Peretti’s film about Michael Jackson. What REALLY happened. A visit to Monaco in 1993
Michael Jackson once said he was dreaming of a time when lies told by his detractors would become a means to disprove these same lies.
This is exactly the method we are using here and in order to restore the picture of what really happened to Michael we need to first collect lies from his life-long haters like Diane Dimond and Victor Gutierrez and compare them with stories from other Michael’s so-called “friends” – like Bob Jones, MJ’s former publicist, for example, or Jordan Chandler’s mother June, and see what the comparison brings us.
Jacques Peretti’s horror documentary about Michael Jackson describes Bob Jones as Michael’s right hand and as a person who supposedly knew Michael Jackson very well – the film says “he had been on every tour and stayed at every hotel” with his boss. His work “entailed dealing with the tabloids, dealing with the fan magazines, dealing with the fanatics who are his fans and they are fanatical…”.
Given Bob Jones’ opinion about Michael’s fans I wonder whether he was capable of doing his work at all, but this is not the point. The point is whether he really knew Michael so well that he could be regarded as the ultimate source of information about the man.
Surprisingly Bob Jones says that he met Jackson seldom and tried to distance himself from his boss. He speaks about it in his testimony on April 11, 2005 (http://floacist.wordpress.com/2007/12/15/court-transcript-4-11-2005/):
QUESTIONS BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS TO BOB JONES:
11 Q. What did you do for Michael Jackson?
12 A. I was vice-president of communications and
13 community relations.
14 Q. And when did you begin working in that
15 capacity for Mr. Jackson?
16 A. 1987.
17 Q. Can you tell me a little bit about what that
18 title involves in terms of work?
19 A. Dealing with the media, and the community,
20 and various other assignments.
21 Q. Such as?
22 A. Whatever came up. Getting — arranging to
23 get awards, arranging for coverage in newspapers,
24 magazines. Assisting in the — with the fan clubs,
25 et cetera.
26 Q. All right. Would it be fair to say that you
27 were the man in charge of public relations –
28 A. Yes. 5522
1 Q. — for Michael Jackson?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And how many years did you work for Mr.
4 Jackson?
5 A. 16 and a half.
6 Q. And how did your employment come to an end?
7 A. I received a letter one day saying that,
8 “Thank you for your services. They’re no longer
9 needed.”
10 Q. Did you ever receive any explanation as to
11 why you were being terminated?
12 A. That, “We were restructuring” –
13 MR. MESEREAU: Objection; hearsay.
14 THE WITNESS: — “and going in a different
15 direction.” That was in the letter.
23 Q. BY MR. AUCHINCLOSS: All right. As far as
24 your understanding as to why you were being
25 terminated, can you tell us what you believe to be
26 the reason why you were being terminated?
27 A. Well, I can only cite the letter that I
28 received. 5523
18 “All right. So you were never given an explanation
19 as to why you were being terminated?” Is that true?
20 THE WITNESS: The letter, yes. The letter.
21 That’s all I can say.
4 So I believe you testified you were
5 terminated late in 2004; is that correct?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. And since that time have you had any
8 employment?
9 A. No.
10 Q. Have you been involved in any activity at
11 this time concerning — during that period of time
12 since your termination that concerns your years of
13 employment with Michael Jackson?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. What is that?
16 A. I went to the State of California and filed
17 a complaint for my vacation pay.
18 Q. All right. Other than that, have you been
19 involved in the writing of any memoirs of your years
20 with Michael Jackson?
25 A. Yes.
26 Q. And can you
27 specifically tell me what you’ve been doing in terms
28 of writing those memoirs? 5525
1 A. Preparing a book.
2 Q. Preparing a book?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. And what is the subject matter of that book?
5 A. My — well, my years and — my years with
6 Michael Jackson.
7 Q. During your years of working with Michael
8 Jackson, did you have occasion to spend time with
9 him personally?
10 A. Seldom.
15 Q. And did you ever travel with him?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. On how many occasions?
18 A. I think on three tours, and perhaps on
19 special occasions for events that I had arranged,
20 such as the World Music Awards.
21 Q. Where was the World Music Awards?
22 A. Monaco.
1 Q. How often would you see Mr. Jackson during
2 that trip?
3 A. Well, I would say, doo-doo-doo-doo, in Monte
4 Carlo maybe I saw them three or four times.
QUESTIONS BY THOMAS MESEREAU:
17 Q. Okay. Now, when did you say your work was
18 terminated?
19 A. June 9th, 2004.
20 Q. Okay. And where was your office at the
21 time?
22 A. In my home.
23 Q. You indicated in response to the
24 prosecutor’s question that you didn’t see Michael
25 very often, right?
26 A. No.
27 Q. And why was that?
28 A. This was — this was Michael Jackson’s modus 5549
1 operandi from the very beginning. I saw Michael
2 mostly if we were on a tour that my presence — if I
3 may explain. I have worked in the entertainment
4 industry prior to working with Michael Jackson for
5 17 and a half years, and I know familiarity breeds
6 contempt. And the further you stay away from
7 artists, the better off you are.
