arouse state that will show clearly the uncircumsiced penis. For full glans exposure the uncircumsiced penis needs to be fully arouse, given the fact that excessive sking may still cover a good part of the glans with a partial arousal. So I think this boy, IF telling the truth, must have seen both states. The fact that he missed this tells he’s making this up or most likely it was planted in his mind by someone who like him was circumsiced. They only talked about what they know, what is familiar to them, failing to tell the accurate description because the boy NEVER saw MJ’s penis to begin with.
    Thank you. Have a wondeful Sunday with many blessings your way.🙂

    Like

  18. Suzy permalink
    July 25, 2010 11:24 am

    @ Tinkerbell

    “We all know an erect penis will look circumsiced.”

    Well, that’s what the media were trying to explain the unmatch with. But please read this post by Helena about circumsiced and uncircumsiced penises in erect or unerect state:

    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/04/19/all-you-wanted-to-know-about-it-but-were-always-afraid-to-ask-part-1/

    Like

  19. Tinkerbell permalink
    July 25, 2010 10:59 am

    One important fact that kind of “slipped through the cracks” regarding Gardener’s evaluation is that he was not informed the kid was under a strong mind altering drug for this “confession”. I am positive if he would have been aware of that fact all bet were loose and the confession would be classified as worthless or in the least, not reliable, inconclusive.
    This is something Hellperin mentions in his book and I think he’s very right here. (Possibly the only thing you can take from this book).
    Another thing is, like David mentioned above, the decription, the drawing JC supposedly made. His remarks about why it was not done by a professional artist just like a composite is very telling. Can we imagine what such a drawing would look like in terms of quality?! Shit, it would be just like a photograph! And they didn’t do it???? Most likely this kid met with an artist and met serious problems making descriptions to correlate to the “accuracy”of the drawing, thus they kept the piece of paper as evidence. The kid could not reproduce a description for a second or third time when meeting with the artist!
    It is also very telling that once TS gets his infamous strip search he doesn’t do anything with this i.e. file formal charges. Even if he convened 3 grand juries, and memory is foggy here, why wouldn’t anybody find enough evidence to indict MJ, drawing +strip search?
    That to me closes the deal. This was mentioned by JRT in Magic and Madness.
    One thing people have always said is that the descrition didn’t match based on the circumscision. We all know an erect penis will look circumsiced. But like someone else said in their analysis it makes you wonder that this boy saying he spend so many hours, many days alone in sexual activities with MJ that he didn’t even once see the penis in a non aroused state.
    I agree 100%. When you start looking into this story with a fine combtooth it doesn’t stand scrutiny. Most likely that’s exactly what those 3 grand juries saw.

    Like

  20. shelly permalink
    July 25, 2010 10:35 am

    @ David

    The problem is in the insurance doucment, it’s written that the DA spoke to Chandler after the settlement, they allegedly spoke to him in March.

    In my opinion the best proof that Evan wasn’t scared of the fans is the 2nd lawsuit where he wanted to record an album about the molestation of his son. Someone who is scared of the fans want to have a very private life and not be in the media. He obviously wanted to be in the media.

    Like

  21. Suzy permalink
    July 25, 2010 4:36 am

    Talk about a brazen cynic. Ray after Michael’s death:

    http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/06/uncle-alleged-molestation-victim-responds-jackson-death

    Like

  22. mjlover4life permalink
    July 24, 2010 8:58 pm

    thank you for this article one more nail in the coffins of the ones that have blatantly lied about Michael Jackson and great links also. we need more articles like this ine
    I love you Michael Joseph Jackson Rest in piece my angel

    Like

  23. Susan permalink
    July 24, 2010 7:30 pm

    Hi everyone:

    Just read the link provided by David regarding Gil Garcetti trying to amend the law that prohibits forcing people who say they have been sexually assaulted to testify in criminal proceeding.

    These Chandlers will just about do backflips to get out of going to court, won’t they?

    And how exactly does Ray Chandler’s (Evan’s) book jive witht that therory of Jordie’s doctors saying “he needs to put this matter behind him”?

