Ray Chandler SUBPOENA: Happy End for the dear old uncle?
When you read the ton of Ray Chandler’s papers against the subpoena he received from Michael Jackson’s defense team, you have to occasionally pinch yourself to remind you that it is the DEFENSE which insists on the Accuser coming to court and accusing the Defendant there.
Since the idea is difficult to grasp, I’ll repeat it.
Michael Jackson’s Defense team knows that Accuser Ray Chandler has written a tell-all book All That Glitters where he describes the Defendant’s alleged crimes. They also know that the Accuser claims that the book is based on authentic documents, and that is why ask him to come to court and accuse the Defendant there (and not in the book).
The previous two parts of this post however showed to us that the Accuser didn’t like the idea and categorically refused to go to court and present his documents there, saying that they were ‘irrelevant’, and that the same information could be obtained ‘from other sources’ like Evan and Jordan Chandler (who didn’t want to go to court either), and that it was ‘invasion of his privacy’ and that Ray Chandler was a ‘journalist’ who was protected from testifying in court and disclosing his sources by the Shield law.
This was followed by a sort of a tug of war between the parties where the Defense insisted that Ray Chandler wasn’t a journalist while he insisted that he was. So this is exactly where we are at the moment.
The next document in this tug of war is Michael Jackson’s objection to Ray Chandler’s objection to the Subpoena which is dated November 5, 2004 and called “MR. JACKSON’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO QUASH CHANDER SUBPOENA AND DECLARATION OF COUNSEL”.
The full document is here and I will cite only some excerpts from this 24-page document which is trying to persuade Ray Chandler to be so kind to come and make his accusations against Michael Jackson in court:
“Mr. Jackson’s Objection and Opposition is based on the following grounds:
(1) Petitioner is not a journalist nor engaged in any news gathering activities as a reporter, editor, publisher, or person connected with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, and he is not entitled to protection under the Shield law.
(2) Petitioner is a ‘witness’ to the 1993-94 events who cannot withhold unpublished information, and he is acting as a recently admitted attorney who is promoting his brother and nephew.
(3) Petitioner’s objections to Mr. Jackson’s subpoena are without foundation because there is no invasion of privacy, no overbreath, and no undue burden in requiring petitioner to respond to the subpoena”.
…. “On September 19, 2004, Mr. Jackson served the subpoenaed party with two (2) subpoenas. The first was a Subpoena Duces Tecum where the response was due on October 5, 2004. The second was a subpoena for personal appearance at trial, and the production of documents where the response is due on January 31, 2005.
On October 25, 2004, the subpoenaed party served a Motion to Quash and Application for In Camera Review. The motion challenged the subpoena because the subpoenaed party seeks protection under the California Shield Law contained in Evidence Code section 1070. However, Petitioner is not a journalist. He is an attorney who has never engaged in news gathering or otherwise worked for a news organization… and he doesn’t satisfy section 1070’s definition of a journalist..”
“In addition, petitioner was a witness to the events in 1993 and 1994 when his brother, Evan Chandler, and his nephew, Jordan Chandler, made claims against Michael Jackson. By his own admission he does not gather news because he is a recently licensed attorney who practices law in Santa Barbara, and on both the cover of his book and his self-promotion web site, he states he was a witness to the events of which he writes.”
“Petitioner’s own web site states that he is a witness to the events:
“The 1993 Michael Jackson scandal has remained a closely held secret for over ten years. Other than speculation and innuendo, the facts have never been revealed – until now. Inside All That Glitters, Ray Chandler, the boy’s uncle, provides the hard evidence. From the day the boy met Michael, through six months of frenzied publicity, and into the scarring years that followed, this is a story told by one who witnesses the events as they unfolded, and he has the proof to back it up.
Did the King of Pop sexually molest a thirteen-year-old boy in 1993? In this account, the master of invention is unmasked” (Exhibit “2”) (emphasis added)”.
“In his declaration attached to his motion, petitioner states:
“From late August through December of 1993, I lived in the home of Evan and Jordan Chandler in Los Angeles. During that time I talked extensively with Evan Chandler, Jordan Chandler, June Chandler (Jordan’s mother), and other persons directly and indirectly connected with the molestation allegations”
Petitioner is a witness to the events of which are relevant to this legal proceeding”… “As a witness, he cannot withhold unpublished information regarding the events he witnessed”
Pinch yourselves, guys – you are reading the paper provided by the DEFENSE, not prosecution.