8 Q. And for that reason, did you not go to
9 Neverland very much?
10 A. I went to Neverland when I brought groups
11 up, such as the Challengers Boys & Girls Club. Such
12 as the First AME Church, et cetera. I was not a
13 regular visitor at Neverland at all.
20 Q. BY MR. MESEREAU: In a typical year, while
21 you were employed, how often would you visit
22 Neverland?
23 A. I haven’t been to Neverland in years. My
24 visits to Neverland were on a more frequent basis
25 about five years ago when I was able to get groups
26 approved to go to Neverland.
27 Q. Okay. And you had an office located where?
28 A. Before we closed the offices, we were at
1 9255 Sunset Boulevard.
So Bob Jones wasn’t a regular at Neverland where he hadn’t been in years, rarely saw his boss as he worked from home, and associated with Michael Jackson only on tours – three times within his 16 and a half years of employment. He also thought that “the further you stay away from artists, the better off you are” (from all artists).
But Peretti’s film presented it as if Bob Jones was somewhat offended that he always had to stay in a suite (!) on a different floor from his boss. And now we find out that it was actually Bob Jones’ own choice. And how much can this person know about Jackson as a human being if he was never really close to him and made it a rule to distance himself from him and all other artists he represented?
From what we see in the film it is clear that Bob Jones’ story about Monaco is very much edited, but even the redacted version shows that what he said was not exactly what they later made it out to be. He said very little and mostly made meaningful pauses, but Peretti, Gutierrez and Dimond sqeezed as much horror into these pauses as was only possible.
Here is their version of the events based on Bob Jones’s words:
- “He pushed it to the edge in Monaco. It was their honeymoon. The most intense things occurred during their honeymoon. He gave the mother of the boy his credit card and she went shopping with Jordan and Michael being alone in that room. Jackson is in the suite with Jordie. He was having a relationship with Jordie and it was intensifying. So why did no one stop him, not the police, not Jordie’s mother, not Jackson’s manager?
And this is what Bob Jones really said:
Peretti: Jordie and Michael were with the flu?
Bob Jones: Supposedly. I got the doctor to come. They said they had the flu. The mother and daughter went out shopping to Italy (?). They were in the suite with the flu.
Peretti: For how long?
Bob Jones: All day. But they were in the bedroom at night too. (long silence)
Peretti (pertrified): What do you think was going on?
Bob Jones: I have no idea. (long silence)
Peretti (knowingly): I think you do.
Bob Jones: Oh, you do?
Peretti: I could make a guess. (meaningful silence)
Bob Jones: Whatever, you know. I wasn’t in there. I had a suite on a different floor. I always stayed on a different floor than my boss. Familiarity breeds contempt.
Peretti’s voiceover: Only Michael and Jordie can know what really happened in that room. All we know for sure is that while the ceremony continued Jackson and Jordie remained in the suite.
Diane Dimond: He was sitting on his lap next to the prince of Monaco. His mother and sister sat behind. It was so embarrassing that one of his aides said Jordie should go and sit in the back but he wouldn’t hear about it.
Bob Jones: You can take a horse to the water but you cannot make him drink it. When you see somebody doing wrong you can tell the person he shouldn’t do that…
Peretti: What was he saying to the world?
Bob Jones: I can do what I want to.
Oh, how meaningful those silences are! They are evidently meant to imply that Bob Jones didn’t believe they had the flu and that it was only a pretext for them to stay alone the whole day. But why didn’t they use those pauses for explaining why Michael and Jordan called a doctor at all if they were allegedly not ill? Isn’t it too much trouble to call a doctor first and then explain to him that it was only a joke?
Actually it is no other than June Chandler who confirms that they were really ill that day:
15 Q. Okay. When you were in Monaco with Michael
16 Jackson, what did you do?
17 A. We went to an awards ceremony. We — well,
18 Jordie and Michael — Jordie and Michael were sick,
19 so Lily and I went shopping and drove around. We
20 were driven around.
3 Q. Now, you indicated that at one point Jordie
4 and Michael had the flu, right?
5 A. Correct.
6 Q. And where did you find out they had the flu?
7 A. In the hotel room.14 Q. And do you recall what you bought with
15 Michael Jackson’s credit card?
16 A. I know I — I think two handbags.
17 Q. Anything else?
18 A. Not that I recall, no.
From what I know about the flu it is not only a sore throat and a running nose, but a bad headache and a high temperature too. So why would it look unnatural to some that those ill with the flu would stay in the hotel room and sleep the whole day? Or possibly watch TV and videos? And certainly not take baths as I am not sure that people with a high temperature like taking baths as Jordan later alleged.
And why do they fuss so much about those children sitting in the first row during the ceremony? Bob Jones indeed asked Michael to make the children sit in the back but Michael wouldn’t want to hear about it, so does it mean that he was defiantly demonstrating that he would ‘molest’ a child in full view of everyone?