    Like

  24. Jacqueline M. permalink
    July 24, 2010 6:58 pm

    Hi, everyone. What a great job you do for Michael. I don’t know where or how you are able find so much information about these cases. Sometimes I look for something, but I only find tabloid trash. I think I am horrible at investigate things. That’s why I love to read this website! And about Ray Chandler, I think he is a lier, but he is very smart. He should learn something from his brother, Evan. He destroyed Michael’s life for money and I’m sure that all that money never made him happy, and we already know where his greed took him to.

    Like

  25. David permalink
    July 24, 2010 6:28 pm

    Hey guys! This is an URGENT MESSAGE!!!

    While researching the 1993 case, I stumbled across a BOMBSHELL article that will knock your socks off! This article will annihilate Ray’s claim that the Chandler’s refused to testify because of the lack of police protection, or not being put into the Witness Protection Program!

    In February 1994, Los Angeles District Attorney Gil Garcetti was so desperate to force the Chandlers to testify in criminal court that he tried to get the law amended so that he would IMMEDIATELY be able to FORCE them to testify! If your son was molested, would the cops have to “force” you to testify? Of course not!

    Unfortunately his attempt was unsuccessful, and the Chandlers were able to take the money and run! This story totally obliterates that lie that Ray Chandler spewed about the Chandlers not testifying because they wouldn’t be put in the witness protection program. If the Chandlers had truly needed protection, Sneddon and Garcetti would have hired the Secret Service to protect them! Read the “Officials Desperate To Nail Jackson” article in the following link for more info.

    Notice how the article also makes reference to Blanca Francia DENYING that her son Jason was abused, and her DISCOMFORT with the fact that police had interrogated Jason without her knowledge!

    http://www.mjj2005.com/kopboard/index.php?showtopic=16311

    Like

  26. Suzy permalink
    July 24, 2010 4:22 pm

    According to this very post of Helena the Ray Chandler book was published on September 12, 2004 and only a week later Michael’s defense reacted and subpoenaed him.

    I think Helena’s version of the release date is more likely than Amazon’s, simply because of the fact that “REQUEST NO.10” by Michael’s team in the above document which says: “ALL DOCUMENTS constituting, evidencing, concerning, discussing or mentioning any contract, agreement, or arrangement for the printing, distribution, promotion, or sale of the book “All that Glitters: The Crime and the Cover up” by Raymond Chandler.”

    So it shows: Helena’s version of the released date is the correct one, not Amazon’s. And Michael’s defense team was very much aware of the book. That’s exactly one of the reasons why they subpoenaed him!

    Like

  27. July 24, 2010 12:50 pm

    As for Mesereau’s PI I didn’t read it I watched a documentary where the PI was interviewed and he said so himself.

    As for ATG & Bob Jones. I assume Mesereau would had to read these books. For starters. Why subpoena RC about the contents of a book you have not read? How would he know what was in it if he hadn’t read it? Bob Jones and Stacy Brown both testify at the trial, the book was public knownledge. Under Mesereau’s cross examination Brown said he made up some parts of the book for sensationalism, (Brown co-wrote the book with Bob Jones).

    Like

  28. shelly permalink
    July 24, 2010 11:16 am

    In my previous I meant Teva

    Like

  29. shelly permalink
    July 24, 2010 10:49 am

    @ lynande51

    I thought it was Feldman who send Jordan to Gardner.

    “Meserreau read ATG, and the Bob Jones book, and still believed in the innocence of his client. ”

    I don’t think he read those books. ATG was published in January 2005 according to Amazon and the Bob Jones book was after the trial. Mesereau had probably lots of reason to believe in his innocence.

    “As for the sodium amytal. I don’t know. Meserreau’s PI uncovered that it was used.”

    Where did you read that?

    Like

  30. July 23, 2010 10:05 pm

    @Shelly,

    Shelly: As for Evan, he was the father so maybe it gave him some rights to have that document.

    NO it does not. Regardless of how JC got there this is still a conversation between a doctor and patient, and yes it’s authenticity should be questioned. Mez questioned it. Didn’t Meserreau subpoena RC to find out how he got his hands on supposed legal and privlege documents? Meserreau read ATG, and the Bob Jones book, and still believed in the innocence of his client. The media took everything MJ did and twisted it they believed nothing. Why as fans should we swallow what the Chandlers have to say without deep scrutiny. I have studied every angle of this case from both sides, and there is something very unsettling about it. Also let us not forget RC is not a witness to anything. Geraldine Hughs was there in the office not RC.