It is the Defense which is demanding the Accuser’s documents.
And it is the Defense which is using the Accuser’s own words to prove to him that he qualifies for an accuser.
And it is the Accuser who fiercely denies such a fact.
The situation is completely absurd and now that you have awakened to the absurdity of it, let’s move on.
“In his Memorandum, petitioner requests the court to delay ruling on his motion until it determines the admissibility of the allegations involving the 1993 case. While petitioner is correct there has been no determination by the court regarding whether such matters will be admissible, Mr. Jackson is in the position of having to prepare for trial. In the past two (2) weeks, the government has disclosed approximately 22, 000 documents relating to 1993 case, and it is necessary for Mr. Jackson to conduct his defense in a reasonable manner, which necessitates information from petitioner”.
“Petitioner challenges the relevance of the subpoenaed documents by claiming they have nothing to do with the current case. However, with the government disclosing 22,000 pages of information regarding the case, with petitioner being a witness to the events involving that case, and petitioner having documents and statements from the persons involved in that case, the subpoenaed documents are beyond question relevant and material to the proceeding”.
So the government already disclosed a mammoth amount of documents about the 1993 case even there had been no ruling about it from the judge yet… no surprise though… when it comes to Michael Jackson no one really expects things to be fair…
“Petitioner contends there are other sources who might be an equal source of information that is in petitioner’s possession such as his website or Jordan Chandler. However, the unpublished information which the petitioner seeks to withhold is, by definition, not published on his website. Further, he makes no showing of what Jordan Chandler does or does not have in his possession or whether Jordan Chandler is amenable to process”.
“Petitioner states that newspapers, public pleadings, and magazine articles are not necessary to be produced. Mr. Jackson agrees, and he does not seek such documents. Rather, he seeks information that is not publicly available”.
Wait, guys,so the Defense team does NOT even know what incriminating documents Ray Chandler may have on Michael Jackson?
And in spite of it they still insist that he discloses EVERYTHING he has?
Which means that they are SO sure of Michael’s innocence that they feel they can handle ANY document he might have in his closet?
Because only a COMPLETELY innocent man will behave in a confident and insistent manner like that?
And this is just another of our proofs of his total innocence adding to the MOUNTAIN we already have?
“Petitioner claims such documents “are not relevant to the subject matter at hand and none of these documents contain any information regarding any claims of child molestation or defenses of such claims’.
No, we really have to pinch ourselves again… Is it me who is dumb, or is something terribly wrong going on here?
Why do the papers to which Ray Chandler refers in his book as ‘hard evidence’ and ‘proof to back up the events as they unfolded’ all of a sudden become ‘irrelevant’ and not containing ‘any claims of molestation or defenses of such claims’?
What do they contain then? Anecdotes on the issue of ‘child molestation’?
Let us make a mental note of it and move on – if we stop at every paragraph the way this text compells us to it will be a never-ending story…
“Petitioner claims the documents would invade his privacy and reveal personal financial information. Michael Jackson is not interested in his personal financial information. … He is only interested in documents that have a “reasonable possibility the information will materially assist his defense,” which outweighs petitioner’s privacy concerns.”
This ‘material assistance to the defense’ issue was cunningly interpreted by Ray Chandler as positive statements by Jordan or Evan Chandler in support of Michael Jackson which he said they would not find in his portfolio.
However we know that there is only one way in which the accuser’s information can materially assist the Defense – if it turns out to be false and the Defense proves it.
And in this respect the Defense was looking for Ray Chandler’s documents not because they hoped to find Michael Jackson’s glorification there but because they wanted to check their AUTHENTICITY and overall importance.
THIS was the only reason why they wanted to see Ray Chandler in court.
Same as theonlyreason why the Defense was so incredibly fearless in their demand for the Accuser’s documents was their confidence in Michael’s complete INNOCENCE.
* * *
HOWEVER, THE EFFORTS OF THE DEFENSE TO PULL RAY CHANDLER INTO THE COURTROOM WERE DOOMED FROM THE VERY START.
This was found out in the reply to the Defense’s Opposition paper which Ray Chandler’s team made three days later, on November 8, 2004. The document is called THIRD PARTY RAYMOND CHANLER’S REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO QUASH.
It may be found here and it presents undeniable proof that Ray Chandler was indeed protected by the California Shield Law and was therefore immune to the Defense’s pleas to come to court and accuse Michael Jackson there.