June Chandler’s testimony is no help to us in answering the question as she doesn’t’ even mention the World Music Awards ceremony and (surprisingly) never tells the story of a rare chance of meeting the royalty via Michael, however this time it is Bob Jones himself who clarifies the situation in his testimony at the 2005 trial:
Q. Where was Michael Jackson sitting in that event?
BJ: He was seated on the front row next to Prince Albert of Monaco, and — on one side, and Linda Evans, the actress, on the other side. And I attempted to get — I had arranged for the Chandlers to sit directly behind Mr. Jackson because I did not feel that the royalty wanted to be bothered with those guests. But he insisted that they sit with him, so I left it alone.
Q. Now, you indicated at the music awards, the World Music Awards, that at one point you saw Jordie on Michael Jackson’s lap and his sister on Michael Jackson’s lap together, right?
10 A. That is correct.
Q. Did the mother sit with Michael Jackson as well?
A. Behind.
Q. Okay. So when you saw the brother and sister sitting on Michael Jackson’s lap in the first row, the mother was right behind, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. So this is the first row in full view of everyone at the awards show, correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. There was no effort to hide anything at any time?
A. No.
Q. At some point, did you see the children with their mother behind where Michael Jackson was
sitting?
A. When I brought them in to their seats, they were seated behind Mr. Jackson. Mr. Jackson moved them up front.
Q. Okay. Did — when you say he moved them up front, did he move them into seats up front?
A. He moved them into his seat.
Q. Okay. So the children moved into his seat to sit with him?
A. With him.
Q. And the mother still stayed sitting behind?
A. That is correct.
Q. And at some point did you see the children go back with their mother or did they always stay with Michael?
A. No, they stayed up there.
Q. Please tell the jury what the World Music Awards show is.
A. The World Music Awards show is a show that’s given annually in Monte Carlo for the best worldwide record sales. And we had gone there for that particular purpose, for him to be honored by the World Music Awards. And to be seen around the world. And I attempted, because perception is 90 percent of what the public thinks, to get those people off of his lap.
Q. Did the Chandler family seem to remain during the entire show sitting with Michael?
A. Oh, of course. Yes.
Q. Okay. And were there other stops on that trip?
A. To Paris. We flew from Los Angeles to Paris, and Paris to Nice, and we helicoptered to Monte Carlo.
Q. Okay. Do you recall attending any other events with Mr. Jackson on the trip to Monaco?
A. Of course, His Royal Highness Prince Albert hosted a reception for visiting dignitaries, and he had an event — when you go there, they have an event each night for visiting dignitaries. And there was only one event that Mr. Jackson attended.
Q. And do you recall whether or not the Chandler family were at that event?
A. They were with him.
Q. And that was because Michael insisted that the Chandler family go?
A. I don’t know whether he insisted whether they attend or not.
Q. Okay.
A. But all of his guests were invited.
Q. Okay. Were there any other guests of Michael Jackson that you haven’t named?
A. No, just the Chandler family.
So Michael not only insisted that ordinary children should sit next to the Prince of Monaco, but that an ordinary family should attend the reception for visiting dignitaries and be treated there as their equal.
Isn’t it bringing a new perspective into the whole story? Most pop stars would leave their companions at the hotel while they make their dazzling appearance at a royal ceremony and reception all by themselves – but not Michael Jackson.
Diane Dimond described the scene of Jordan sitting on Michael’s lap during the awards ceremony as something completely revolting: “He was bouncing Jordan up and down on his lap. His nickname for the boy was Rubber. He was whispering Rubber, Rubber…” My God, how could she know about Michael whispering anything to anyone? Did she ask the Prince of Monaco about it? And did he honor her with an answer?
Well, I also had a look at that video of the ceremony and these are the primary things that attracted my attention:
1) Jordan was NOT sitting in Michael’s lap and Michael was NOT bouncing him at all. If you look at Michael moving with the rhythm you’ll notice that Jordan is completely static, which means that he is sitting on Michael’s seat and not on Michael’s lap (See the video at 0:26)
2) Half the time it was Jordan’s sister LILY who was really sitting on Michael’s lap. In fact the ceremony must have been long and the children were evidently tired and so they shuffled from Michael Jackson to Linda Evans and back. See for yourselves:
3) And it is no surprise that Bob Jones didn’t understand what was going on there in the first row – he was sitting some 20 feet away from them and couldn’t see or understand what Michael was doing:
19 Q. Now, going to the music awards, what was the
20 nature of the physical contact that you saw with
21 them at the World Music Awards?
22 A. Jordie sat on his lap.
23 Q. Where were you seated?
24 A. I sat a distance away from June, her
25 daughter, and Jordie and Michael.
26 Q. How many feet away were you when you were
27 observing Mr. Jackson and Mr. Chandler together?
28 A. Oh, I would say approximately 20 feet.
And has any of you ever wondered whether Michael could do without the Chandlers at the awards-giving ceremony in Monaco at all?