    As for the sodium amytal. I don’t know. Meserreau’s PI uncovered that it was used. Don’t forget EC was making accusations before JC’s tooth was pulled, and asking J if anything happened the thought by asking the question was already implanted in JC’s head. The addition of sodium amytal could have corrupted his thoughts. I still think Torbiner is a overlooked key player.

    Like

  31. lynande51 permalink
    July 23, 2010 8:55 pm

    Actually he would not have been given a copy of anything. It was the LA police that sent Jordan to go see Dr. Gardner because he was considered an expert in false allegations.He would have been told ahead of time that the father was questionable so evan would have been the last person to get it. You know just the fact that they sent him there would make me ask if they had difficulty believing him.

    Like

  32. shelly permalink
    July 23, 2010 6:40 pm

    @lynande51

    The Murdoch’s story refers to Wade Robson, he is the kid who danced with Michael.
    As for Evan, he was the father so maybe it gave him some rights to have that document.

    Like

  33. lynande51 permalink
    July 23, 2010 6:01 pm

    It is not. There would be no reason for Evan Chandler to have a copy of Dr. Gardner’s professional tape recordings. He was supposedly brought in to determine if Jordan was trustworthy. This is not a report, it is a taped interview with a MD and it is protected not only by the patient Dr. priviledge it is also protected by the juvenile court system because of Jordan’s age. In other words it is a big fat lie to say that this is anything offical at all. Without the original taped transcriptions typed copy all it is is a screenplay written by a very imaginative person.
    As for who Orietta Murdoch this is who she is:
    An executive assistant at MJJ productions, Orietta Murdoch. According to Murdoch, one of her duties was to keep Jackson’s daily schedule. She said one boy had won a contest to meet the star and on that day, several hours had passed and the parents were unable to reach Jackson or their son. But Murdoch claimed her hands were tied. “There was a rule in the office that you don’t bother Michael in the morning, you don’t call until he calls you,” she explained. “When he did call in he told me to cancel a meeting he had with Donald Trump, to say he wasn’t feeling well. So I asked him about the child and he said he was fine and he would be back in the afternoon.”
    The incident she was referring to happened sometime in 1993 with Brett Barnes. He was the one that won a dance contest in 1992 in Australia and Michael paid for him and his family to come to Neverland to visit. This is the time he and Brett went to Disneyland without telling Brett’s parents. Because no one told Brett’s parents the police were called. I believe that she was fired shortly after this incident or as she says she quit because she couldn’t watch was going on and not do something. I wonder if the incident with Brett was a twisted inspiration for Evan Chandler because that is also when Jordan went to Disneyland

    Like

  34. shelly permalink
    July 23, 2010 5:37 pm

    “Okay, but…How did Evan get it? It is a client patient privilege. Evan does not have the authority.”

    Are we sure it’s an official document. Coming from Ray Chandler nothing would surprise me.

    Like

  35. Dialdancer permalink
    July 23, 2010 6:38 am

    lynande51,

    You are right. I spoke to a friend who works in this field. If Dr. Gardner believed Jordan, he would have been legally bound to notify the Police immediately. There are stiff penalties for doctors not reporting any kind of child abuse or suspected child abuse.

    Like

  36. Dialdancer permalink
    July 23, 2010 6:29 am

    vindicatemj,

    You’ve got a lot of Michael in you. Michael placed the Genie from Aladin in Neverland for his guests. It had a saying. “Your wish is my command”. Thanks for the link.

    Like

  37. Suzy permalink
    July 23, 2010 6:24 am

    @ lynande51

    Who is Orietta Murdoch? Whose business manager was she? Michael’s? And what does she have to do with the Chandlers?

    Like

  38. lynande51 permalink
    July 23, 2010 4:41 am

    The other thing that they keep feeding us lies with is that very silly scribbled picture of what they say is Jordans description given to the police. Please . It says at the top of it. Cow blotchy white with a line through it and then pink not white/brown, under that it says body oil stink under that is that silly drawing then brown patch on ass left glut under that Orietta bleach.To the right of that silly drawing it says in a box, My theory- ass blotched shades of brown- so how is MJ p. ( penis?) be so picture Orietta bleach. You know what those words are? Notes on how to describe Michael Jacksons genitalia. That silly drawing is where Evan was rehearsing Jordan giving him information from a former business manger by the name of Orietta Murdoch. Yes she was fired too.You want someone to read bad handwriting ask a nurse. This also gives a little more credence to Geraldine Hughes thought that they used the sodium amytal story as a way to say this is how I found out, thinking that if anyone ever questioned it they would believe it was truth serum.This also means that Jordan lied and was a willing party in that lie.