Ray Chandler finally laid out his last card which had remained hidden until the very last moment:
- “The protection of the California shield law are not restricted to a journalist “employed” by a media outlet. The Code uses the phrase “or other person connected with or employed (by the media) (underline added), and it specifically included publishers as well as reporters. Defendant has incorrectly identified the publisher of Raymond Chandler’s book as Windsong Press Ltd. of Gurnee, Illinois. The correct publisher is Nevada Corporation (doing business in California) that is also named Windsong Press. Raymond Chandler is the sole owner of this publishing company, which holds the copyright of his book. As such Chandler is not only a journalist by way of authorship of a non-fiction book, he is also “connected with or employed by” the publisher.”
So instead of taking his ‘documents’ to court and having an honest talk there, our good old uncle turned them into a fiction book and set up a publishing company to hide behind its walls – with the only purpose to say whatever he wanted and never have to prove his lies in court…
How very prudent and cowardly… How very intricate and simple… And how very effective… Killing two or more birds with one stone… Openly telling lies and never having to answer for them in such a terribly legal way…. Fantastic… No wonder he was a lawyer and knew how to bypass law…
The rest of his revelations in this final document (which, as you remember, he never expected to be made public) are also sensational but can in no way surpass the blow he has just delivered to Michael Jackson and his team. Speaking about gathering information about the 1993 case, Ray Chandler reveals that:
- “he purposefully placed himself in the position to gather such information with the intent to disseminate it” – which turns his story about Evan Chandler’s sobbing on the phone and imploring Ray to come after he was attacked by a journalist into a blatant lie. Now he says that he purposefully placed himself in the position of a resident in Evan’s house (what a troupe of clowns these Chandlers are).
- the issues raised in his book “include unethical and possibly criminal activities among members of the bar and other state-licensed professionals, unethical and possibly criminal activities on the part of certain media, and information on child abuse”. Which means that there are certain lawyers and media outlets which may be equally slandered by Ray Chandler in his book and they cannot sue him either as the good old uncle is covered by the shield law (those who have the book please check it for his other victims – you’ll surely find Mary Fischer there, as well as Geraldine Hughes).
- “even after the publication of the book he has continued to gather information regarding the molestation of his nephew”. This way he admits he dedicated his whole life to harassing Michael Jackson and unwittingly discloses that he and the other members of the gang did not have any direct evidence of Michael’s ‘guilt’ – otherwise he wouldn’t have spent ten or more years of his life gathering newspaper clips about his alleged misconduct (it is absolutely incredible that so many people have chased Michael for decades – Tom Sneddon, Ray and Evan Chandler and Diane Dimond to name only a few!)
- Ray Chandler also reveals that thoughhe harassed Michael Jackson all his life “he was not, and has never claimed to be, a witness to either the molestation of Jordan Chandler or the alleged extortion attempt by Evan Chandler against Michael Jackson. This explains why defendant has subpoenaed Raymond Chandler only as a custodian of records, and not as a percipient witness”. Well, this statement of Ray never being a witness naturally contradicts his own words in numerous TV interviews and on the cover of the book saying that “this is a story told by one who witnessed the events as they unfolded”. But adding just one more lie to the whole pile of them is no longer significant to many of us here …
- Finally he sneers at Jackson and his defense team by accepting the fact that “the only way that the documents may reasonably assist the defense is to “impeach the credibility of a prosecution witness”. So he knows that this is the only way, but feels quite relaxed and sure of himself as he knows equally well that the Defense will not have access to him and his ‘documents’ now and will therefore never be able to ‘impeach his credibility’ in court.
After hearing both sides and finding out that Ray Chandler was actually a publisher and was covered by the Shield law, the judge put an end to his subpoena the same day (Nov.8, 2004) and sealed all the documents pertaining to it by this order.
And since Ray Chandler was also covered by the Protective order of July 9, 2004 regarding Defendant’s Subpoenaes, which allowed the subpoenaed people not to disclose the fact of the subpoena to anyone at all, he shamelessly applied for that status and immediately received it – as it was the Defense which subpoenaed him, not Prosecution.
Reviewing the battlefield we can say that:
- Everything is quiet now
- No one really knows that Ray Chandler refused to come to court and produce his “hard evidence” against Michael Jackson which laid the basis for his slanderous All That Glitters book
- The good old uncle can safely go on with his lies on every TV, radio and media channel
- He should not be afraid to answer for what he says as he is protected by the California Shield law
- His book can still be on sale making profit for the author and publisher and can still disseminate lies about Michael Jackson.