I asked myself this question and my answer is that he could do without them easily. He could have left them at the hotel to watch the ceremony on TV.
Then why did he take the Chandlers to the ceremony?
It is because Michael wanted the children to have an experience they could remember for the rest of their lives. That is why he made a gesture very much characteristic of him – he moved them to the front row next to the Prince of Monaco thus showing that children deserve only the very best in life.
Bob Jones evidently didn’t think so and that is why all the seats were already assigned by him and other officials to other dignitaries in the first row excluding the children, so Michael had to seat them where he could – Jordan on the edge of his own seat and Lily on his lap.
Would he have done that if there was any ‘molestation’ really taking place? I doubt it very much indeed – only a mind like DD’s could come up with a highly perverse idea like that.
And would Jordan have looked that happy if only half an hour before that things ‘had gone out of hand’ as June and Jordan later described it? What a crazy idea…
A photo taken in Nice of Michael and the Chandlers after the Music Awards ceremony. Evidently Michael was fond of Lily no less than of Jordan.
But why would Michael give so much attention to someone else’s children?
Let me refer you to some short quotes from Michael’s testimonial tapes with Rabbi Shmuley – they really give an insight into Michael’s inner world and show that it was so much different from the world of Dimond, Gutierrez and Peretti that they are like those parallel lines which never cross, as you know:
MJ: “…I think, children worship fun, love, they worship attention. They want a fun-filled day. Things that, when you experience it with them you have a special place in their heart forever. It changes who they become and what our world becomes, the totality of what happens in this universe becomes. It is the future”.
MJ: …When I see children I see helpless little puppies. They are so sweet. How can anyone hurt them? All children are our children. I see beauty in all children and I love them all – equally. I used to have arguments about it with people who didn’t agree with me. They say you should love your own more.
- … I’m not easy and I know I’m not easy. Because I give all my time to someone else. I give it to children, I give it to somebody sick somewhere, to the music…
P.S.
The Veritas Project says that Ray Chandler’s book provides Michael’s note to Jordan which in Ray’s opionion means something awful. I’ve read it and to me it is just another proof of Michael’s belief in Jordan and his great future in entertainment industry – his dance was indeed so awesome that he stopped people in the street at the age of 8 (according to Ray Chandler).
The note also shows Michael’s affection for the whole family and his particular fondness for Lily and her mother June.
It is also sadly clear that at the time he thought the family was very much like him and it was a spirit of kinship that was making them as one:
- “[Boy’s name], you’re not only my cousin but also my best friend. I can’t stop loving your mother and sister. I have found true love in all of you. If more people were like us the world would change instantly. I have such golden dreams for you. I want you to be a giant in the industry. You are my new inspiration. I love you. Doo doo head. Applehead. Disneyland soon. Love, doo doo. Call soon, bye, doo doo head. Tell Mom I love her.”
Tell Mom I love her …
Vindicating Michael 
Helena, the German text below the last photo is funny because it says MJ is on the terrace of his hotel with two children and an “unidentified” woman. So like in the case of Jimmy Safechuck people wondered about the woman at his side, and it turned out it was the mother of the children. It should be pointed out again that the mothers or parents of the children joining him were always present. He always invited them together with the children to accompany or visit him, he never excluded them or tried to keep them away.
I am reading Frank Cascio’s book again and in his case he even lays stress on the fact that MJ knew his father first, was very impressed by him as a caring person and then wanted to meet the rest of the family. Frank says Michael appreciated their family values and that was the reason he remained friends with them for his whole life. And these family values was what he missed and was looking for and what he certainly was also looking for when he befriended other kids and their families – it was not only the relationship with children.
LikeLike
Dee, you were so fortunate to see it with your own eyes! And we here are also fortunate to have your description of how it really was as you are a direct eye-witness of the events. So thank you very much for it.
You are right – it is important to draw attention to the fact that Jordan was easy and relaxed during that visit. When you read Jordan’s declaration to Larry Feldman the words used by him to describe that trip were something like “In Monaco things got really bad” or “out of hand”, and if it had been true the boy would have been at least confused and stressed out, or more likely even depressed by the “secret” he had to bear.
Only there was no secret to bear and this is why there was not a single trace of anxiety in his behavior. Your words can be even illustrated by some screenshots from that famous tape in Monaco at the World Music Awards when Michael was sitting with June Chandler’s children in the first row.
One of the photos shows Jordan with a broad smile on his face when he is sitting on Michael’s seat (not on his lap!) and watching the show:
In another photo Jordan touches Prince Albert by his sleeve and behaves like he is a pal of his – easy and relaxed:
And the third is a photo of all three Chandlers on the roof of a hotel where Michael is naturally holding the little girl, Lily Chandler in his arms – the media didn’t show it but during that visit Michael seemed to always hold her in his arms:
LikeLike
Having been present throughout Michael and Jordie’s trip to Monaco, I can categorically verify that Jordie most certainly didn’t look like a youngster who was in a predicament which would have caused him any kind of stress or anxiety at all. On the contrary, he was out on the balcony frequently with Michael by his side, laughing, joking and throwing water balloons at those of us down below. Michael was exploiting the opportunity for a childhood he never experienced. Unfortunately, (too many) others were preparing to exploit him. Excellent and well-thought-out piece, as always.