    Like

  39. lynande51 permalink
    July 23, 2010 3:55 am

    Hi Teva, first let me say that the interview they have out there as being the one between Jordan Chandler and Dr.Gardner is just that an interview. No where in there that does it reveal his findings or a conclusion of his assessment. This interview does not say anywhere in it that he believed Jordan Chandler and it shouldn’t. Dr. Gardener would have had more than one interview with Jordan. It takes more than a one time, one hour interview to do a proper assessment of a patient. He would have had to observe Jordan to know his mannerisms before he could have said conclusively that , yes I bellieve this patients anwers to be trustworthy.Once again their propaganda is that Dr. Gardner believed Jordan, if so, show us that letter. They can’t because they would not have been the ones that got it , the police would have. What it looks like to me is another screenplay written out Evan Chandler. That is what he wanted to be was a screen writer and this is how they are written it looks like a script for a movie and nothing more.

    Like

  40. Tinkerbell permalink
    July 23, 2010 2:58 am

    Wow! This is a great blog! Love it. Finally I read smart people talking about reading those damn books filled with lies. I still have to read ATG but have read Bob Jone’s “The Man Behind The Mask” and the demon woman’s book.
    Now, I am a new fan a was very exceptical of all this mess. It has taken me over 1 full year to get to details that absolutely suport MJ’s innocence. Why has it been so incredibly difficult is beyond me because once you start finding stuff, one after the next ALL vindicate Michael. And this post by David about Evan refusing, rejecting at all costs to testify well Hello! What more do people need? Thank you very much for this wonderful, truthful and exceprtional blog. I look forward now to another 6 months of study towards my MJ doctorate! Tinkerbell, MJD!🙂

    Like

  41. Dialdancer permalink
    July 23, 2010 12:59 am

    Thank you. This is the article and information I’ve waited on. Had it been me, my child, my family member who was supposedly seduced, abused and corrupted, nothing and no one could have kept me off the witness stand, whether for the Prosecution or Defense. Illegally obtained documents or money be damned. I’d have gone to jail and taken the alleged perpetrator with me. It is what you do “IF” you are telling the truth.

    Like

  42. July 22, 2010 9:32 pm

    @Shelly,

    Okay, but…How did Evan get it? It is a client patient privilege. Evan does not have the authority.

    @lynande51,
    Okay, are you saying a Diane Dimond type situation occurred? Where someone within the DA’s office walked up to RC handed him this document in a manilla envelope then slipped away? If this document is real, it is a criminal offense to possess. Doctor-patient information is sacred, and protected under the law. It cannot be just handed to someone in the public. Raymond Chandler as a lawyer should know that such information illegally obtained cannot be used in a court of law, it would be inadmissable and considered fruits from the poison tree.

    Like

  43. Suzy permalink
    July 22, 2010 7:13 pm

    @ David

    I’m not surprised about Bashir’s career advancing. That’s the media for you! You can get big not by talent and integrity but by connections. Wasn’t it also obvious when Ian Halperin was getting deals and air time left and right for a documentary that has not even been made yet, while people like Aphrodite Jones, Larry Nimmer and so on have such a hard time get their documentaries shown or even to get book deals? Apparently the media only likes dirt – and to them it doesn’t matter if it’s true or not.

    Like

  44. David permalink
    July 22, 2010 6:42 pm

    Something that I forgot to add to what I wrote earlier:

    What’s next? Is NBC going to hire Andrew Breitbart for what he did to that NAACP lady? (That’s a perfect analogy, because he slandered her with that edited speech the same way Bashir slandered MJ with the edited documentary!)

    And for those of you who live outside of the USA and may not be familiar with this story, there was a political commentator who runs a blog, and he slandered a public official of the Obama administration by posting an edited video that made her appear to be a racist.

    She was immediately forced to resign, but the media found out that she is NOT a racist when they aired the ENTIRE video, and everyone has had to apologize to her, and she’s going to get her job back!

    It’s too bad nobody in the media ever apologized to MJ!