LikeLike
There is only one thing good about these bullshit documentaries about Michael – when you watch them today they look absolutely revolting. The atmosphere those people created around Michael, the things they said, the assumptions they made, the interperations they gave of his most innocent moves – all of it is indeed disgusting. But on the other hand it helps us to recreate the times. We can imagine ourselves in Michael’s shoes and what it was like for him. It must have been suffocating.
And after that some people wonder why he felt so lonely and lived in isolation. They explained it by him being “paranoid”. But if we were in his place we would also dream of a safe hiding place for ourselves and would shut away from this world – if the world is like the one in Peretti’s film.
This post was made five years ago and now that I briefly looked through it I saw that the video was not working. I’ve now replaced it with a shorter one.
LikeLike
Peretti’s documentary is atrocious in terms of filmmaking and just a big pile of bullshit from beginning to end. I only just saw it today. It disgusted me.
LikeLike
Congratulation for you site!Beautiful!
Enter at Michael Jackson’s Official Blogs for fans
http://michael-jackson-fan-club.blogspot.com/
and leave a link to your blog for sending people to this article.
Thanks!
LikeLike
@ Helena
Yes, I agree about June’s character. On her part, she might have hoped for a romantic relatiohsip with Michael, I don’t know. This family wanted to posess Michael. June as well as Evan and Jordan, IMO. Remember how Evan wanted Michael to buy them a house or build an addition to their house and move in with them.
When they realized they couldn’t posess him, they turned against him, and like you said, went for “the second best thing”, extorting money from him.
Some of us are still wondering how could Jordan willingly turn against his friend, but why would he be a decent young man with morals and ethics when he had parents like Evan and June?
LikeLike
“As for June, I don’t necessarily think of a romantic relationship, but we have to understand Michael and his patterns”.
Suzy, you know, I am interested in June Chandler not because Michael might have felt something for her (it is none of my business anyway), but because her role in that story seems to me a well conceived piece of a fairy tale. It was her testimony which put me very much on my guard and the manner in which she was talking which infuriated me completely. To say that I didn’t like her testimony is to say nothing at all. You feel that this woman is capable of a lot.
She is a complete opposite of Evan. Evan was a psychopath, nervous, jealous, sometimes unruly, not always sure of himself, suspicious of the worst between MJ and his son and a little bit sloppy. June is absolutely normal, has everything under control (and this is why I am sure there was never a slightest chance she could allow any ‘molestation’ taking place), very strict in her behavior and wasn’t suspicious of any ‘wrong’ because she assessed the situation with Jordan absolutely correctly (contrary to Evan).
That is why her later involvement in the case was not because ‘her eyes suddenly opened’ – she was’t a naive girl like that – no, her involvement was intentional. She just decided that if she couldn’t have all, she would settle for something smaller but surer and wouldn’t leave the scene with her hands empty.
Evan Chandler said about her (not that I listen to him much though but here he was right) that she was cold and heartless. Based on her character I am 100% sure that it was with her joining the gang their case acquired that ‘steel’ feel.
You see we still need to understand why Jordan didn’t speak to her for 11 years after the case.
LikeLike
The Steins were not friend of Michael, they sold the tapes.
LikeLike
@ Helena
Yeah, I know the video and I know that it’s Lily sitting on Michael’s lap there. It’s just this picture that I didn’t realize so far it’s her. My bad. You see how the media are able to manipulate people if we are not on alert. Putting this picture in articles where they talk about MJ molesting boys, suggesting it’s a boy on his lap, when, in fact, it’s a girl. Of course, even when I thought it’s a boy, I didn’t think it’s something sinister, but the media obviously did, that’s why they used this pic so often. But they never informed us it was a girl….
As for June, I don’t necessarily think of a romantic relationship, but we have to understand Michael and his patterns. The media always talked about Michael befriending little boys, but in reality he befriended families, and in those relationsips the mother was actually often more important than the kid. It wasn’t just with June. It’s a pattern.
You have certainly heard of the Glenda tapes. I personally believe them to be real and – I just recently realized it – the son of Glenda was in a British documentary in 2005, talking about it. The documentary was called “Michael Jackson’s boys” and as you can imagine
by that title, it was a trashy documentary suggesting there was something sinister in his relationship with boys. Here is the part with Damion:
Notice, how Damion doesn’t say anything suggesting Michael did anything wrong with him, it’s just the narration that makes their relationship look bad (much like what Bashir did). In fact, what Damion is talking about more is the relationship between Michael and his mother (and it seems like the makers of this documentary don’t even want to acknowledge that, they go on making their suggestive, trashy comments).