    Like

  45. David permalink
    July 22, 2010 6:14 pm

    Hey guys, I just found out that the scumbag tabloid reporter Martin Bashir is leaving ABC News to accept a job at NBC! He will do stories for Dateline NBC, as well as anchor the daytime news for MSNBC.

    It’s really disappointing to know that his career is advancing so well, despite his checkered past. It’s beyond me how any organization that prides itself on journalistic “integrity” could hire someone who knowingly LIED to someone about the purpose of an interview, and didn’t allow them to approve it before it aired, and aired it without getting the permission of the parents of a minor who was used in the interview, and then had the interview exposed for the fraud that it is by the interviewee who filmed a rebuttal to it. It just blows my mind! And on top of that, he was reprimanded in Britain for doing the same thing!

    But when you think about it, it only makes sense that NBC would hire Bashir. They have always been biased against MJ, and the best example of this is the episode of Dateline that aired in early 2003. NBC wanted to interview MJ after the Bashir documentary debacle, and not only did they offer him money, but they offered not to show the Dateline episode that was produced by Victor Guitterez. MJ rejected their deal, and not only did the air the episode, they expanded it to 2 hours! The Veritas Project (located on this site) talks about this in detail.

    If I post the links, the spam filter will block this comment, and we’ll have to wait for Helena to return to unblock it. So instead, just google “Martin Bashir”, and read about him leaving ABC. And then go to the MJ-777.com blog and read the entry from June 22nd called “When the mainstream media stops telling lies…..” entry for more info.

    Like

  46. lynande51 permalink
    July 22, 2010 2:29 pm

    I think this book was written well in advance of the settlement. Judith Reagan says in her podcast that they were selling this dribbling mess within days of signing that confidential agreement. I think they hoped that some publisher out there would ignore that confidential agreement.
    As for the Dr. Gardener report that has to be a complete fabrication. As I wrote before if he had gone to see Dr. Gardener they would not have had his conclusion. He would have reported that to the police not Jordans lawyers or his mother and father because it was the police in LA that sent him to be interviewed by Dr. Gardener. The only ones that would know what was in there would have been the DA’s and the investigating officers. No matter what the world of psychiatry thought of Dr. Gardener’s theories he still wanted to be taken seriously so he would not have breached this very important protocol.
    My one curiosity in all of this is why did Michaels defence want any communication about Michael or Jordan prior to their meeting in 1992. They asked for them going back to January in 1992. What did Michael’s investigator find out that we don’t know about? I think it has more to do with who the Chandlers knew before they knew Michael.

    Like

  47. Suzy permalink
    July 22, 2010 1:22 pm

    Thank you David, very informative page.

    Like

  48. David permalink
    July 22, 2010 10:35 am

    @ Suzy

    That website you found contains parts of the Veritas Project, which is listed on this site in its entirety. Go to the top of the page, and open the link, which is to the right of the “Rules”.

    Also, for more info on the trial, you can go to the MJ Upbeat website, which has a summary of the testimonies for each day in court, from the opening statements to the verdict. The link is listed under the blogroll as “MJ Upbeat/TrialMJJ Source”.

    Like

  49. Suzy permalink
    July 22, 2010 10:21 am

    This looks to be a good website with lots of interesting info: http://surftofind.com/seminal4

    For example, there’s more on Tellem there and here is something I didn’t know so far:

    „However, considering that (Ray) Chandler got his �law� degree from the very college where Tom Sneddon �teaches� law students every unethical thing he knows, one has to assume that Chandler took notes well from his master.”

    Like

  50. shelly permalink
    July 22, 2010 6:22 am

    @ teva

    I think he got a copy from Evan.

    Like

  51. lynande51 permalink
    July 22, 2010 5:06 am

    This is great work! I like Rule #5:
    RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO.5:

    Raymond Chandler object to producing these documents on the grounds that they are not relevant to the subject matter at hand in that none of these documentation contain any information regarding any claims of child molestation or defenses of such claims.

    What exactly was their book about if it wasn’t about their claims of child molestation? All of those supposed documents that he had attached to his book were intended to be supportive of their charge of molestation! Am I missing something? Every single word in that book and the document attached claim that is what happened. I can barely stand to read past number 5. It is as good as admitting that the whole book is a lie and if the book is a lie then so is the story!