Damion is talking about how Michael was on the phone with his mother for long hours, calling her 3-4 times a day, to the extent that it made Damion’s father jealous. And that’s why he decided to tape the calls.
IMO this is the type of relationship Michael had with June as well, and with many mothers of kids. To me it even seems the mothers were as or more important in these relationships than the kids….
LikeLike
“Bob Jones actually said when asked about having a different suite from Michael’s was “Familiarity breeds contempt.”’
Raven, thanks a lot for the correction – I can’t decipher some words and always appreciate help. What surprised me in Bob Jones’ case was that he distanced himself from Michael on purpose. And this was Michael’s PR man? He produces the impression of someone who is of very high opinion of himself and who is offended that his effort was not appreciated well enough. But he does not look like someone who would put all his life and soul into his work!
He wanted to stay at a distance in order ‘to preserve his dignity’ and not to turn into an errand boy – this is understandable of course, but is not enough when it comes to Michael and the awful situation he found himself in. And I can imagine how much he was paid for the work too if some chefs dismissed from Michael’s house claimed he owed them almost half a million for vacation pay or overtime or something of the kind.
The more characters we see around Michael the more I understand that he had practically nobody to rely on in his surrounding. Even his lawyers in the 1993 turned out to be buddies with Larry Feldman, as I’ve just learned. I now remember my shock at Johnnie Cochran not saying a word about Michael’s innocence in his conversation with Larry King – he discussed it as a purely legal matter with no word of support for Michael. It astonished me then but I decided not to raise the point as everyone seems to have a high regard for the great Johnnie Cochran. He may be great but he didn’t believe Michael the way Thomas Mesereau did and that is why the 1993 case ended the way it did.
LikeLike
“I have never realized that’s Lily with Michael on that pic!”
Suzy, please watch that video too and you will see that half the time Lily is sitting on Michael’s lap and he is as affectionate with her as if she were his daughter (Lily is sitting on his lap while Jordan isn’t!).
I think that Michael was spending so much time with the Chandlers’ children not only because he loved children in general – he was treating June, Jordan and Lily as his family. When the prosecutor and June Chandler spoke of Michael calling them a family they definitely implied something sinister – but it seems to me we should understand the word family in its literal meaning here.
Something prevents you from believing in the romantic side of their relations with June Chandler, while the chances of a love affair there are very, I would say extremely high. And LMP is no obstacle here – she was a married woman with a newly-born baby then (born in October 92) and though Michael was evidently very much attracted to her he was not the one to break family ties that easily. His relationship with LMP intensified at the time the Chandler scandal broke out because LMP provided him with great support then, but back in March-April-May 1993 he was still undecided and could be choosing.
This is probably why he spent his time in June Chandler’s home in April – if it were only for the sake of Jordan they could have gone to Neverland (as all the ‘attractions’ are there). But for some reason he stayed in her home, though it Neverland it would have been much more comfortable and secure?
Monaco took place on May 9, 1993 and exactly two months later Evan Chandler said to David on the phone that rumors that Michael was in love with June (he used a different word) were not true as Michael “even didn’t like June”. Well, firstly, this was two months later and secondly, Evan probably wanted David to pass this information to June to ruin her hopes about Michael. And though we know that Michael did start to avoid June Chandler later, she was still hoping – otherwise why would she plan to go on a tour with him together with the children?
I’m sure it would be a great mistake to underestimate this point – without it we won’t be able to unravel this mystery as June Chandler is one of the key players there.
And getting back to Lily and Jordan it seems to me that Michael was treating them as his own children. He was probably testing himself as their father – even an ordinary man will usually outdo himself if he is entering a new family, let alone Michael to whom children were always in the first place. And June was using her children for anchoring him to her.
LikeLike
Helena, not that it really matters but I think what Bob Jones actually said when asked about having a different suite from Michael’s was “Familiarity breeds contempt.” It’s an old saying that comes from the idea that if you spend too much time around someone, you’ll grow to despise them. (Bob seems to be a man of many cliches’…”familiarity breeds contempt,” “you can lead a horse to water but can’t make it drink,” etc).
Apparently, even with all that distance, he still found a way to breed plenty of “contempt.”
LikeLike
Helena
I have never realized that’s Lily with Michael on that pic! The media always put this pic in articles where they want to put his relationship with boys in a sinister light, so in that context it has always been suggested it’s a boy on his lap. And I have never really looked into it and realized it’s actually Lily, to be honest. But it’s true, it’s her! Thanks for pointing that out!
LikeLike
Jordan didn’t have the behavior of a victim in Monaco. He was happy, he was having fun and he didn’t avoid Michael. PERIOD.
LikeLike
Suzy, this is such a treasure that I am copying the letter together with some comments (for the picture and full text see here please: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/01/but-he-never-calls-me.html)
“In November of 1993, as the media feasted on the first child sex abuse allegation to be made against Michael Jackson, Oscar-winning actor Maximilian Schell sent the following letter to the Hollywood Reporter and paid for it to be printed on the back page of every copy of the publication:
MAXIMILIAN SCHELL
NOV, 19
1993
TO: MICHAEL JACKSON
(SOMEWHERE ON THIS PLANET)
DEAR MICHAEL,
I AM DEEPLY ASHAMED — FOR THE PRESS, FOR THE MEDIA, FOR THE WORLD – I don’t know you – we met only ONCE on one of those Award-Dinners (“ENTERTAINER of the DECADE”) – We shook hands – you were kind and polite – I don’t think you knew who I was – HOW SHOULD YOU? OUR WORLDS ARE TOO FAR APART – (I am more, “CLASSICAL” – minded -) but I looked into your eyes — THEY WERE KIND —
You are a great artist and I admire you – my little daughter (she is 4½) LOVES YOU! DEEPLY – SHE EVEN WANTS TO MARRY YOU! (-“BUT HE NEVER CALLS ME!”) SHE IMITATES YOU ALL THE TIME – and quite well –
WE ALL LOVE YOU
I would like her more to listen to MOZART – but she loves YOU! AND I RESPECT HER TASTE! —
THAT YOU SURVIVE THIS AVALANCHE OF DIRT THROWN AT YOU – I ADMIRE TREMENDOUSLY –
THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU ARE!
GOD BLESS YOU
Maximilian Schell
P.S. “ONE CAN ONLY SEE GOOD WITH THE HEART – THE ESSENTIAL IS INVISIBLE FOR THE EYES” – (“THE LITTLE PRINCE”)
Comments:
Ana said…
‘Judgment At Nuremberg’ is one of my favorite films and when I saw the name Maximilian Schell I recognized him from the film. How surprising that he would write an open letter to Michael Jackson. Thank you for bringing this to my attention as I doubt I would have learned of it anywhere else.
Katey said…
I’m glad this got posted. You know, Michael Jackson had to deal with a lot of crap during his life. And I’m very sorry for everything he went through and though I’m sad he’s gone, I’m glad he doesn’t have to deal with tasteless people anymore. He’s at peace. This man’s letter is very sweet and I hope it opens other people’s minds.
Maria said…
Thank you, I knew about this letter. It takes a genius to acknowledge a genius-Michael Jackson always shook hands with the greats and they were proud to be his friends.
That says it all.
LikeLike
Helena,
Here is Maximilian Schell’s letter to Michael: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/01/but-he-never-calls-me.html
LikeLike
Lisa Campbell says that Maximilian Schell sent a letter to Michael after the Chandler scandal broke out and quoted Antoine de Saint Exupery’s “Little Prince”: “…one sees well only with the heart. The essential is invisible to the eyes.”
(so as a complete minimum people like DD and VG should have a heart to be able to see the essential).
Antoine de Saint Exupery was another pure and noble soul. He comes from the French nobility, was a pilot during WWII and was shot in a battle somewhere above the Mediterranian. His Little prince novel was written in 1943. I looked up an article in Wiki about him not to misquote the above piece and was amazed by the other quotes from his Little Prince book: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Little_Prince
He was surely a kindred soul to Michael Jackson and was fortunate enough not to have people of DD and VG quality around him who could easily ridicule him for these sayings (many of them seem to have been said by MJ!):
• Grown-ups never understand anything by themselves, and it is tiresome for children to be always and forever explaining things to them.
• It is truly useful since it is beautiful.
• “Where are the people?” resumed the little prince at last. “It’s a little lonely in the desert…”
“It is lonely when you’re among people, too,” said the snake.
• Here is my secret. It is very simple: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.
• You’re beautiful, but you’re empty…. No one could die for you.
• “Men have forgotten this truth,” said the fox. “But you must not forget it. You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed.”
• Only children know what they are looking for.
• But the eyes are blind. One must look with the heart…
From other books by ANTOINE DE SAINT EXUPERY:
• To love is not to look at one another: it is to look, together, in the same direction.
• Each man must look to himself to teach him the meaning of life. It is not something discovered; it is something molded. (Man in the mirror)
• Your task is not to foresee the future, but to enable it. (Man in the mirror and everything else)
• Perfection is attained, not when no more can be added, but when no more can be removed.
• To be a man is to be responsible: to be ashamed of miseries you did not cause; to be proud of your comrades’ victories; to be aware, when setting one stone, that you are building a world. (a message to be sent to DD and VG on a daily basis as a wake up call)
• True love is inexhaustible: the more you give, the more you have.
• I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things. (Michael’s tree where he used to write songs)
• You do not inherit the earth from your ancestors: you borrow it from your children. (Earth song)
MICHAEL JACKSON:
”When I see children, I see that God has not yet given up on man. The innocence of children represents to me the source of infinite creativity. That is the potential of every human being. But by the time you are an adult, you’re conditioned: you’re so conditioned by the things about you – and it goes”.
“We’ve been treating Mother Earth the way some people treat a rental apartment. Just trash it and move on.
But there’s no place to move on to now. We have brought our garbage and our wars and our racism to every part of the world. We must begin to clean her up, and that means cleaning up our own hearts and minds first, because they led us to poison our dear planet. The sooner we change, the easier it will be to feel our love for Mother Earth and the love she so freely gives back to us”.
“When I begin to feel a little tired or burdened, children revive me. I turn to them for new life, for new music. Two brown eyes look at me so deeply, so innocently, and inside I murmur, “This child is a song.” It is so true and direct an experience that instantly I realize again, “I am a song also.” I am back to myself once more”.
https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/return-to-innocence/ (excerpts from Dancing the dream)
http://michaeljackson4eva.freewebspace.com/custom.html (full book)
LikeLike
“We do not see things as they are; we see things as WE are.”
“So did you come to me to see YOUR fantasies performed before your very eyes”
“Like a mirror reveals the truth see the evil one is YOU”
These are the reflections of an ancient wisdom which psychologists now associate with the mechanism of self-identification. People project their own mentality onto others and explain other people’s behavior by the motives they can think of.
It is actually very simple – if you have ever given away money to someone needy and experienced joy at being able to help, you know what this joy is like. But a greedy person who has never shared his money or did it grudgingly will not be able to understand, feel or even believe that experiencing joy in such circumstances is possible in principle.
Since he always gives money solely for a purpose he will think that a generous gift can been made only in exchange for a big favor, or as payment for something, for example. And no matter how hard you try to explain that you just like making gifts he will laugh or will be angry at you for making a fool of him and thinking him so naïve.
In short a person CANNOT attribute to another person a feeling, motive or a moral feature if it is non-existent for him – he simply doesn’t know what it is, and that’s that. How can he attribute it to anyone if he doesn’t even know or believe that it truly exists? Instead he will project on the other person his own thoughts, not knowing that he is dealing with an opposite case – these thoughts never occur to the other person’s mind…
Listen to what explanations people give of other people’s behavior and you will know how they would most probably behave if there were in similar circumstances themselves – they are choosing from the range of motives which are familiar to them only. This is why it is called self-identification – you involuntarily identify yourself with another person and start speaking for him while simultaneously disclosing your inner self.
Considering this self-identification mechanism both Diane Dimond and Victor Gutierrez should be monstrous inside.
LikeLike
Hi everyone:
Here is a quote I found – it is from the Talmud, and it captures perfectly the perversity of people like Bob Jones, Dimond, Orth, the whole lot of them – “We do not see things as they are; we see things as WE are.”
LikeLike
@suzy
Easy, they are perverts and those are his fantasies.
LikeLike
Thanks for the update, Helena.
I was trying to find out what’s so horrible or disturbing in that letter like the media claimed, but I have never found an explanation. Certainly it’s the same reason why some people in the media believe calling kids Applehead or Rubberhead has to mean something perverse.
Michael hit the nail on the head in his lyrics to the song “Is it scary”:
“I’m gonna be
Exactly what you gonna see
So did you come to me
To see YOUR fantasies
Performed before your very eyes
A haunting ghostly treat
The foolish trickery
And spirits dancing
In the light
But if you came to see
The truth the purity
It’s here inside
A lonely heart
[….]
Masquerade the heart
Is the height of haunting souls
Just not what you seek of me
Can the heart reveal the proof
Like a mirror reveals the truth
See the evil one is you”
What I do find disturbing is how Michael’s detractors constantly use terms like “honeymoon” (see Bob Jones above), “they were in love” etc. when describing Michael and Jordan’s relationship. If they truly believe MJ was a p. and m-ing this boy, how can they use terms like that, as if it was some kind of consensual “romance”? Now, that is what is disturbing, not anything that Michael said or did!
LikeLike
Lynette, oh please do add it! I saw that picture somewhere but then lost it. Looking at it one immedieately realizes that Michael had a deep affection for the whole of the family – Lily, Jordan and evidently June (at the time). BTW, I will also add an affectionate note Michael wrote to all of them (it comes from the Veritas Project):
“[Boy’s name], you’re not only my cousin but also my best friend. I can’t stop loving your mother and sister. I have found true love in all of you. If more people were like us the world would change instantly. I have such golden dreams for you. I want you to be a giant in the industry. You are my new inspiration. I love you. Doo doo head. Applehead. Disneyland soon. Love, doo doo. Call soon, bye, doo doo head. Tell Mom I love her.”
LikeLike
Can I add the photo of them leaving Nice in the limo for people to see.It shows that Michael had as much affection for Lily as he did Jordan. When the tabloids saw Michael in Moaco with the Chandler/Schwartz’s the lines said Michael Jackson has New family. If anyone were suspicious of anything or saw anything weird do you hinsetly think that ALL of the people in that room could be silenced. The chandler kids split their time between Linda Evans and Michael Jackson. Also Yanni was looking toward the kids at one point grinning at how happy they seemed to be to be there.
LikeLike