    Like

  52. July 22, 2010 4:48 am

    David: “Check your email!”

    Guys, I will check the mail – only I need several days off and will be away until early next week. Please keep the vindication going.
    If some of your posts are suspended by the spam filter (it happens when there are many links in the post) please wait – I’ll “release” them when I am back.

    I’m going to make a few more posts about those documents on Ray Chandler. Not to keep you in the dark here is a link to the whole pile of them for you to do your own research: http://www.sbscpublicaccess.org/ctdocs.php (type Ray Chandler in the “Search” and you get them). Start from the bottom – this is the order in which they come.

    Hope to see you soon.

    Like

  53. visitor permalink
    July 22, 2010 12:59 am

    I have found the documents 2 days ago and I am still laughing. It looks like someone pissed on his pants. Oh well, liars don’t feel confortable when they are asked to prove their fictions.

    Like

  54. David permalink
    July 21, 2010 11:56 pm

    @ Teva

    That’s a good observation. Dr. Gardner committed suicide in May 2003, and he was widely regarded as a quack in the psychiatric field. Who knows? If he was still alive, perhaps he would have stopped Ray from leaking it, and that’s IF it’s even authentic at all? How do we know that Ray Chandler didn’t just type it up himself?

    The only good thing that came from that script is that Jordie confirmed that he didn’t confess to being “molested” until after being drugged by “his dad’s friend” for a dental procedure. And we all know that “friend” is Dr. Mark Torbiner!

    Like

  55. July 21, 2010 10:48 pm

    I have always wondered how he got his hands on Dr. Gardener’s report. This would be client-patient privelge information. Only Jordan could okay it’s release. Am I missing something?

    Like

  56. Suzy permalink
    July 21, 2010 9:51 pm

    Thank you Helena!

    “In his TV appearances Ray Chandler always spoke about some offical documents proving his case, however here he refers to “hundreds of newspaper and magazine articles or public documents readily available to the Defendant”. Does it mean that he has nothing else than newspaper cuts from the tabloid press?”

    Most definitely! It’s like his claim of “hard-core commercially produced child porn” being found in Neverland. When in fact he probably meant the books you have just covered in your series about the “porn”. It’s neither “hard-core” or “child porn”. The only part that is true that they are commercially produced.

    Ray Chandler is the master of spins!

    BTW, Tellem Worldwide was also working for Dave Schwartz!

    Like

  57. David permalink
    July 21, 2010 9:17 pm

    EXCELLENT POST! Not only did Jordie threaten legal action to avoid testifying, but Ray did too? Wow! I never knew that. I always wondered why he didn’t testify if he was subpoenaed by the defense. And I’ve always wondered why he was NOT subpoenaed by the prosecution, but the fact that Sneddon wanted NOTHING to do with him speaks volumes.

    This is why I have said that any MJ fan who wants to investigate the 1993 case MUST read “ATG”. MJ’s lawyers never got the chance to cross-examine the Evan, Jordie, and Ray in court, so the fans must “cross-examine” that book (which I did, and I’ve used to prove MJ’s innocence!).

    One thing I want to add is the fact that not only did June lie about not suing MJ, but she also lied about not knowing that Dave Schwartz owed $5 million to creditors. In “ATG”, Ray says that Dave’s creditors were owed $5 million, but were willing to accept a $4 million dollar payoff. So Dave asked June to ask MJ to loan him $4 million.

    Ray doesn’t say specifically that June asked him, but either way Dave did not get the money from MJ, and as a result Dave asked Larry Feldman to receive $4 million out of the settlement. Feldman flatly denied Dave’s request because he wasn’t eligible to receive any of it (only Evan, Jordie, June, and Feldman himself), and this made Dave FURIOUS!

    In court, June said that not only did she not ask MJ for the $4 million, but she also didn’t even know that Dave owed that money to the creditors in the first place. So someone is lying here!

    Some of my research of “ATG” has been used in the All For Love blog, where she’s doing a series called “Evan Confessed to Drugging Michael”. Parts 1 & 2 are already up, and part 3 is coming soon! Enjoy!
    http://allforloveblog.com/?p=2928

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. 2003 – The Facts About The Child Molestation Allegations Made Against Michael Jackson « redblackghost
  2. Michael Jackson Is Innocent « La Cienega Just Smiles

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: