Skip to content

Victor Gutierrez is a link to NAMBLA and REAL pedophiles. Was it a big P.Plan?

October 7, 2010
Fans protest Michael Jackson's innocence in th...

IT WAS A FRAME UP

SUZY translated into English the German article found by LOUISE and is now presenting it in the blog:

It is a real bombshell! It seems Lynette was right and our gut feelings about Victor Gutierrez being a p. were right. Although Gutierrez claims he is heterosexual, but even if that’s true he is certainly paid well by NAMBLA! Look at him advocating p-ia here! I have no doubt about that now!

The plot is thickening. The portrayal of MJ as a p. and his persecution really was a big p-le master plan! It started in 1986, as you will see from this article http://www.taz.de/?id=archivseite&dig=2005/04/05/a0170:

The article dates back to April 2005, so during the trial. The title is „It was love” (makes me puke and such things are which make me suspect VG is a p.).

It’s about Victor Guiterrez releasing „Jordan Chandler’s Diary” (which we know is fake). The article starts with claiming  that allegedly Jordan , „who got a 25 million dollar settlement”, would too testify at the trial. (We since know both claims to be untrue – the settlement wasn’t about 25 million dollars but 15 million and Jordan did not testify).

„Michael Jackson is a p., without doubt” – Gutierrez is quoted. The paper met him in the Hollywood Hilton Hotel. The 40-year-old journalist wore a black jacket, jeans and glasses.

„He puts a book on the table before us. There are only few copies left of it. On Amazon they cost 300 to 1000 dollars. The title: ’Michael Jackson was my lover’.

Gutierrez has researched the subject since the 80s. “He came dangerously close to the truth” (please notice I’m quoting). Jackson’s much feared „private investigator” Anthony Pellicano issued him death threats. He had to spend long years outside of the USA. (Notice the spin here – he didn’t „have to” spend long years outside of the USA. He could have maybe paid the money he was ordered to pay by the court and then he could have stayed in the US.)

„The 90s were very difficult for me” – says Gutierrez.” (cry me a river)

He says the photo on the cover of his book about Michael in his pyjamas was shot by Jordan Chandler in his (Jordan’s) room during the time he stayed there. The article also claims Gutierrez’s book is greatly based on the diary of the then 13-year-old Jordie. Quote again: „The content of the 215-page book is very explicit, very intimate. It says that between February and July 1993 Michael Jackson and Jordie Chandler were a couple. And they had sex.”

Then the article goes on to say how it’s a „turning point” in the MJ trial that Judge Rodney Melville allowed in the „alleged prior sexual crimes” evidence and it speculates how names like Emmanuel Lewis, Jonathan Spence, Sean Lennon, Wade Robson, Albert von Thurn and Taxis, Jimmy Safechuck, Macaulay Culkin, Brett Barnes, Cory Feldman, Edward and Frank Cascio, Jordie Chandler, could come up there.

Quote: „They were all little boys between the age of 10 and 13. They were all very pretty. They were all close to Michael Jackson. And now they become very dangerous to him.” The article speculates how it could make the trial be dragged on maybe until even the autumn and says: „Jackson’s chances for an acquittal will sink dramatically every day”. (It’s not explained why. Wishful thinking, I guess.)

And this is where it starts to be interesting! The next chapter is titled „Jackson: Hero of the p-les”

First they introduce Gutierrez. They say he grew up in Chile. He works for a paper in Santiago where he writes about politics and human rights (really? what rights does he advocate? p. “rights” maybe?). He first came to the USA in 1984 as a photographer for the Olympic Games in LA. He didn’t go back to his land where Pinochet ruled. „The American Dream was too attractive”, he says. He finds a job at a Spanish paper in LA and becomes a crime reporter.

In 1986 he reports from a congress of NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association). NAMBLA was founded in the 70s. It „supports relationships between generations”. It was supported by prominent names like Gore Vidal and Allen Ginsberg. It got quickly isolated from the rest of the gay movement. Gutierrez claims he heard at this congress for the first time that „Michael is one of us.” He says: „Jackson was treated like an idol there, as a hope for social acceptance.”

Guiterrez quit his job at the newspaper and started talking to employees of Jackson and interviewed the first boys. He was soon out of money, he sold his car, he tried to save money on food.

Quote: „He learns: there are several types of p-les. P-lia is as old as the human race (it reminds me of those professors who recommended Carl Tom’s book and who advocate the same idea and teach their students ped-lia in Ancient Greece as a regular subject. VMJ). Not every game they play is a terrible crime. Victor Gutierrez says: ’In the five months of their relationship Michael Jackson and Jordie Chandler were happy. It was love.’” (If this is not p. propaganda, then what is?)

Then the article describes „D-Day”, 23. August 1993, when the first news of the allegations against Michael broke. How Michael’s lawyer, Howard Weitzman called Michael, who was in Thailand, and broke the bad news to him. Michael denies the allegations, he throws vases to the wall and stops eating.

The next chapter is titled „The parents earn good with it”

It introduces Jordan: he was born on 11, January, 1980. A skinny, dark haired boy, whose parents are divorced since he was five. The article claims that divorced parents are a constant feature by almost all of Jackson’s young friends. (I don’t think it’s true.) Jordan’s parents are described as greedy who were after money and fame. (Guess this is the problem of Ray Chandler with Gutierrez.) Gutierrez says: „In America I learnt what „stage parents” are.” Parents who send their children to singing competitions and constantly look to get near stars.

The article claims that for expensive goods, money and travels Jordan’s parents overlook that a man, who is almost three times as old as him, sleeps in the room of their 13-year-old son. The article says the situation escalated when Jackson wasn’t willing to buy the screenplays written by Chandler’s father, who then got mad and informed the authorities and filed civil charges.

The article claims that as Jackson finds out about the existence of the diary he makes a bizarre contract with Jordie which should stop him from releasing it. (LOL, it’s the first time I hear the settlement was because of Jordan’s diary.). Again it’s claimed it was 25 million dollars (it was 15 million), which Michael paid in annuities, and the parents got one million dollars each too. If Jordan breaks his silence, claims the article, he has to pay back the money. The old lie about Jordan’s description of Michael’s genitals matching is repeated.

Victor Gutierrez answers all questions, just not one: how did he get the diary. “Although on the first page of the book it says: ‘For Jordie. Thanks for your courage’.” The article writes about Jordan then, that he is 25 and hiding from the media. Last year he lived together with his friend, an investment banker, in New York. (I don’t know if it’s an attempt to suggest a gay relationship. I have this feeling. But Jordan is not gay, as far as I know.)

utierrez: “Jordie was at the time very intelligent for his age. He was clever and sensible.” Quote: “It was Jackson’s most intense relationship. ‘At the beginning Michael didn’t know what’s up with him. He only got to know more about p-les in the 90s through the Internet’, says Gutierrez.”

It’s asked why don’t more boys speak out. Gutierrez: “’They are all afraid.’ Not of Michael and his power but of public opinion. ‘It’s about homosexuality’, says Gutierrez, ‘Nobody wants to be the gay Jackson boy.’ His theory: if Madonna had a relationship with a minor that wouldn’t be such a big scandal. On the schoolyard the boy would be a hero. But as Jackson’s lover he would be a faggot.”

’In a hundred years maybe such relationships will be socially accepted’, says Gutierrez. (remember he introduced the same idea in Jacques Peretti’s film? VMJ) The story reminds him of Oscar Wilde and his young lover Bosi. As Gutierrez, a hererosexual himself (if that’s true, I guess NAMBLA pays him well), was looking for a publisher for his book in 1995 he heard people say he glamourizes p-les. (I wonder where people got that idea from. LOL.) He released a Spanish version of his book in Chile. He ships the English version to small book shops in LA himself. Michael Jackson never sued him for his book. His employees buy up all copies those they get hold of..“

Then the 1995 lawsuit of Michael against Gutierrez is mentioned. It says Gutierrez “made a mistake”. This chapter is at least correctly described. That Gutierrez made a claim he couldn’t prove and the mother said Michael never molested his son and Gutierrez could never prove the existence of the tape. Jackson wins the case, Gutierrez is ordered to pay him 2.7 million dollars, but flees to Chile instead.

“He is back in L.A. since 2003 and for the first time he earns money with the story. NBC employs him as an advisor. The company “Rituale World of Wonder” got an option of publishing his book (when Googling this name the only one link that comes up is the link to this very article – does this company exist at all?).

Randy Barbato and Fenton Bailey, who made the documentary “Inside Deep Throat” and before that the Macaulay Culkin comeback „Party Monster”, are working on a Screenplay from Gutierrez’s book in which Danny de Vito should play Gutierrez. (I sense another VG fairy tale here.).

Updated by Suzy:

There are certainly signs in Gutierrez’s book which tell us he WAS in contact with the Chandlers and up until a point they were supportive of his book. Otherwise they wouldn’t have given him pictures of Michael those were shot by Jordan and also private pictures of Jordan himself.

What made them turn on each other? Probably that Gutierrez had a different agenda than them. His story is not that of a victim. His story is a “love story” (as much as I want to puke from this idea) that was ruined by the “evil prejudice” of society and the greed of the parents. Gutierrez used them and then went with his own agenda. They didn’t like that.

It’s my impression that the journalist is probably a p. too. He seems to be sympathetic to VG and his “case”.

[UPDATED]  Indeed, the German newspaper (Die Tageszeitung) which conducted and published the above interview with Gutierrez has a history in advocating p-lia! Look what I have found about them:

“In 2010, an article emerged on the website Spiegel Online titled “The Sexual Revolution and Children: How the left took things too far”. The article mentions Tageszeitung’s promotion of Children’s sexual liberation during the 1970s.[2] A series in Tageszeitung titled “I Love Boys” featured interviews with men who described “how beautiful and liberating sex with preadolescent boys supposedly was”.[3] The article goes on to mention that those who opposed sexual experimentation with children, such as the magazine’s then editor Gitti Hentschel were accused of being “prudish” by others who accused them of inhibiting freedom of expression and children’s sexuality.[4]”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Tageszeitung#Pedophilia_Controversy

So one can only wonder how much are the media actually infected? I start to wonder what was NBC’s real reason to give a job to Gutierrez in covering the MJ trial….

I will search for more on that website. At the end of the article it says: “Tomorrow: Jordie Chandler and Michael Jackson: the story of an abused love”. It’s a very suspicious title again. Suspicious of more p. propaganda….

Updated by Lynette:

Hi I am going to add 2 pages from his book. They are the Authors Notes. This is where he thanks everyone who helped him. There is some irony in this because right after he thanks the LAPD Child Abuse Unit He Thanks NAMBLA. How brazen I wonder if the LAPD are aware they  helped one of his kind? What do you think? Probably not.

 

117 Comments
  1. May 23, 2011 8:51 pm

    @Truth Prevail yes & JC didn’t have a diary

    Like

  2. shelly permalink
    May 23, 2011 8:27 pm

    There is something that I don’t understand, if Sneddon really believed Culkin, Robson and Barnes, why the Neverland 5 were not prosecuted. Some of them claimed to be direct witnesses of child abuse and they never went to the police. In most country it’s a crime to do that.

    Like

  3. Truth Prevail permalink
    May 23, 2011 5:25 pm

    wait is this the book the one where victor claims wade was molested 2 and did jordies diary ever exist?

    Like

  4. May 22, 2011 7:55 pm

    Victor Guitirrez and Evan Chandler crossed paths and this resulted in a dramatic meeting of minds. V.G.`s pathology+E.C.`s pathology is more than 1+1.The result was a crime with ramifications to last beyongd the death of Michael.It became explosive and the fall- out is continuing to this day.

    Like

  5. March 1, 2011 1:24 pm

    Thanks for all your research! Yuck! That Michael, an innocent man was so appallingly and disgracefully treated and used as the ‘poster boy’ for this pervert/p***’s makes me wanna throw! And heartbroken for Michael too!😦

    Like

  6. February 20, 2011 12:24 pm

    thanks for this nice post 111213

    Like

  7. Suzy permalink
    January 18, 2011 7:51 am

    Seven wrote a great article on Diane Dimond on her blog: http://www.mj-777.com/?p=7101

    In it she writes Rodney Allen (the guy who trained those Canadian boys to say MJ molested them and who bombarded Hard Copy with letters about it) was arrested and convicted for p-lia in 1998! I didn’t know this, but I’m not surprised. Though so far I “only” thought he was a nutcase, maybe it was a part of that p-le plot against Michael that Gutierrez was a part of too?

    Like

  8. lcpledwards permalink
    November 25, 2010 8:49 pm

    Here is a short video from 1996 of producer Teddy Riley discussing the allegations and his interactions with Jordan Chandler!

    Like

  9. Alison permalink
    October 20, 2010 8:25 pm

    Suzy those are really good points on your last comment – such common sense. as if Macauley would have been such a happy kid, remained friends all those years, gone to his funeral et.c if he’d been abused and as if Wade would have written the tribute he did and choreographed that tribute at those awards last year, can’t remember which one it was, maybe MTV. its just not possible.
    and yeah, jordie would have avoided him.
    its so warped that the media and the poisoned public ‘believe’ that for Michael Jackson all the ‘rules’ change and whats not the case for everyone else and the text books becomes true when its Michael – ie the profile rubbish thats not. its turning a lie into truth and truth into a lie, very evil.
    there was something else i was going to say but its gone right out of my head – either i am losing my marbles or its the anger, if i remember it i will come back later.

    Like

  10. October 19, 2010 5:58 pm

    Wordspinner, can you prove in any way that you are the guy you claim you are?

    Like

  11. Olga permalink
    October 19, 2010 11:53 am

    Sorry Lynette for the double mention.

    Like

  12. Suzy permalink
    October 19, 2010 8:14 am

    Last night there was a program on TV about a p. case in my country. Just two points, that I know we are aware of anyway, but got confirmed again. One is that one expert said that p’s can never stop. He said basically it’s the only crime where recidivism is 100% when they get out of jail.

    That’s one of the reasons why I always say no matter how hard the media tried to fit him in, MJ does NOT fit into the “p. profile”! Even many haters admit the Arvizo case was likely a bogus. So basically what they are saying is that he abused Chandler (and maybe Francia) and then stopped. Because I often hear haters say: “OK, he didn’t molest Arvizo, but he molested Chandler (and Francia).” It just doesn’t work like that! Once a molester always a molester, they cannot stop! With all the children around Michael all the time he should have had, literally, hundreds of victims if he was a p.!

    Then the next argument of haters to this is usually, that he certainly had more victims only they won’t come forward for some reason. We have seen our favourite hater here claim things like people like Wade Robson, Brett Barnes, Macaulay Culkin were molested, and they are only covering for Michael. To believe this you basically have to agree with the p. argument about kids enjoying what p’s doing with them! So with that logic you are basically supporting the p. argument! And that brings me to my next point from yesterday’s program: the victim’s behaviour. It’s a lie, a p. propaganda, that victims could be molested and still turn out to be alright and even happily cover for their molesters, because they enjoyed this so much. That, again, doesn’t work like that!

    This kid started to behave strangely and started to AVOID the guy who molested him, that’s how his mother found out. The boy was sent to this man each summer for a vacation, but after he was molested he didn’t want to go any more and he fought very vehemently against having to go!

    Now, compare this with the fairy tales of the Chandlers! On the stand June was asked if Jordan’s behaviour changed during his friendship with Michael. She said yes, but what she described was NOT AT ALL the change you would expect from an abuse victim! On the contrary! June said Jordan became a smart-alec (turning into a teenager, I guess) and WANTED TO SPEND ALL HIS TIME WITH MICHAEL!

    I guess this is what p. propagandist, Gutierrez told them about how abuse victims behave? But it’s a lie. That’s NOT how abuse victims behave. On the contrary.

    Like

  13. lynande51 permalink
    October 19, 2010 5:20 am

    Hi Olga I did have this article posted in August if you would liketo read it.
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/la-times-article-august-28th-1993-enter-victor-gutierrez/

    Like

  14. Olga permalink
    October 19, 2010 3:38 am

    Helena this is from one of the articles I gave you and I will post a relevant to the subject part

    August 28 1993 LA Times

    -As investigators continue to probe the accusations that Jackson molested one or more children, sources said they spent Friday canvassing more witnesses, interviewing children close to the entertainer and meeting with parents of possible victims.
    Weitzman, who said he is in daily contact with police, declined to discuss the progress of the probe, except to say that “they are conducting a very thorough investigation.”
    One of those interviewed was Victor Gutierrez, a Southern California free-lance journalist who has been working on a book about Jackson for several years. Gutierrez spoke to LAPD officers for two hours Thursday and was interviewed again Friday.
    He would not disclose what transpired during those sessions, but he told The Times that he has interviewed for his book some of the same youngsters being sought for questioning by the LAPD.-

    I think that we might manage to do what police was unable to in 1993. We have to give that pervert what he deserves.

    Like

  15. lynande51 permalink
    October 18, 2010 2:09 am

    Hi Alison. I am afraid tht there is a UK equivialnt of NAMBLA it is called Ipce. This is actually the international group.Type in Thomas O’Carroll and you find more information it if you really want it. Thomas O”Carroll is really the author of the book Michael Jackson Dangerous Liasons by Carl Thomas he used an alias for his book.

    Like

  16. Suzy permalink
    October 17, 2010 2:51 pm

    Hi Alison!

    being in UK i never heard of NAMBLA before, and i have no idea if there’s an equivalent organisation here, I hope with all my heart that there is NOT.

    NAMBLA is a North-American association, but I’m sure there are p. organizations in Europe as well. For some reason, I believe possibly they can operate in Europe even more freely (no wonder VG mentioned his NAMBLA association in a European paper, but never in the US). If you read back on this blog, you will find info on Thomas O’Carroll (Carl Toms), an Irish p., who wrote a slanderous book about Michael after his death (basically trying to advocte p-lia on Michael’s back).

    This man was invited to hold a lecture about his “experiences” as a p. in a Paris conference which was organized by Professor Richard Green who worked at the Universites of California, New York and Camebridge.

    “He said he met Claire Morris, a PhD student, through a television project. She had introduced him to her professor, Richard Green, in the department of criminology. As a result of that contact, Green had invited O’Carroll to speak at the International Academy of Sex Research conference in Paris and was recommending that his students read O’Carroll’s book, Paedophilia: The Radical Case, in which he advocates sex with children, including his own, as a “positive experience”.”

    http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=165893

    O’Carroll was also invited to a program on BBC where he advocated p-lia: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/mar/04/digitaltv.broadcasting

    Also the German paper which conducted the above interview with VG (Die Tageszeitung) has a history in advocating p-lia, as you can see.

    Society’s “elite” is terribly infected, more than we are aware (at least I wasn’t aware before discovering all this)!

    – why would NAMBLA want to use MJ for this, the backlash against him made everyone more aware of the whole issue and did nothing to promote NAMBLA’s cause.?

    Well, I think they are aware that it’s a process to break down society’s moral opposition. They don’t give a damn about Michael’s well being, of course, they can as well as make him go to jail. They are thinking of the “bigger picture”, which is in their mind probably that through such a popular, talented and nice person, they can start tell us that there is nothing wrong with it after all, it’s just another “orientation” bla-bla-bla-bla. They wanted to paint MJ a p. just to provocate an open debate about p-lia using his “case”. It’s evident from O’Carroll’s book. In that process they would make him a “victim” of “wrong” social standards – not that Michael would ask for such a “defense”.

    Like

  17. Alison permalink
    October 17, 2010 12:28 pm

    Hi, I’ve not commented in here before, though I have been in the site.

    I am totally shocked about these links and i am sure you are on the right track because the long term persecution of MJ and the outrageous and nonsensical allegations have to have SOME reason for it and none have seemed good enough to me, even the pure racist angle which i have believed, isn’t enough. In this day and age something that forces so many people in so many organisations to forget any logic, commonsense, reason and any sense of justice and truth seeking in such a way as they have with MJ, and for this to be ‘invisible’ to normally rational people, needs to have long tortuous roots in all factions of society and to have a strong agenda to maintain their agenda / disgusting habits. p..ia ticks these boxes because it is so underground but apparently so prevalent across demgraphic borders.

    being in UK i never heard of NAMBLA before, and i have no idea if there’s an equivalent organisation here, I hope with all my heart that there is NOT.

    I just want to check a couple of things out with you and then i have a question.

    – why would NAMBLA want to use MJ for this, the backlash against him made everyone more aware of the whole issue and did nothing to promote NAMBLA’s cause.?
    -are you saying that VG knew chandlers before 1993 and the whole meeting and “friendship” was a set up from the beginning? if thats what you are saying it certainly makes sense. but how do you prove it was set up?
    – if VG knew chandlers, how did they ever meet and become friends with such a ” man”?
    – is there a possibility EC was also a p..le? and if so – OMG! what about Jordie? was he a victim of this? If so, no wonder MJ wanted to protect him and separate him from evan. – i know that bit is speculation. and if evan realised MJ knew then more reason to try and make it that MJ was the one not himself as he would have not wanted to be outed himself, so blame the pop star to take the heat off himself.

    my other question – if this organisation exists, if this subject is being TAUGHT in a Univeristy and advocated as it seems to be — WHY is this not being stopped? why are Dimond, Sawyer, O’Reilly, Oprah et.c et.c not saying anything about this IF they are so concerned about child abuse as they say they are?? Why is this allowed whilst an innocent man is crucified for – in their eyes- being a perpetrator of the same.??

    my other thought is not directly related, but it may be as part of the wider picture, but its a query i have always held — Why is it that society condemns p..ia ( rightly) but simultaneously promotes it and allows it to be promoted by way of :
    – models, girls usually, who are deliberately made to look underage promoting sexuality through their poses, expressions, AND by the clothes they are modelling, which are often very revealing and sexy. They deliberatley promote an image of “sexy underage innocence”, which is a disgusting thing to do. eg the sexy schoolgirl image which is not aimed at schoolboys, its aimed at adults and the vulnerable waif look.
    – they manufacture children’s clothes that are mini versions of adult clothes that are either sexy or at least encourage adult males to view little girls as smaller versions of adult women.
    – entertainment often includes the above sort or image in dancing and in some song lyrics, this dates back to the 50’s and 60’s at least. these are adult men singing about underage girls and may be well respected groups.

    I have never understood why they so hypocritically do this, yet if someone is caught acting on it the media then come down on them like a ton of bricks. and they should do so if the person is guilty, but the same media may carry one of the above advertisements on the opposite page!

    with this in mind, therefore, it suggests that at least some of those controlling the media, may be p…les. who are promoting their disgusting agenda but have to be seen as being against it when someone is caught. just how widespread must this be for this amount of control? and clearly the media was all controlled when it came to MJ’s persecution.

    If this is true this is something we must expose.

    Like

  18. lynande51 permalink
    October 14, 2010 4:11 pm

    When I first started really reading ATG and read the part where they say that the FBI declined to prosecute for violations of the Mann Act I thought if Mchael had done this in other states and other countries he could have been. It really would have been a travesty too because that is probably one of the most racist laws there is out there. It was passed just so they could prosecute high profile black men that “dared” to become involved with white women. However after his death we find out that they did investigate in 1993 and found nothing. NOBODY ever found one tiny little piece of evidence except for Jason, Gavin, and Jordan saying that it happened. Even after the FBI files were made public Michaels lead “expert” had to add her 2 cents saying that she wonders why they didn’t investigate the 1993 allegations and yet they say that they do. Does she even know how to read? Diane Dimond doesn’t like to read things the way that other peole do she likes to put her spin on everything from the settlement to the FBI files. I swear that woman would spin the bible to use against Jesus and God.

    Like

  19. Chris permalink
    October 14, 2010 12:40 pm

    I think I know what Daves big lie is but I won’t spoil the surprise. I actually noticed it right away but I never bought Dirty Vic’s book (or any that MJ gave no permission to publish) so it never really meant anything to me at the time. I’m just amazed I missed the Mann Act article Charles did until like a month ago. Sneddon what a ……

    Like

  20. October 14, 2010 7:03 am

    “Latoya Jackson is a complete fool and one of the most greedy people that i have ever seen in my life.She was ,and still is ,greedy and jealous of Michael’s fame,success, talent,money.”

    Absolutely! Money is a great factor of course but the main thing is that she is awfully envious of Michael and jealous of him being a star (while she is a nobody) – so telling things about him is just her way to ‘stardom’. She has chosen to make herself a celebrity at the expense of Michael’s good name.

    I remember seeing her on TV soon after Michael’s death together with Katherine – the mother was reserved and sad, but that imbecile was beaming with joy that she could show off her good figure and a beautiful dress. She behaved like a ‘star’ at the Cannes festival. Terrible creature.

    This is what happens when you are empty inside.

    Like

  21. ares permalink
    October 14, 2010 12:22 am

    Latoya Jackson is a complete fool and one of the most greedy people that i have ever seen in my life.She was ,and steel is ,greedy and jealous of Michael’s fame,success, talent,money. She doesn’t care about his reputation or his good name.And the interview with VG proves that. I think she would easily slander Michael again,if someone gave her the right amount of money. I can’t believe that Michael forgave that… woman. And that is by itself a proof about what kind of person MJ was.I mean would anyone else forgive her? I certenly wouldn’t.

    I think that the Jackson family should really keep her away from the spotlights and forbid her even mentioning MJ’s name. I feel that her mental situation is really bad and she could say something that could really hurt MJ.

    Like

  22. Olga permalink
    October 13, 2010 11:41 pm

    David that would be interesting. There is no doupt that the “writer” that called them is VG

    Like

  23. lynande51 permalink
    October 13, 2010 11:09 pm

    Me too but I did know the FBI mentioned a writer I mistakenly thought they meant DD or Tarraborrelli because at the time we did not know about VG.

    Like

  24. October 13, 2010 6:33 pm

    “I won’t give away any clues yet, but let’s just say that I just caught him in another big lie, and I’ll be more than happy to debunk it in the near future!”

    David, take your time of course though I have to admit that I’m dying of curiosity.

    Like

  25. lcpledwards permalink
    October 13, 2010 6:18 pm

    @ Olga
    Thank you!!! Someone needs to reach her and knock some sense into her! I don’t mean that in a literal way, as she was a victim of horrific domestic violence by her ex-“husband” Jack Gordon, but you know what I mean! It’s INEXCUSABLE that she could be that ignorant of Victor Gutierrez’ appearance and character. Her only excuse is that she just had no idea who he was, and if that’s true then she needs to do some serious research! Otherwise, we can all expect her to meet & greet with Grace, Orth, or Dimond next!

    @ Helena & Lynette: I’m knee deep in research for my next project, and I wanted to give you guys a sneak preview of a BOMBSHELL piece of info that I found on VG!! He was mentioned in the FBI files (although his name was redacted, I know it’s him, and we all will once I post the report!!).

    I won’t give away any clues yet, but let’s just say that I just caught him in another big lie, and I’ll be more than happy to debunk it in the near future! (Just give me another week or two to finish!)

    Like

  26. Olga permalink
    October 13, 2010 5:58 pm

    I sent the link to Taj so he can inform LaToya

    Like

  27. October 11, 2010 10:31 am

    Guys, I hope you don’t mind that I added the information about Die Tageszeitung to the article as an update and also a little info about the other article that I mentioned at the end.

    Suzy

    Like

  28. Suzy permalink
    October 11, 2010 5:47 am

    Forget the earthquake and stuff. I think LaToya went there because VG paid to her for it. Anything for money. I don’t buy she didn’t know who this guy is. If her siblings know she must know as well.

    Like

  29. lynande51 permalink
    October 11, 2010 5:20 am

    I know how you feel I saw this right after it happened and all I could think was LaToya is at it again. David I think she was dropped on her head when she was little that would explain it all.

    Like

  30. lcpledwards permalink
    October 11, 2010 5:03 am

    Here is the translation of the Chilean article with VG and Latoya! I swear, Latoya is a freakin’ AIRHEAD! This is truly disgusting! MJ would be rolling in his grave at the thought of one of his siblings even SPEAKING with VG, nevermind HUGGING him!!!

    Apparently, Latoya wanted to help out with the earthquake that hit Chile in February, or something to that effect. That seemed to be the topic that brought the two together. What’s very disturbing is how the article refers to LaToya as the “head on spokesperson” of the Jackson family. What a scary thought!

    Michael’s chaser ended up hugging La Toya

    Víctor Gutiérrez in a good mood with the Jacksons

    The good wave was such big that the singer, sent greetings to the earthquake victims,
    Picture legend: During the interview La Toya liked Víctor’s Gutiérrez shirt

    Sergio Vallejos

    It seemed and impossible mission, but he did it. The journalist Víctor Vallejo, the same that treated Michael Jackson as delinquent and pedophile, must obtain an exclusive interview with : La Toya Jackson, who today is the head-on spokesperson from the late King Of Pop’s family

    “I thought that I couldn’t make it. Until the last moment I had doubts about the interview”, tells Gutierrez from Los Angeles, California

    “ The only thing I can say is Chile be Strong”
    La Toya Jackson

    With so much faith, the persistent journalist contacted the manager of the dark-skinned girl to speak about the situation. And for the surprise of Gutiérrez,

    The journalist was hired the past week, to produce an interview between La Toya and an Argentinean program via satellite. He reveals “They called me from 70.20.10, from the Channel 13, asking me to contact La Toya to speak about the theory of her brother’s murder”

    The 53 old woman, accepted his invitation. We met last Friday in the studio, before the interview I told her: It’s time to talk about other matters. He confess, I think she though that I was going to lay an ambush or something like that to her”.

    After the 17 minutes interview. Michael’s sister and Gutiérrez shared a friendly conversation.

    I told her what happened in Chile with the earthquake, and she couldn’t get that matter out of her head. She asked me how could she help, and I said sending them regards”

    And they recorded a video.
    We made a couple of tests, because she wanted to send a message in Spanish. She had a hard time trying to say “Fuerza Chile”, but she had a very beautiful gesture.

    Did you make up with La Toya?
    I don’t know, I think the earthquake united us. In addition, I commented to her about my mother’s passing and she was very affectionate.

    What about the other siblings?
    I believe they don’t like me. I did not change my theory (about Jackson’s pedophilia), but I believed he was murdered.

    Like

  31. eleanor permalink
    October 10, 2010 7:58 pm

    Like

  32. lcpledwards permalink
    October 10, 2010 4:55 pm

    It is absolutely STUNNING that LaToya didn’t know who she was dealing with when she was interviewed by VG!! Well, it’s now obvious that this woman doesn’t have a freakin‘ clue about all of the major players involved in MJ’s allegations. What’s next? Is she going to let Diane Dimond or Maureen Orth interview her too? When she did that interview in 2005 (which I linked to in part 1 of the settlements article below), she said that she and MJ NEVER spoke about her statement, and now I must asssume that they NEVER spoke about the allegations in general either.

    If Latoya had any idea that she is talking to the person who single handedly started the child abuse scandals, I’m sure she’d slap the taste out of his mouth!

    In case you guys didn’t see it, I have ANOTHER interview of LaToya giving an interview the day after her infamous press conference, and when you watch you’ll see why she never got money from the tabloids for her story! She has no proof, other than her own suspicions about “cancelled checks”! As if MJ would be dumb enough to leave behind the check stubs for his “hush money”!!! Look in the comments section!

    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/09/20/analyzing-the-media’s-hypocrisy-in-reporting-on-michael-jackson’s-settlements-vs-the-settlements-of-other-celebrities-part-1/

    Like

  33. Olga permalink
    October 10, 2010 4:10 pm

    @Lynette you’re welcome:) Yes there are 2 different scientific areas but they have common things. One is psychotherapy because psychiatrists who have been trained can perform it too, the other thing is drug perscription because in some states clinical psychologists can prescribe and the other common thing is the clinical interview and diagnosis and we use the same tools for that.

    I understand that these details are confusing or uknown to an audience not relevant with these fields

    Like

  34. Lynette permalink
    October 10, 2010 3:28 pm

    Thank You Olga, I think it is hard for people to understand but you will that their is a difference between Psychiatry and Psychology. They are 2 entirely different areas. Now that said I’m sorry Elena if you felt bad but we are getting side tracked by a discussion about how deep this goes. I feel that the mission accomplished fact that VG thanks NAMBLA in his book is enough for people to see that he is in fact a P. I’m not sure if you are looking for a reason as to why they would do this to a person . I think it is important to remember that Michael was the most outspoken advocate for childrens innocence and that was the threat. Their outlook is that children are sexual not innocent and are therefore willing participants in sexual relationships. Whenever Michael Jackson was asked why he loved children so much his reply was that their innocence inspired him. That is exactly why they would target him, he was the opposit of what they were tryingto promote. The article I gave you a link showed you that there are actually about 1100 members of NAMBLA. Not so many as you would think is it when it covers a whole continent. Anyway I don’t think that we have to debate whether or not the Gay community is involved or if they were a part of this conspiracy because homosexuality is not P.***lia.
    @ Suzy you have no idea how badly I have wanted to email DD and say ” Diane did you ever read this mans book? How does it feel to be thanked along with NAMBLA? After all you are in good company then because he thanks them right after he thanks the FBI.”

    Like

  35. Olga permalink
    October 10, 2010 2:14 pm

    P-lia is a disorder under the category of paraphilias. It is a sexual preference by itself like necrophilia for example. I thought as a psychologist I should clarify this

    Like

  36. shelly permalink
    October 10, 2010 11:48 am

    I know what is in a Carl Tom book. No, those people have no influence for the simple reason because it’s a well known fact it’s destroying the life of others people. People who are not attracted to children won’t rape them no matter what their people are saying. By the way, the problem for the girls are not related to pedophilia that happened because they are not seen as human being.

    Like

  37. October 10, 2010 10:01 am

    “Lots of people like me and Lynande have gay friends, and that what we believe in. There are plenty of people who were very pissed of yesterday.”

    This is why when Michael was asked by Bashir whether he was gay, he had to ask to stop the tape and told him in private that he wasn’t – he didn’t want to offend his gay fans. I seems awful to me that you have to hold your tongue about the truth because someone doesn’t like it. As to people being pissed off yesterday – they might have. But I also hope they will appreciate my honest approach to all problems discussed here.

    “I don’t think you really understand”

    No, I don’t. I truly don’t understand why people are offended by what I am saying. I am not harassing gays and have never ridiculed them – I just feel sorry for them. And if you are honest with yourself you’ll have to admit that when gays state that they are “born that way” it means that children may be gay too. And I bet that some gay activists will start campaigning for children’s sexual rights in the very near future on that basis…

    “If you really want to vindicate Mj it would be best to not bring that subject or at least be fair and admit that there are much more heterosexual pedophile than gay pedophile simply because they are much more heterosexual than gay people.”

    As to heterosexual p-les I fully agree that there might be more of them than gay ones. It’s only that I haven’t studied this problem because there was no need or desire to do it – the gay issue was raised only because of Carl Tom’s book who writes in his foreword that he is a lover of boys and is focusing on that type of love only. And now it is Victor Gutierrez who is coming with a similar agenda.

    Heterosexual p-les will also fight for little girls’ sexual rights – only for them it is much easier, because girls in some cultures get married as soon as they start a period and are ready for reproduction which may be as early as 11 or even 10 year old. Homosexual p-les have a longer way to go – because first they need to make gay love a fully accepted norm and it is only then they will fight for “boys’ rights”.

    If you look up the Kinsey group of scientists I researched you’ll see that this was their exact program, of which your gay friends don’t even know and ever suspect of:

    ” John De Cecco, who teaches at San Francisco State University, is Editor of the Journal of Homosexuality. But, more importantly, De Cecco is a board member of Paedika: The Journal of Paedophilia. In a “Statement of Purpose” published in the journal’s first issue, the editors wrote:

    “The starting point of Paedika is necessarily our consciousness of ourselves as paedophiles. … we understand [paedophilia] to be consensual intergenerational sexual relationships …Through publication of scholarly studies, thoroughly documented and carefully reasoned, we intend to demonstrate that paedophilia has been , and remains, a legitimate and productive part of the totality of human experience.”

    De Cecco also was editor of Journal of Homosexuality’s special 1990 issue devoted to the debate over the relationship of homosexuality and pedophilia. This debate focuses on two major questions:

    First, are male homosexuality and paedophilia intrinsically related phenomena, albeit in any given individual they may be differentiated in varying measure, or are they essentially unrelated, even though it is clear that they overlap to a degree that cannot be coincidental?

    Second, as a matter independent of the first question, is it wise for “the movement” to acknowledge the relationship or overlap between pedophilia and homosexuality, and to seek rights for pedophiles (based on “orientation”) similar to those that have been won for homosexuals, or would it be damaging to the gay rights movement to do so, even if it is ultimately the proper thing to do?

    Source: http://www.narth.com/docs/TheTrojanCouchSatinover.pdf

    So while your innocent gay friends are enjoying the fact that they may be out of the closet at last the leaders of their movement are taking the matter further – aiming at boys this time. I hope that as soon as gays learn about the far-reaching plans of some of their leaders they will be the first to block them.

    However the process has gone very far already as university professors are teaching “man-boy love in Greece” as a regular subject now.

    How do you like titles like: “Erotic innocence: the Culture of Child Molesting”, for example? Or “Greek love reconsidered”? Or “Sex in the Gym: Athletic Trainers and Pedagogical Pederasty”?

    As to WHAT they are writing in these books you can see by the comment left by a reader of William Percy’s academic opus “Pederasy and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece”:

    “If this book is anywhere near true, men have been missing out on a lot of action for almost two thousand years. Mind boggling if true”

    I don’t ask you to look into all I’ve written on the subject but PLEASE have a look at only some of these professors and then pass judgment on me:

    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/meet-the-guys-who-recommend-carl-toms-book/

    Like

  38. shelly permalink
    October 10, 2010 8:54 am

    @vindicate

    I don’t think you really understand, it has nothing to do with being politically correct. Lots of people like me and Lynande have gay friends, and that what we believe in. I don’t know how many people are reading your blog but I am sure there are plenty of people who were very pissed of yesterday. If you really want to vindicate Mj it would be best to not bring that subject or at least be fair and admit that there are much more heterosexual pedophile than gay pedophile simply because they are much more heterosexual than gay people.

    Like

  39. October 10, 2010 8:45 am

    Did you know Latoya Jackson got cozy with Victor Gutierrez after Michael’s death? She has to be clueless if she doesn’t know who this man is. This is troublesome to say the least.

    http://www.lun.com/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?dt=2010-03-17&PaginaId=26&bodyid=0

    Oh my God……. And the newspaper is dated March 2010! Can she be a so-called “source” which Victor Gutierrez has in Michael’s family? Or is she a double fool through whom Gutierrez is pumping slander, lies and dirt into the Jacksons?

    Like

  40. Suzy permalink
    October 10, 2010 8:21 am

    I’m very much interested in VG’s hidden agenda. It’s important to know the whys to see the whole picture.

    Like

  41. Suzy permalink
    October 10, 2010 8:15 am

    @ cherie

    When I saw that picture of Gutierrez in that article, he kind of reminded me of Halperin. Do these guys all look alike? Not necessarily physically. I don’t know, it’s probably the shadiness in their eyes.

    Like

  42. October 10, 2010 8:10 am

    “Homosexuality is not a choice. I could point to many studies that show it isn’t a choice”

    For some people it might not be, but not for all. And there is much difference of opinion between scientists on the matter. The objective research practically stopped as soon as it was decided to no longer regard it as a sexual deviation – so there is actually very little scientific information on the subject. Now it is a solely a political matter and all are requested to be “politically correct”.

    However the scientific data on the basis of which that political decision was taken was largerly forged and falsified as I found out during my own research of the matter – so now we are told to be silent because of their lies?

    I understand that you as an American may have no other choice but be politically correct, but I have a different background and though we don’t harass any homosexuals the majority of people still regard it as an illness (me too).

    “I don’t care if VG had a deep dark hidden agenda”

    But how can we get to the bottom of the truth if we are not allowed to discuss Victor Gutierrez’s hidden agenda? It is like having an elephant in the room and pretending we don’t see it.

    Like

  43. Suzy permalink
    October 10, 2010 8:07 am

    Michael’s heart must have been made of gold that he could forgive LaToya. And she keeps betraying him after his death. Anything for money!

    It’s a miracle that with a family like that Michael turned out to be the amazing person he was.

    Like

  44. shelly permalink
    October 10, 2010 8:02 am

    @cherie

    I know that and it’s very infortunate.

    Like

  45. shelly permalink
    October 10, 2010 7:55 am

    @vindicate

    No offense, but I think you are giving too much credit to what humans being are.

    “Animals don’t sacrifice their lives to save their offspring because instinct tells them they should take care of themselves first ”

    I don’t agree with that. If you look at documentaries you’ll see plenty of examples of animals helping each others and risking their own life for that. You got that video on youtube of a dog crossing a highway to help another dog injured by a car, I suggest you to see if you can a very old documentary called Nanouk it’s about fishermen in the North and you see animals getting injured and other animals trying to help them at their own risk while the rest of the group is running away. There are plenty of others example like that.

    As for the question of sex, it has a very important role in human life in the sense that there were lots of wars in the past which began because of that.

    Like

  46. cherie permalink
    October 10, 2010 7:54 am

    ATTENTION!!!!!

    Did you know Latoya Jackson got cozy with Victor Gutierrez after Michael’s death? She has to be clueless if she doesn’t know who this man is. This is troublesome to say the least.

    http://www.lun.com/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?dt=2010-03-17&PaginaId=26&bodyid=0

    Like

  47. October 10, 2010 7:11 am

    The relationship between Achilles & Patroclus is often interpreted by scholars as a “homo-erotic” relationship. Same goes for Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, etc. The most modern coinage of close male relationships indicating “latent homosexuality” is “bro-mance”.

    Pez, you know, all this media, scientific and public hoopla around homosexuality has started to distort people’s normal perception of human relations in general.

    The media on the one side which interprets any connection between males of different ages as purely sexual, gays on the other side who justify such connections by saying that male sex is normal, homosexual p-les on still another side who go further and advocate sexual relations between men and boys as normal too and the general public which is actively involved in all this discussion – all these people seem to look at human beings as animal species only and seem to completely disregard or forget one fundamental thing about human relations – they are NOT based solely on sex.

    It is totally degrading to think that the motives for human behavior are basically sexual and it is almost tragic that this is what the society is communicating to us by making those dirty innuendoes about different kinds of human relationships.

    In an atmosphere like that the idea of FRIENDSHIP as a phenomenon disappears altogether. Since human relations have started to be regarded in terms of sex only normal friendship between men is now immediately called homosexuality, friendship between man and boy is labeled homosexual p-lia, and friendship between normal man and woman is ruled out altogether as both sides are termed asexual. Isn’t it degrading in its very extreme?

    HUMAN BEINGS ARE NOT ANIMALS (or are not solely animals) and a phenomenon like friendship is still found between people. A woman can be bosom friends with a man and both of them can still be normally heterosexual, man can be friends with another man and even sleep with him in a camp tent for many days and nights without being gay, and even a friendship between man and boy is quite possible without any sexual element in it (look at foster fathers who love their adopted children like their own).

    It seems that nobody is noticing that by all this extensive talk about “he was seen with a male friend and is therefore gay” we are psychologically being prepared to regard sex as the main driving force in human relations! Let me state it here that it is an ABNORMAL AND A DEGRADING POINT OF VEIW.

    We are NOT only animals whose behavior is motivated by two basic instincts – that of reproduction (or sex) and the instinct of survival (or struggle with each other for life). We are decidedly different! And it is not only our brains and the ability to talk but yet something else which makes this difference and forces us behave in a way which is uncommon for animals with all their instincts.

    Animals don’t sacrifice their lives to save their offspring because instinct tells them they should take care of themselves first (and the young won’t be able to survive without their mother in nature anyway) – however for a human parent sacrificing himself for a child is not at all uncommon.

    Animals don’t take care of their old while the majority of humans think it is their duty to.

    Animals won’t share their last drop of water with their invalid brothers while humans are known to give away the little they have to those who need it more.

    Animals don’t side with each other because such a relationship is ‘interesting’ for them, while human relationships can be based solely on common interests – even if they are separated by oceans like us, never see each other and speak via internet only.

    What makes us different? Some call it a human spirit and refer to a mysterious human soul, some call it conscience or a God’s spark present in every human being, some call it morals and ethical norms which people for some strange reason needed and created for themselves. Whatever you call it what’s crucial here is that it is found only in humans and that human beings often give them a priority to any of their animal instincts.

    Mind it that this strange human substance cannot be reduced to intellect or education only as it is quite possible for someone clever and educated to associate with a lesser intellectual than he and nevertheless derive a lot of fun out of it (as in an adult-child relationship, for example).

    The balance between the two sides in a human being is rather unstable – the spirit part can be reduced to a complete minimum and a human can start living for sex, eating and a good sleep only while with some human species the spiritual part becomes so predominant that the “other” side of him becomes virtually non-existent or thin as a veil. Needless to say that for the first kind it is practically impossible to understand the other kind – while the second type of people know everything about the first one as it is where they actually started.

    What I’ve read and seen about Michael Jackson gives me reason to believe that he has made an enormous leap into spirituality and the basic contradiction between him and the society is in the fact that it is the society which has fallen hopelessly behind.

    Like

  48. shelly permalink
    October 10, 2010 6:56 am

    You should Suzy and if you do it send her the link with the page of the Gutierrez where he is thanking Nambla.

    Like

  49. Suzy permalink
    October 10, 2010 6:44 am

    BTW guys, I almost feel tempted to write an e-mail to Diane Dimond asking her “how does it feel that your friend is a p. and that you have been supporting a p. for all these years?” LOL! Remember when she wrote to Susan Etok “I’m sorry, but your friend (meaning MJ) was a p.”.

    Don’t worry, I won’t write an e-mail to her, but oh, the irony of it! Dimond bashing Michael all these years while supporting and befriending real p’s like VG!

    Like

  50. Suzy permalink
    October 10, 2010 6:26 am

    And pez,

    I think there are two reasons of why the media are so obsessed with gay stories about celebrities. Yes, one reason is that some part of the media uses it as a derogatory term. However I think more recently that’s not the reason. On the contrary. The gay community wants the most famous, cool and talented people to be gay, to be associated with them. That’s what Halperin’s job is all about! If you go to his website, according to him everybody in Hollywood is gay! To “out” celebrities as gay seems to be his main theme and purpose.

    Gutierrez and him are the same from this respect – they are doing a job for their community. However Halperin is a gay man attracted to grown men, so he doesn’t need MJ to be a p., just gay. Gutierrez is, in my opinion, a p. I can’t see how someone who is not one advocate their case with such passion.

    Like

  51. Suzy permalink
    October 10, 2010 6:04 am

    @ pez

    That it’s coming from Oprah is a bit ironic, since she has been constantly accused of having a gay relationship with her close female friend Gayle King.

    http://www.people.com/people/article/0,26334,1215402,00.html

    “I understand why people think we’re gay,” she says in an excerpt of the article provided to the Associated Press. “There isn’t a definition in our culture for this kind of bond between women. So I get why people have to label it – how can you be this close without it being sexual?”

    So when she and Gayle King have a close bond that doesn’t have to mean it’s sexual and it’s silly of people to think a close friendship can only be sexual. But when it comes to Michael Oprah suddenly has different standards. How hypocritical!

    Like

  52. lynande51 permalink
    October 10, 2010 4:48 am

    I have a co worker who is gay. He thinks Ben Affleck is hot and so do I. Does this mean that Ben is gay? NO it means we both have the same taste in men. Homosexuality is not a choice.I could point to many studies that show it isn’t a choice but will not waste your time with it. Michael was not gay he was a heterosexual male. Let’ s not forget what we are here to do. I don’t care so much about how deep this goes into the P. community. My intention in buying the book was to get information and documents from the 1993 case to use against them. I don’t care if VG had a deep dark hidden agenda I just want to prove he was associated early on in the case and the stupid tabloid media, the Chandler lawyers and even some of the police believed this stalker which is actually what he was.
    It is the same as people thinking that if you sleep in bed with someone no matter what age they are you are automatically going to have sexual feeling toward them! How ridiculous!

    Like

  53. pez permalink
    October 10, 2010 3:30 am

    Here’s a clear example of the INCORRECT & OFFENSIVE “pedophilia- homosexuality” connection that is perpetuated by the press in relation to Michael’s allegations

    Oprah did a show years ago on men on the “down-low”, which is a slang term for men who secretly have sex with other men while being married or committed to women.

    Oprah Show Transcript
    Men Living on the D.L.
    Friday, April 16, 2004

    J.L. King
    … If he’s comfortable with his sexuality and he has no desire to have
    sex with another man, he can have gay friends. He can get in the bed with a gay man and not
    touch him…seriously…and not touch him, because he’s comfortable with who he is.

    Oprah
    You sounding a little bit like Michael Jackson up here. (Audience laughs) A little like Michael Jackson up here. I’m not going there with you with all that you can get in the bed with a man and all that stuff…

    Oprah immediately made reference to the falsehood of Michael “sharing” his bed with boys while speaking to a man who had sex with men throughout his marriage to a woman. That’s similar to Victor Gutierrez’s twisted line of thinking. Basically, a (older) male sleeping in a bed with another (younger) male is “homosexual” and “suspect”.

    In academia, the same line of thinking is also pushed. The relationship between Achilles & Patroclus is often interpreted by scholars as a “homo-erotic” relationship. Same goes for Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, etc. The most modern coinage of close male relationships indicating “latent homosexuality” is “bro-mance”. JM Barrett (author of Peter Pan) was once accused of being a pedophile (how ironic) since he spend much of his time with kids, specifically young boys.

    In Victor, Oprah, and many other people’s minds, a man sharing a close friendship with a young boy is “homosexual” and indicative of “pedophilia”. These people use the terms interchangeably forgetting that sexual orientation and psychosexual disorders do NOT influence each other.

    The characterization of Michael as “gay” or “asexual” is used as a derogatory slur in the press, painting him as a “sexual deviant”. This influences the public into believing he’s a pedophile. Think about how the media attempts to “out” celebrities, using headlines like

    “So and So Caught in Gay Sex Scandal”

    “So and So’s Secret Gay Lover”

    “So and So Seen with Gay Prostitute”

    “So and So is GAY!!”

    In order to devalue, insult, and degrade celebrities, the media accuses them of being gay. It’s not obvious at first but really think about it. The media is not that “liberal”.

    Homophobia is the driving force behind the monstrous portrayals of Michael. Victor is either a self-serving gay man (the agenda is clear) or a self-HATING gay man who NEEDS Michael to be gay in order to validate his own existence. His tabloid dribble is similar to Ian Halperin’s narrative on Michael’s homosexuality. Only difference is Ian *denies* Michael being a pedophile. By the way, Ian Halperin is gay.

    When older men have sex with younger women, they are considered “cool”, “the man”, “sugar daddies”, etc. The stigma around older men who have sex with younger men is decidedly uncomfortable and negative.

    When men molest young girls their actions are considered sick but somewhat “usual” or even ever-so-slightly “normal”.

    When men molest young boys, they are considered “perverted” “freakish” “repulsive” “disgusting” “sick” “twisted”, etc .

    Catholic priests who prey on young boys *slightly* avoid those labels because they are protected in a way by the falsehoods of religious sanctity.

    Like

  54. October 9, 2010 9:02 pm

    “I feel it distracts us even MORE than Desiree’s trolling, because while we all agree MJ was innocent, we may not all agree on homosexuality.”

    David, your line of reasoning and arguments are perfect and I have nothing to say in reply except one thing – it is inevitable to raise the issue of homosexuality each time we touch on real p-les who are harassing Michael Jackson.

    Since the main cases we are investigating are those of Jordan Chandler and Gavin Arvizo we are forced to deal in the problem of man-boy relationship because it is simply imposed on us by Michael’s haters. This narrows our conversation down to homosexuality (if the main case had concerned a girl our situation would have been different).

    To finish up with the allegations of Michael’s haters who describe him as gay I’ll say that besides Michael’s own words we have numerous factual evidence proving it that he was heterosexual (even under sedation he vehemently asserted it to Evan Chandler and to Uri Geller who once hypnotized MJ at Michael’s request and took the opportunity to interrogate him on the gay issue).

    Getting back to homosexuality the primary idea of p-les and people like Gutierrez – whatever kind they are – is that boys “like it” because they may be in love with adult men as they are inherently gay and are naturally attracted to older males.

    However homosexuals also claim that they are “born that way” which implies that even small children may be gay too. And though I am completely neutral to gays, neither accepting homosexuality not ridiculing it as I consider it an illness – and it is absurd to mock at a person ill with pneumonia for ex. – the concept of “gay kids” I refuse to accept CATEGORICALLY.

    If homosexuals agree that they develop their liking for males as they grow up it will be perfectly okay and will have nothing to do with p-lia – however the way they explain it they make you think that even small children may be gay and therefore have the right to love males and be loved by them. In short the explanation which gay men give as the main reason for their sexuality – that they are born that way – is also a perfect explanation for p-lia too!

    If they are born that way it means that children may identify themselves as gays at an early age.

    If they are born that way it is only the age of consent which will be standing as the last barrier between them and adult gays.

    If they are born that way some ripe and mature boys may claim it is their right to decide which partner they choose and at what age too.

    If they are born that way it paves the road for further struggle gay people will wage in order for “the rights of children” to be accepted.

    However if they are NOT born that way all this nonsense with “children sexual rights” will be RULED OUT and no field for p-lia future acceptance will ever be prepared.

    Like

  55. shelly permalink
    October 9, 2010 8:23 pm

    @vindicate

    I agree we should stopped the conversation here. Yes one of the gay stereotype is the macho guy. As for my friends, I am not speaking of one guy, for as much as I know, they were never attracted to women. It’s just a question that they never asked themselves and they are not more effeminate or machos than any others men. I was asking you the question about the macho stereotype because you were speaking about the effeminate guy.

    By the way, there are lots,of heterosexual pedophiles like Polansky and Woody Allen and if you want to talk about influence you can talk about public intellectual who were not gay and were defending pedophilia during the seventies.

    I really think we should stop there, it’s not the subject of the blog anyway.

    Like

  56. October 9, 2010 7:45 pm

    “In that case how do you explain the macho type. What you describe is a stereotype of what people think a gay man is.”

    What I described is just a probable reason for developing homosexuality as a choice a boy may (or may not) make as a result of some psychological problems. However there are millions of shy men who don’t develop it – and Michael Jackson was among them. IT IS NOT A MUST! There are lots of other things which help to overcome any possible deviations in youth sexuality – like channeling one’s thoughts and energy into something different – music for example. Michael was so engrossed in music and his work that this (together with his unshakeable belief in God) saved him from any deviations in spite of some aspects of his childhood which are traditionally considered harmful for a boy. He didn’t have time for leisure and impure thoughts – he was always working and barely had time for sleep.

    I strongly suspect that your friend who had a boyfriend when a teenager also had a lot of spare time at his disposal which he used for early sex. He probably started it with a girl though but for some reason it was not successful (?)

    As to macho men I am truly surprised to know that many gay men actually look like machos and this makes me think their reasons for homosexuality are different from those unfortunate men who are either suffering from hormone deficiency or psychological problems. Why are you asking me? Why not ask the machos about it?

    However I am sure they will name sexual satiety as the main reason. In their case it is pure corruption and a quest for queer and unusual sensations which made them turn to males instead of females. This group of people seems to me the most dangerous one in terms of developing a liking for children too.

    Like

  57. lcpledwards permalink
    October 9, 2010 7:21 pm

    Helena,
    Seven and I did a post a few weeks ago about an interview with MJ from 1979, where he described a white female groupie who called him a derogatory gay slur because he wouldn’t kiss her. The gay rumors have dogged MJ since his teen years, when he was accused of taking female hormones to keep his voice high. (For the amount of hormones needed to change his voice, he would have surely lost all facial hair and would have grown breasts too!). I think this goes along with what you said (TO A CERTAIN EXTENT) about women (and society in general) bullying effeminate males.

    http://www.mj-777.com/?m=20100821

    As well all know, those gay rumors would come back to haunt him when he was accused of child abuse, because in some people’s eyes p-ia and homosexuality go hand in hand.

    But personally, I think this conversation should end here, and should continue amongst emails ourselves because this is a controversial issue that has NOTHING to do with MJ (since we all know he wasn’t gay anyway!). Helena, I know you remember battling those people a few months ago about this, and the guy who emailed you about the gay kids who committed suicide was very offended. I just don’t think the comments are the appropriate place to discuss this, you know? I feel it distracts us even MORE than Desiree’s trolling, because while we all agree MJ was innocent, we may not all agree on homosexuality.

    But of course this is your blog and you can comment on anything you wish, but I just don’t feel it’s necessary because mJ wasn’t gay, and for the last few comments you guys have debated about whether kids are gay, if you’re born gay, etc, instead of the important issues at hand.

    Like

  58. shelly permalink
    October 9, 2010 7:16 pm

    In that case how do you explain the macho type. What you describe is a stereotype of what people think a gay man is. There is a macho type, the guy who likes perfum and the guy who is not macho and who doesn’t lile perfum and I don’t think are attracted to man who think they should themselves and by the way when I say you are born that way I am speaking about the people I know and sorry they started having boyfriend when they were teenagers and I am not joking. By the way there is no scientifical study on why people are gay, I am just speaking about the people I know.

    Like

  59. October 9, 2010 6:56 pm

    “There is a teenage sexuality”.
    I know about teenage pregnancy, but I don’t believe in “gay” kids.

    “You are gay or you are not and you are born that way”

    How do you know it? Because some scientists told you? Being “born that way” is still a matter of big controversy and dispute.

    “Most of the people I know they grew up in traditional families with no one gay around them and there was no influence from TV”

    Many men develop a gay problem because of us, women and very strict rules the present day society imposes on them. Men should be strong, men should be masculine, men should be brave, men should be active, men should be rich, men should be this and that. And a boy who often cries or who is shy or who doesn’t participate in boys’ games is led to believe by the society that this is wrong for a boy to behave like that. And he starts to feel more comfortable with the idea that he is more feminine than masculine… If the society accepts the notion – for example – that shyness is completely okay for a man, many boys will no longer feel that they are “different” and they are the “outsiders” as many of their psychological problems will be solved automatically.

    I am almost 100 per cent sure that if a man who thinks himself gay finds a tender, delicate and probably slightly shy woman his belief in his own homosexuality may be shattered. I truly believe that one of the reasons why men become gay is women who bully them.

    P.S. Look at the classical ballet dancers – practically all those men turn gay. Having to raise female bodies on a daily basis eventually kills their desire for women and routine touching women’s various parts only adds to their development of a disliking for women. So any overexposure to the other sex eventually leads to a wish to try something “new” – hence the boredom resulting from excessive sex with females may also spark curiosity in same sex relations. Any excess is evil.

    Like

  60. shelly permalink
    October 9, 2010 6:04 pm

    @helena

    There is a teenage sexuality. You got more and more girls getting pregnant at 13 and the father is 14. I don’t agree with that but it’s the truth and it’s why the legal age is around 15. At that age you know exactly what you are and it has nothing to do with the other adults around. You are gay or you are not and you are born that way. Most of the people I know they grew up in traditional families with no one gay arond them and there was no influence from Tv because having people claiming they are gay on Tv is something very knew.

    Like

  61. October 9, 2010 5:41 pm

    “I don’t think you should mix the pedophilia and the gay issue, it’s totally different”.

    Not quite, as the problem of the age of consent shows it.

    “Claiming that they knew they were different when they were a child or a teenager doesn’t mean they were attracted to adults. It just means that as a teenager they were attracted to others teenagers.”

    What is attraction? A girl may be very much attracted to other girls – more beautiful than her which will make her wish to be like them, admire them and stay by them – but it doesn’t mean she will not turn into a heterosexual woman. This is what I wrote to my correspondent in my email about the kids whom he called “gay”:

    …. I am terribly surprised that anyone can call himself gay at the age of 13. How would he know it as at that age a teenager has at least several years to go before he physically turns into an adult? Or do you regard all boys friendly with boys as gays?

    … It terribly surprises me again that you repeatedly refer to some kids as “gay kids”. I am sure that there is no such thing as a gay kid – unless a kid starts sexual life at an unnaturally early age (because he has been corrupted by someone else or due to a corrupt environment around him). No kids should be involved in sex at all!

    … As to you feeling a gay when you were a teenager – I think you mistook the storm of hormones raging in your body at the time for signs of homosexuality. A teenager is not an adult yet – especially a boy – his voice changes, he grows tall very quickly, he starts ejacuating at night, his character becomes very unbalanced. It is a hormone storm and “deciding” anything during a storm is harmful and wrong. That is why it is often recommended for teenagers to tire themselves with sports during this period so that they have less time and energy for alien (sexual) thoughts and deeds.

    The time to decide on your sexuality comes when the storm subsides. However if a gay man or gay ideas come into a teenager’s life during the storm his life takes a different direction with the teenager not able to realize that. That is why any propaganda of gay sex especially to teenagers is criminal.

    The same also goes for starting heterosexual sex life too early – propaganda of it among teenagers is almost equally wrong. It results in their having numerous sex partners and devoids them of a concept of what love is. Love in their minds becomes equal to sex only (while in fact it is much bigger than that). Sticking to one sex partner and cleanliness of body and spirit is a very good thing and you never know it until you come to it. It is a way to refine yourself and your soul.

    “most of my friends are gay”

    This is exactly the problem – with so much propaganda of homosexuality around the world ALL of us will soon be gay and life on earth will just come to an end because there will be no one to bear children any more. I actually cannot understand how much of this new tendency is fashion, result of propaganda, desire to try something “new” in sex and how much of it is a true hormone deficiency.

    Like

  62. October 9, 2010 5:38 pm

    “There is no connection between an adult homosexual make and a p. They denounce this practice very loudly.”

    Now yes, though it was not that way when the gay movement started. However even given all these denouncements the only thing that is separating legitimate gay sex from illegitimate one is the age of consent (same as in heterosexual relations).

    However in the US the age of consent is 18 (sometimes 16, correct?) while in Albania or Austria it is 14 and in Mexico the age of consent for girls is only 12. It means that the concept of a sexual crime is very vague and what is a crime in the US is not a crime in Mexico.

    And if you go to Italy or Hungary, for example, to have sex with a 14 year old boy there, it will be still within an accepted norm as the age of consent for girls and boys alike there is also 14!

    I more or less understand that the majority of gay men may be interested in their own age group but with so many loopholes in legislation the legal barrier for ‘usual’ homosexual relations turning into p-lia is practically non-existent or minimal. Some males will stick to adults all the same, but some will be lured to investigate a younger type of sex – same as it will happen to heterosexual men if the US legislators allow sex with girls of age 12, for example.

    http://www.ageofconsent.com/ageofconsent.htm

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3699814.stm

    Like

  63. lynande51 permalink
    October 9, 2010 3:59 pm

    There is no connectin between an adult homosexual make and a p. They denounce this practice very loudly. It is the P. community that want to latch on to the gay cause as a way to introduce their own. If someone who claims that they are gay engages anyone ni a conversation about the adult- child love they are a p.*** .

    Like

  64. shelly permalink
    October 9, 2010 3:38 pm

    @vindicate

    I don’t think you should mix the pedophilia and the gay issue, it’s totally different. Claiming that they knew they were different when they were a child or a teenager doesn’t mean they were attracted to adults. It just means that as a teenager they were attracted to others teenagers. I don’t know if you really spoke to gay people but seriously I never met a gay who approved sexual relationship between kids and adults. I am not saying I know every gay people on earth, but most of my friends are gay.

    Like

  65. October 9, 2010 2:28 pm

    “I am sending you a link. It is possible he may have been among us recently promoting his hate campaign. I think you will recognize the writing style if it so.”

    Dialdancer, sorry, but what link are you talking about? I can’t find it.

    Like

  66. October 9, 2010 2:21 pm

    Guys, sorry I am only just starting reading comments on Gutierrez/NAMBLA connection.

    Lynette, thank you for the link to the article about NAMBLA – it is very enlightening as to the secrecy in which they are functioning: http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20050217-2208-manboy-daily.html

    The way they describe it Victor Gutierrez could not have attended a NAMBLA conference if he wasn’t its member. Going there as a reporter was out of the question so it clearly speaks to him being part of it. This makes this Gutierrez business and the can of worms we’ve opened REALLY SERIOUS.

    Let us remember what the article said about the NAMBLA secrecy:

    “The annual meetings, Polhemus said, were hush-hush affairs. Attendees were told to go to the host city, and the venue was not disclosed until the last minute.

    “They don’t want press and they don’t want the cops showing up,” he said. After the main sessions, Polhemus said, “You break up and you go into different rooms, . . . like a trade conference.”

    The networking for illicit activities occurs later, in private conversations over drinks or dinner, he said. That’s what happened in November at a conference in Miami, FBI agents said in court documents.

    An undercover agent dined with several NAMBLA members at a burger joint where they discussed trips abroad to abuse children. After the convention, he contacted them by telephone and e-mail and set up the sting by promising the boat trip to Mexico.

    … Saturday, the FBI arrested three NAMBLA members at Harbor Island as they waited for a boat that undercover agents told them would sail to Ensenada for a sex retreat over Valentine’s Day with boys as young as 9. The FBI said four NAMBLA members were arrested in a Los Angeles marina where they also planned to set sail to the bogus rendezvous.

    The seven men represent a cross-section of America: a Dallas dentist, a Pittsburgh special-education teacher, a South Carolina substitute teacher, a New Mexico handyman, a Chicago flight attendant who is also a psychologist and two Florida men, a worker at a paper company and a personal trainer.

    A Fullerton chiropractor who was also an assistant pastor at his church was arrested on child-pornography charges as part of the sting, and bail was set at $100,000. He admitted taking an Encinitas boy to Balboa Park and molesting him, the FBI said in court documents. Prosecutors have not charged him in connection with those allegations.

    Friends, relatives and co-workers of the men expressed shock at the arrests, but the FBI said in court papers that most of the men told the undercover agent they had been sexually involved with children in the past, including boys they met through the Internet and others abroad.”

    An assistant pastor, a teacher, a personal trainer, a special education teacher, a psychologist, a dentist plus a couple of handymen? Practically all of them having easy access to children and infiltrating the society in a very quiet and dangerous way? Their friends and relatives shocked at their detention – which means none of them ever knew anything of their activities? And they are so secretive that they engage in their sex activities mainly abroad?

    Isn’t it a certain pattern of behavior which has nothing to do with MJ – something we’ve always said before?

    See the earlier posts about it – it seems that this horrendous subject is back again!

    About the research into spread of p-lia now:
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/05/18/why-they-harassed-michael-jackson-but-welcome-thomas-ocarroll-is-it-the-answer/

    About who Thomas O’Caroll is:
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/carl-toms-book/
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/carl-toms-new-stage-o-hatred-for-michael-jackson/

    About the university professors who opendly recommended Carl Tom’s book:
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/meet-the-guys-who-recommend-carl-toms-book/
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/academic-assault-on-michael-jackson-the-guys-who-recommended-carl-toms-book-part-2/

    About why MJ could never be part of them:
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/05/21/academic-assault-on-michael-jackson-he-wasnt-one-of-them/

    About the way these people are eroding intolerance to p-lia and about its links to the gay movement:
    https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/05/29/they-did-it-once-theyll-do-it-again/

    By the way the person who engaged me in a gay discussion then and was terribly resentful of me at the time (though I never harass any gays) is back into my life now again – and it is sheer coincidence of course that he has restarted sending me emails all of a sudden, explaining to me that he always knew he was “different” – even when he was a child.

    Does he mean to say that some children are gay from their birth? And if this is so, then there is nothing unnatural in them being attracted to adult men? I definitely regard it as an introduction to really serious future events and a possible fight …

    Like

  67. October 9, 2010 9:59 am

    “Wouldn’t VG have gone to June first?”

    Even if VG had gone to June Chandler she was the one who would never have fallen for his fictional stories – she would have driven him away without hesitation after listening to him for half a minute.

    She is the complete opposite of Evan Chandler – June Chandler easily sums up people and sees through them, is extremely balanced, smart and clear-thinking (as her testimony in 2005 shows it), can be fully in control of any situation, pays utmost attention to every detail by putting it in its right place and seeing things to the very bottom of them.

    We tend to underestimate June Chandler because the media chose to portray her as an “irresponsible” mother – otherwise they couldn’t explain why she allowed Jordan to stay in Michael’s room. Considering her character a statement about her “irresponsibility” is totally wrong!

    June Chandler is capable to keep anything fully under her control and if she didn’t notice anything bad at the time (as she repeatedly said it back in 1993 which is documented by Ray Chandler in his book) it really means there was nothing to notice.

    However by the year 2005 she had somewhat changed her story which is extremely interesting.

    Like

  68. Suzy permalink
    October 9, 2010 9:04 am

    This is why after settling the case in 1994 he and Ray Chandler continued to collect newspaper cuts for decades to see whether Michael was or wasn’t what they thought him to be – they just were not sure of it themselves.

    I often had the feeling when listening or reading Ray that he is trying to convince himself, more than anything. They needed to justify in their minds what they had done to Michael.

    Like

  69. October 9, 2010 8:43 am

    “This is a very plausible theory”

    Yes, Lynette, it is. Theories of what really happened and how it all started are inevitably forming in our heads even though we try to keep our minds as open as it is humanly possible. My theory is more macabre than yours as I have an impression that Gutierrez was not just “telling” things to people or “befriending” them – it seems that he was an instigator of scandals against Michael and as a sort of a provocateur spreading lies about him, and he hit it off with Evan Chandler only because Evan turned out to be extremely susceptible to VG’s suggestions.

    Evan was highly suspicious of people in the first place (even of his wife Natalie – with her coming home late if you remember the tape with Schwartz), very unbalanced and violent as beatings of both his wives, David Schwartz and an attempted murder of his son Jordan prove it, and he was also very inventive as all scriptwriters naturally are – all this is a terribly explosive mix which just needed a little spark planted into his head by Gutierrez.

    I don’t think Evan wanted to frame Michael at the very beginning – he was too entangled in emotions for that. In the taped conversation with David Schwartz at one point he claims he has evidence against Michael and the next moment says he has no idea what is happening there. Even after the criminal investigations was opened, Gutierrez says in his book that Evan admitted to the police he had nothing but suspicions only!

    It seems to me that Evan was so torn by his own emotions that he really began thinking that his life was turned into a nightmare by Michael (while in fact it was the doing of Gutierrez and his own imagination) and he wanted millions as a sort of a “compensation” for the “damage” done. However he never seriously thought of putting Michael behind bars because he was too unsure of himself and had nothing on his hands to prove his suspicions. This is why after settling the case in 1994 he and Ray Chandler continued to collect newspaper cuts for a decade to see whether Michael was or wasn’t what they thought him to be – they just were not sure of it themselves.

    As to demanding millions of Michael Evan probably thought that Michael was so rich that parting with that money wouldn’t matter to him anyway (he was probably even reassured by his lawyers that Michael’s insurance company would pay) – and that is why Evan and Ray Chandler were so annoyed and amazed that he didn’t pay them at once for all the “inconvenience” this situation caused to the Chandlers family. Remember Ray Chandler’s sincere amazement in his book – something like “if Michael had paid at once he could have avoided all the publicity and would have gone down into history not as a c.m. but as the greatest entertainer in the world?”

    Guys, you are absolutely right when you think that Gutierrez and the Chandlers had different agendas – in a certain way Evan Chandler was a kind of a victim of Gutierrez or at least secondary to him while it is probably Victor Gutierrez and the people standing behind him who are the real driving force in Michael’s harassment. VG’s plans were so grandiose that he went so far as to claim that one day he would own Neverland! Who could have promised him that?

    Let us remember all these small and big facts and have our minds open for being able to digest further information which will surely come into our hands. Our goal is to finally solve this jig-saw puzzle and fit each small fact into the general picture – so now it is too early to pass the final judgment.

    As to Joy Robson and her speaking or not speaking to VG – this, in my opinion, is of minor importance. By the way if she did talk to VG she could have told Michael about their conversation – Michael surely knew much more than we think he did and this is probably why he felt it was impossible to fight and sue all of them (and why he started to be suspicious of some of his maids, bodyguards, assistants, etc. and fired them). In a situation Michael was in it was terribly easy to grow paranoid. He felt that practically all of them presented a danger to him and preferred to replace his team with new people at the first opportunity – which only increased the ranks of his enemies, alas.

    What is top important to me in VG’s story about Joy Robson is his own admission on how he handled these conversations – he opened them with a statement that Michael was “this and that” as if it were an established fact. It was like, “Didn’t you know it? Why didn’t you? Everyone knows it!”

    When people hear things like that it is their natural instinct to side with “everyone” and it is then that people start “remembering” things – and what looked to them completely innocent before suddenly acquires a sinister meaning even if it was nothing but a kiss, a smile or a hug given to a child…

    Like

  70. Suzy permalink
    October 9, 2010 7:32 am

    @ David

    Thanks for reminding me: yeah, it was in one of your articles I read it in.

    Like

  71. Suzy permalink
    October 9, 2010 7:31 am

    As for Jordan’s motives to turn to the Dark Side. I still think he is very material. And VG might have whispered in their ears about how Michael picks up people as his BFFs and then all of a sudden drops them. And Jordan maybe thought: OK if that’s the fate waiting for me then I go with the money.

    Like

  72. lcpledwards permalink
    October 9, 2010 7:30 am

    @ Suzy
    I included an excerpt from “Unmasked” that has an interview with those 2 former maids who said that Blanca Francia was “possessive” of MJ. It’s in Part 1 of the settlements article under the section on Blanca & Jason’s settlement with MJ.

    Like

  73. Suzy permalink
    October 9, 2010 7:16 am

    @ Lynette

    Yeah, that sounds logical now. I think VG might have talked to Joy Robson and other parents but I don’t think the conversation went like how he describes it in his book. You don’t walk up to somebody telling them: “BTW, your friend is a p. and might molest your son” and I agree if that had happened Joy (and other parents) would have told that to Michael.

    I think in reality VG was probably just sniffing around, trying to get inside information out of these people and cautiously tested waters about who is the parent who might do the job for him. Then he found the mentally disturbed Evan.

    It’s a good point how the Chandlers named boys they couldn’t even know. But VG knew about them…..

    (A note about Blanca Francia: There was an interview that two former maids of Michael gave during the trial. They too were working for Michael while Blanca Francia was there. They said she was very possessive of him and they had the feeling she had a crush on him. Then I was wondering about the shower scene she described on court. During direct-examinations she claimed she saw the shadow of Michael and Wade in the showers, but then under cross-exam she admitted she only saw Michael. You know, it kind of made me wonder whether she was spying on Michael while he was showering, whether she wanted to see him naked or something. And I wonder if she eventually did.)

    Like

  74. lynande51 permalink
    October 9, 2010 4:49 am

    Elena I don’t think that VG ever spoke to Joy Robson about Michael. I would have thought that if some man had approached her and said anything like Michael M.ing Wade she would have told Michael immediately. I have added the Authors notes now so you can read them. He probably did talk to the FBI he was probably the one, the writer that told them about the boys in Mexico that is mentioned in the open files of the FBI. They looked for these boys and found nothing. Here is what I think probably happened. He found out that Michael was friends with Jordan.Victor befriended the Chandlers maid. He spoke with Evan and told him his suspicions. Evan ran with it. He counted on Victor to give him important information and to help him frame Michael. He may have even been the one that suggested drugging Jordan and Michael to get the truth and it went no where. What did work with Jordan were the threats from his father and the lie that he had bugged his room I think that is where the whole problem started with the description. Victor thought he could get the description from Blanca or Adrian McManus because they were the ones that cleaned his bedroom so they might have inadvertently walked in on him when he was dressong or showering. They made a guess about Michael knowing that vitiligo always changed and he relied on Orietta Murdoch for the Michael was bleaching his skin story . They missed on the circumcision. He was also the one the gave them the names of the ” other boys ” and helped to make up a story with salacious details probably from his own experience. It is evident that he was involved when you read the court documents from Sneddon because he names Jimmy Safechuck and Jonathan Spence in his reason for allowing the 1108 evidence. Evan and Jordan would not have ever known about these people without help and that help came from none other that Victor Gutierrez. This is a very plausible theory when you remember that the police in 2 different counties and the FBI found nothing, no evidence anywhere, no other victims unless they were produced by this man and his accomplice Evan Chandler.

    Like

  75. lynande51 permalink
    October 9, 2010 3:25 am

    June was inaccessible to him. She was always with Michael and Jordan and Michael was at her house. He had an in at Evan’s house which was their maid.

    Like

  76. shelly permalink
    October 8, 2010 11:27 pm

    I read in an article from Friedman that the Chandler maid was a source of Gutierrez. I cannot find the article.

    Like

  77. October 8, 2010 11:11 pm

    Wouldn’t VG have gone to June first?

    Like

  78. October 8, 2010 10:38 pm

    “Remember how right at their first meeting Evan confronted Michael with questions about whether he is m-ing Jordan. And he didn’t even know the man yet and Jordan never complained about anything. So how do you get to that idea? That he has talked to VG before and he put this idea in his sick mind, totally makes sense now!”

    Absolutely! The fact that he blurted out such an incredible question when he saw Michael for the first time – though he didn’t know a thing about him – means he had been brimming with suspicion and couldn’t hold himself any longer. Someone had poisoned his totally unbalanced, jealous, suspicios and violent mind with this venom and it was surely Victor Gutierrez who did it.

    It is like Iago and Othello in Shakespeare’s tragedy.

    Like

  79. October 8, 2010 10:26 pm

    “I scanned the Authors Notes from his book. He names all of the people who “helped ” him make his dream come true. The real irony is that right after the LAPD Child Abuse Unit he thanks NAMBLA.”

    Lynette, can you insert the document into the post, please? It doesn’t open with me and I would love to see (and probably research) the contributors to this book!

    Like

  80. October 8, 2010 10:22 pm

    “It wouldn’t surprise me at all if he put the original idea in Chandlers head.’

    Lynette, Victor Gutierrez proves it himself in his MJWML book that this is actually how he started his conversations with people. Do you remember that in an episode with Joy Robson he opened his speech with a remark that Micael was a p.?

    This is what he wrote about it:
    “I introduced myself to the mother saying that I was a journalist and that I was writing a book about Jackson which concerned his relationship with minors, including his being a p-le.”

    He was routinely starting a conversation with naming Michael things as if it was AN ESTABLISHED FACT! Can you imagine the impression it could have produced on a violent guy like Evan Chandler if he had heard a statement like that? Especially supported by VG’s revelations about some fictitiuos other “victims”?

    I have no doubts whatsoever that this is how all this Chandlers’ case started.

    Like

  81. October 8, 2010 10:03 pm

    “I’m not gay, my partner is Gay”
    (Victor Gutierrez, magazine The Journalist, March 31, 2003)

    Lynette, if Victor Gutierrez is the author of the above words it means that he is admitting that he is gay. It looks like a sort of a humorous gesture or a figure of speech meant to shrug the fact off as something unimportant.

    It is similar to a woman who thinks and says that she is married while her partner thinks and says that he is single – this difference of interpretation does not change the fact that they are actually living together (and it only their perception of their affair which is different).

    Did Gutierrez really say that?

    Like

  82. October 8, 2010 9:46 pm

    Lulu, I also respect Madonna for what she said in the video you’ are providing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVZyUwoGfN0&feature=player_embedded).

    She said:
    “I don’t like people humiliating other people like that. It just doesn’t seem right and fair.”

    Interviewer:
    You said that “publicly humiliating someone for your own gain (which you think Martin Bashir has done) will only come back to haunt you. I can assure you – all these people will be sorry. God is going to have his revenge”

    Like

  83. October 8, 2010 9:42 pm

    “Why did the media WANT him to be guilty so bad? Was it “just” sensationalism or did it have a hidden reason – at least in some part of it?”

    Suzy, we need to find all the links.

    Like

  84. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 9:28 pm

    @ Louise

    Earlier I linked in an info on Die Tageszeitung – the newspaper which conducted and published this interview with VG. It turns out that this paper has a history in supporting p-ia! ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Tageszeitung#Pedophilia_Controversy )

    So one can only wonder how much are the media actually infected? I start to suspect NBC (and other media) had another motive of covering the case the way they did than “just” sensationalism and ill-will towards MJ. Who knows who else in top positions was a part of this p. plot against Michael?

    Why did the media WANT him to be guilty so bad? Was it “just” sensationalism or did it have a hidden reason – at least in some part of it?

    I was also shocked earlier to learn (through the Thomas O’Caroll story) how much the Academia is infected! So nothing would be surprising any more!

    It’s like all the world has gone crazy! Good is presented as evil and evil is presented as good. Unbelievable the times we are living in!

    Like

  85. October 8, 2010 9:01 pm

    “I swear, it’s like all of MJ’s enemies are in bed with each other!” you’re absolutly right lcpledwards.
    I think Veritas’ chart shows this perfectly. Eventualy we will complete this chart with 80’s information like what we’ve found about VG.

    As Helena wrote, with this news about VG we have opened “a can of worms”. We need to look more inside of it. I am sure the can is very deep.

    The German article says during 1984-86 VG worked for a spanish newspaper as a crime reporter. This means he was probably been in contact with the police. It would be interesting to find out more about this.

    As Suzy said, NAMBLA’s members and fans are everywhere. In Michael’s case, was VG the only one? If not, who are the others?

    Like

  86. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 6:14 pm

    @ Raven

    Yeah. In the article they also write how all those boys were “very pretty”. The word they use is “hübsch”, which is, just like “pretty” in English, usually used for describing girls, not boys. Things like these are why I think the journalist who wrote this is a p. too.

    Like

  87. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 6:06 pm

    I think Ray’s problem with Gutierrez is not so much the lies he is telling about Jordan and Michael (in fact I think initially Evan probably participated in making up those), but the fact he portrays Evan as the greedy extortionist he is!

    The reason for that is that he wanted to portray it as a “consensual romance” that was ruined by Jordan’s greedy parents and not because Jordan didn’t like it or something. As a p. he has to tell us Jordan liked it and no harm was done.

    Like

  88. October 8, 2010 6:02 pm

    @Suzy

    I agree. There is something very disturbing and unnatural in the way he goes to great lengths to describe exactly what the boys looked like. What difference does it make, for example, if Jordan was “skinny” or “dark haired?” These are the kinds of details only a ped would find important enough to notice and comment on. What he’s trying to do is to draw a picture of Jordan as a very attractive boy and thus (in his own mind) justifying the attraction. A normal person who is disgusted by the thought of someone molesting a child would not careif the child was skinny, fat, dark, fair or purple…all that’s important is that this is a child being abused.

    Like

  89. lcpledwards permalink
    October 8, 2010 5:48 pm

    Hey guys, this is a comment that I posted a few months ago, but I wanted to repost it here because it’s very relevant to what we’re talking about now!

    I read something that literally made me laugh out loud! In this article from Sept. 2004, Ray Chandler is interviewed about “ATG”, and he made an amazing comment about Victor Gutierrez. Here’s Ray’s comment on Victor and his book “MJWML”:

    With Jackson facing a January 2005 trial on charges of child molestation, Chandler’s book should cause a firestorm. For one thing, it validates much in a previously published book by Victor Gutierrez — banned in the U.S. — that chronicled Jackson’s relationships with several children, including Chandler’s nephew.

    But Ray Chandler said he did not endorse that book. “Victor Gutierrez is a sleazebag,” he said.

    WOW! For Ray Chandler to call Gutierrez a sleazebag, then Gutierrez must truly be a sleazebag! He doesn’t even live up the Chandler’s standards! That’s incredible!

    By the way, here is an archived version of the ATG website, and they have a list of Ray Chandler’s media appearances. He made around 20 appearances, yet refused to appear in court! What a coward! This site also has his rebutalls to Mary Fischer’s GQ article, Geraldine Huges’ book, and the 1995 Diane Sawyer interview, so this CONFIRMS that Ray Chandler is indeed the author of that hater’s site that we debunked a few months ago.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20061018104435/www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,131615,00.html

    http://web.archive.org/web/20041014024341/atgbook.net/index.php

    Like

  90. Olga permalink
    October 8, 2010 5:47 pm

    I hope Jordan Chandler will read this page one day and sue the hell out of that sicko. VG deserves to fly the country for the second time in his pathetic life

    Like

  91. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 5:07 pm

    @ David

    So “World of Wonder production” does exist, the name was just misquoted in the article.

    Is this a gay website or what? The way they write about Jordan, lusting after him.

    And VG is telling us he’s not gay and not a p. Yeah, right. Then what does he do on such websites?

    I don’t buy he is not a gay p. No heterosexual man would write about the alleged sex scenes between a man and a child with such pleasure.

    Like

  92. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 4:58 pm

    @ Raven

    The sheer hypocrisy of these people who persecute Michael, yet embrace the likes of Guiterrez and other advocates of NAMBLA is mind blowing, and sickening.

    Isn’t it? I wonder how much the so called “elite” (including the media elite) is infected. I think the likes of Dimond are simply too stupid and lazy to see and discover these things, but I wonder about NBC and the likes. I can’t believe nobody ever checked what’s VG’s book really is about and that nobody has ever realized the thanks to NAMBLA and nobody has ever given a second thought about that, and that nobody has ever learnt about the interviews he gives elsewhere. I just can’t believe that.

    And how would Guiterrez know that Michael “didn’t know what was up with him” and “only got to know more about p_hiles in the 90′s through the Internet”? Where the heck does that come from? You know good and well that if there had been ANY evidence whatsoever on Michael’s computers that he was accessing information about pedophiles (even if only for educational purposes) it would have been seized and used as evidence against him. No such evidence was ever found.

    Of course it’s just another lie of VG. There was never a trace of child porn found on Michael’s computers. Never a trace to so called “man-boy love” websites or NAMBLA or anything like that. It was simply not in his interest. Guess why? Because he wasn’t a p.

    Like

  93. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 4:34 pm

    @ Lynette

    Thanks for the article. I was wondering what kind of “congresses” NAMBLA hold. And putting together this article and the one about VG you can tell that VG is spinning again. This article says:

    The annual meetings, Polhemus said, were hush-hush affairs. Attendees were told to go to the host city, and the venue was not disclosed until the last minute.

    “They don’t want press and they don’t want the cops showing up,” he said.

    So there’s no way he was there to report from the congress as a journalist. He was there because he is one of them, I agree with you about that.

    And of course he didn’t infiltrate them as an undercover journalist either. When people go into such an organizations undercover they have a goal with that: either to investigate as a detective or to expose them as a journalist. He never exposed NAMBLA. In fact he always talked in support of them. He’s a friend of NAMBLA, not an undercover spy on them.

    And this is frightening:

    The American Civil Liberties Union has come to the defense of the group’s leaders and publications.

    “There is nothing in them which is unlawful, which is outside the bounds of what is normally protected by the First Amendment,” ACLU lawyer John Reinstein said in an interview.

    Gillen said the ACLU has blocked efforts to get information about the group. “We haven’t been able to get a firm fix on how many members, who they are, where they are,” he said.

    I think it has more membership and more influence than people think. Or how do we explain all the support for somebody like VG in the media (Dimond, NBC etc.), while they were torturing an innocent man?

    Like

  94. lcpledwards permalink
    October 8, 2010 4:05 pm

    Hey guys, here is an article from the World of Wonder website, where the writer says that Jordie actually worked WITH VG on the book, and requested a job at World of Wonder Productions! I have that highly doubtful, because with his settlement money, why would he even WANT to work there, or anywhere for that matter?

    The writer then has the nerve to “recommend” the book because it has some “validity” and is a “counterbalance” to the glowing media coverage of MJ (this was written just after he died).

    http://worldofwonder.net/2009/06/29/Jordie_Chandler_today/

    Here is a questionnaire that he filled out:
    http://worldofwonder.net/archives/2005/03/08/victor_gutierrez/

    And to think, this guy was actually hired by NBC News, which purports to be a legitimate, objective news organization? I blame Maureen Orth and Andrew Lack for this! Orth needs no explanation, but Lack was the President of NBC who authorized that Feb. 2003 Dateline episode that horrendous episode of MJ right after the Bashir doc aired. He then accepted Sony’s offer to replace Tommy Mottola! I swear, it’s like all of MJ’s enemies are in bed with each other! Lack definitely needs to be added to the flowchart on the Veritas Project!

    For more info on Lack, read my comment from 8-28-10 in this post: https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/08/04/thanks-to-you-bashir-nobody-will-ever-see-mj-perform-again-because-you-killed-him-by-d-edwards/

    Like

  95. October 8, 2010 4:02 pm

    The sheer hypocrisy of these people who persecute Michael, yet embrace the likes of Guiterrez and other advocates of NAMBLA is mind blowing, and sickening.

    So they needed a celebrity poster person? I guess Allen Ginsberg wasn’t good enough for them. I do love Ginsberg’s poetry because I’m a huge fan of the Beats. But as far as society at large was concerned, Ginsberg was always a flake on the “outer edges” of society, so there was really nothing to be gained by tearing down his reputation, since it was already a reputation built on controversy and going against the grain.

    I do wish they would stop trying to use Oscar Wilde’s affair with Bosie as some sort of “justification.” Yes, Bosie was a younger man, but he was not a child. That was a case of a fully consentual, adult gay relationship, which is totally different. Oscar Wilde’s only “crime” was being a gay man at a time when being gay was considered a crime.

    And how would Guiterrez know that Michael “didn’t know what was up with him” and “only got to know more about p_hiles in the 90’s through the Internet”? Where the heck does that come from? You know good and well that if there had been ANY evidence whatsoever on Michael’s computers that he was accessing information about pedophiles (even if only for educational purposes) it would have been seized and used as evidence against him. No such evidence was ever found.

    Like

  96. lynande51 permalink
    October 8, 2010 3:32 pm

    I have a link to an article I found in my search about NAMBLA. In the May 2005 issue of British GQ there was an article about Michael Jackson and of course they were interviewing VG who was saying he had infiltrated a top secret society.I knew instantly he was talking about NAMBLA so I went to see if I could find any articles about them being infiltrated by the police or perhaps a reporter. I found this article about the ONE time they had been infiltrated and a little bit about how difficult it is to infiltrate it so the likelyhood that VG infiltrated them is slim to none as far as I’m concerned. The only way this man got information from them was because he was one of them no other way. Logic talks so here’s some logic for you. This is a veryparanoid group, the reason would be obvious they take part in criminal activity of the worst kind. Do you think they don’t have strict rules about who get’s into their group and what has to happen before you get to be one of them? I would say that they have to know ahead of time if you qualify as one of them before you got to get to go to one of their meetings. Any way the article will take you through what I just sort of summarized here for you to understand.

    http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20050217-2208-manboy-daily.html

    Like

  97. shelly permalink
    October 8, 2010 9:53 am

    “I agree that VG is a liar, but why would he lie about this NAMBLA thing. Nobody would want to be associated with these scumbags if he is not in agreement with their views.”

    I don’t know Suzy but why did he thank them in his book?
    All those people, they really make me sick.

    Like

  98. Dialdancer permalink
    October 8, 2010 9:37 am

    Ok. Lets get one thing straight. If there had been a hint of Michael’s interest or participation in this organization Sneddon would have went to the top of Mount McKinley and announced it. During the infestation, the persons who came on the MJ site were intelligent with polished writing skills. They attempted to let us know we did not understand the book and their movement. They often spoke of Michael in admiring terms even going as far as to call him their hero or some such dibble. They wished to use Michael’s name to promote their group in the same way as the Gutierrez’s of the world have and continue to use Michael’s name.

    That is why it is of the utmost importance that some kind of Legislation is passed to stop these bottom feeders. Legislation which will allow family and others affected the right to sue on behalf the deceased; make these people put up the proof of their slander or shut up and pay heavily for defamation. Legislation where people like him do not get to hide behind the First Amendment. Legislation where if you are a 2 or 3 time offender and previously skipped out on paying, your ass sits in jail working off your debt how ever long it takes.

    Like

  99. Dialdancer permalink
    October 8, 2010 8:40 am

    OMG… I first became aware of this group during the fight over Carl Tom’s invading another MJ site trying to peddle his book and recruit advocates. I wonder if Dimond who has become seemingly close to this man knows what he is? (hired for 2005 trial and 2 documentaries)

    @ Helena,

    I know you are trying to digest this person’s writing also. I am sending you a link. It is possible he may have been among us recently promoting his hate campaign. I think you
    will recognize the writing style if it so.

    Like

  100. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 7:04 am

    I looked up information about the paper which published this. Look what I have found:

    “Pedophilia Controversy

    In 2010, an article emerged on the website Spiegel Online titled “The Sexual Revolution and Children: How the left took things too far”. The article mentions Tageszeitung’s promotion of Children’s sexual liberation during the 1970s.[2] A series in Tageszeitung titled “I Love Boys” featured interviews with men who described “how beautiful and liberating sex with preadolescent boys supposedly was”.[3] The article goes on to mention that those who opposed sexual experimentation with children, such as the magazine’s then editor Gitti Hentschel were accused of being “prudish” by others who accused them of inhibiting freedom of expression and children’s sexuality.[4]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Die_Tageszeitung#Pedophilia_Controversy

    Like

  101. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 6:59 am

    Just to name our sources. Here is a link to the original article: http://www.taz.de/?id=archivseite&dig=2005/04/05/a0170

    Like

  102. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 6:10 am

    As for VG thanking NAMBLA in his book. Wow! Isn’t it ironic that all these overzealous bigots in the media were bashing and chasing Michael, an innocent man for almost 20 years, while praising this guy (as did D. Dimond) and giving him jobs (as did NBC) – who is probably a real p., but at least an advocate for them! Are they aware of his connections to NAMBLA? It’s difficult not to, since he is thanking them in his book. Or did nobody of NBC ever read his book? Or our society is so infected with this filth that is p-ia on every level, that they knew and that is the very reason why he got all this support? Because so many people were/are involved in it also in media circles?

    Suzy, I am subscribing to each of your questions and answers here.

    It is actually wonderful that Diane Dimond called Victor Gutierrez “her best source” – let me cite the Court of Appeal documents (about that non-existent video tape) to make sure that she did say it:

    Q: “It is an x-rated tape?”
    Dimond: “It is . . . yes.”
    Q: “Of Michael Jackson?”
    Dimond: “Truly explicit.”
    Q: “It’s what? Michael Jackson and little boy. Are you 100% sure that this tape exists?”
    Dimond: “I am as sure as I can possibly be.“
    Q: “You have not seen it?”
    Dimond: “I have not seen it but one of my best sources on the Michael Jackson story has seen it.”
    Q: “Who .. . you have no doubts about.”
    Dimond: “I have never had a doubt about this person, ever.”

    If we manage to prove a Gutierrez-NAMBLA connection I hope this will be the end of DD and those who have been nurturing this couple, including the World of Wonder Production company (which made Peretti’s film and was planning to make a film based on Gutierrez’s book and which is also connected to the Guardian in the UK!).

    Just as a reminder see what Lynette wrote about the connection between Peretti, Gutierrez, and World of Wonder Productions:

    “Oh yeah I did a little research myself and behold it was produced by World Of Wonder Productions. The same company that Victor Gutierrez wanted to make a movie special about his book MJWML. World of wonder Productions is a subsidiary of The Guardian UK. No surprises there. I found out a lot about the underworld of the tabloid press by reading the book Tabloid Baby by Burt Kearns. If you want to refute them you have to know how they work. I know I said this before but in California in 1993 a freelance journalist was a paparazzi plain and simple. You know don’t you that they got a lot of their information from Norma Salinas, the Chandler’s maid. She was also an immigrant from El Salvador. Sounds like someone else we know doesn’t it? Like Blanca Francia. I think the connection between these people is uncanny and too coincidental to be a coincidence, don’t you?”

    Diane Dimond, the NBC, the Guardian UK – who else have made friends and considered as their best source Victor Gutierrez – the man who is most probably associated with NAMBLA?

    Like

  103. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 6:02 am

    @ Lynette

    It wouldn’t surprise me at all if he put the original idea in Chandlers head.

    To me that’s what makes the most sense now! Remember how right at their first meeting Evan confronted Michael with questions about whether he is m-ing Jordan. And he didn’t even know the man yet and Jordan never complained about anything. So how do you get to that idea? That he has talked to VG before and he put this idea in his sick mind, totally makes sense now!

    The other parents were stable and mentally healthy, so VG had no luck with them. And he must have talked to a lot of them between 1986 and 1993 – that’s seven years until he finally found his man in Evan who was a mentally unstable, bi-polar man…..

    I will search for more on that website. At the end of the article it says: “Tomorrow: Jordie Chandler and Michael Jackson: the story of an abused love”. It’s a very suspicious title again. Suspicious of more p. propaganda….

    I found and read the article. It indeed is p. propaganda – VG’s own p. propaganda, extracts from his book. So I don’t see a reason to translate it as well, it’s just what’s in his book, no additional information.

    Like

  104. lynande51 permalink
    October 8, 2010 4:36 am

    Hey Suzy click on the link I added. I scanned the Authors Notes from his book. He names all of the people who “helped ” him make his dream come true. The real irony is that right after the LAPD Child Abuse Unit he thanks NAMBLA.
    I also want to add a little logic. A normal tab reporter would not have set out to prove this fact about this man. The tabs were having fun with Bubbles and the hyberbaric chamber and his brain in a jar, right up until this guy come along. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if he put the original idea in Chandlers head. Remember how the tab reporters found them was by someone remembering that they had seen a story after they went to the WMA awards. Well if VG was devoting his time to this he would have had been following everyone who came in contact with Michael and he hit the Jackpot with Chandler.

    Like

  105. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 4:20 am

    Of course, I have my doubts about the details. VG’s meeting with NAMBLA members in 1986 probably went more like this: “We WANT MJ to be one of us. Can you do something about that, Victor?” But I can’t see why somebody would openly advocate p-ia, as VG does, if the thing about him being a sympathizer of NAMBLA is not true.

    Like

  106. Suzy permalink
    October 8, 2010 4:00 am

    I don’t know if VG is a p. But he certainly has an affection for p-les. There can be two reasons for it: he is one, despite of his public denial. Or he is an opportunist who gets his paycheck from NAMBLA. Either way we have heard it right from his mouth now that he has connections to NAMBLA since 1986 and that’s why he started to “investigate” Michael.

    @ Shelly

    I agree that VG is a liar, but why would he lie about this NAMBLA thing. Nobody would want to be associated with these scumbags if he is not in agreement with their views.

    Like

  107. Olga permalink
    October 8, 2010 1:46 am

    another sick one exposed

    Like

  108. October 7, 2010 11:59 pm

    oh the rumour here in Chile is that vg is gay, but he recently went to a tv show where he said he has a partner who is a woman talk about whitewash your image.

    Like

  109. October 7, 2010 11:57 pm

    @lynande51

    that is an open letter to a newspaper here in Chile by a fan.
    and it wass true what vg said after Michaels death vg went to every television show here in south america as in europe showin “his evidence”, not because he has nothing to show he claims to have this and that, but it’s not true.
    just goes with his book to show it, if any of those interviewers knew a little about Michael’s life they would put vg in so much trouble, but no noone knows nothing.

    Like

  110. shelly permalink
    October 7, 2010 10:42 pm

    I don’t think we should give credit to anything VG said, including his Nambla part. That guy is such a liar.

    Like

  111. pez permalink
    October 7, 2010 9:33 pm

    There was an interesting documentary on the 2005 trial that aired recently. The film makers Dana Gedrick and Barry Shaw were against Michael at first but slowly realized how ruthless & despicable the medialoid coverage was. They decided to turn the cameras onto the media. This doc is very eye-opening and could be useful for future posts.

    http://www.thetrialsofmichaeljackson.com/

    Like

  112. lynande51 permalink
    October 7, 2010 9:30 pm

    I went a hunting again instead of writing and look what I found and article that was written shortly after Michaels death to Gutierrez. Pay particular attention to th earticlebecasue I don’t know for sure if it is traslated from Spanish good enough. The Person that write it actually says that at some point Victor Gutierrez says in an interview that He is not gay his partner is ( what partner would that be then victor your Partner in crime?) I will leave a link to the original article if someone can do a better jos with the translation for me.
    LORD
    VICTOR GUTIERREZ
    JOURNALIST
    THIS

    I imagine it must be happy with the death of Michael Jackson, that his cell phone has not stopped ringing and his articles and interviews fee has risen significantly.

    I guess now you can breathe easy knowing that the plaintiff has died and the trial he lost in 1997 is closed and that $ 2.7 million to be paid for losing the lawsuit in the United States will no longer be your concern.

    When you said he was in possession of an incriminating video Michael Jackson in compromising situations and failed to prove its existence lost a case in which the Chilean journalism affected its image, professionalism and ethics. But YOU said:

    “I declared myself bankrupt and he had 10 years to find money. In June 2007 the deadline and could not get me anything, ”

    This strategy of letting time pass by filing petitions that may be legal but not ethical is nothing usual in UD., Portrays the misery of his person and the non-existence of values, the total lack of good living, indecency a vulture and the immorality of a deadbeat bastard throwing accusations in the air, unable to prove the truth of his statements.

    Did not respond when in 2001 the Chilean Supreme Court sentenced him to pay $ 47,500 to Cecilia Bolocco without any basis for saying it was a lover of Brazilian writer Paulo Coelho. There was no resources or manhood to take on the sentence. How easy it is to do what YOU do, trash people, make lots of money for interviews, writing books and articles with lies and no losses when demand and lost, as has always been the case. That easy and that is your life miserable parasite. Too bad it does to society. “The journalist did not invent sources, hiding as a” close “,” a senior official of the institution “, etc., Thus safeguarding the credibility and dignity of the profession.” (Article 8th. Code of Journalistic Ethics)

    Latest News In The UD today. Says:
    “Now I can negotiate the rights of my film about my book that was outstanding”
    “And of course me are calling programs worldwide to sell them information and even photos I have of him as a child”

    Morality that Mr. Gutierrez, to continue doing business, continue to receive money from others, continue profiting from the misery of others, to death.

    You have exceeded all bounds of decency and respect, is passed through any part of Article Six of the code of journalistic ethics
    says:
    “A journalist must always establish a clear distinction between facts, opinions and interpretations, avoiding any confusion or deliberate distortion of them”

    2003 to meet the rugged history of Claudio Spiniak UD had no qualms about linking to Joaquin Lavin, at that time a presidential candidate with the pedophile, again winning a lawsuit can not prove the facts. Did not hesitate to devise a mounting public figures linked to the pedophile ring. As usual nothing came and UD. He hoped that the waters be still hiding his head with an ostrich.

    This morning you said in DNA Radio “To keep talking about Michael Jackson if there are more important issues” And YOU said so? You who have lived and been fed by years of reports and articles based on lies? Have you ever had the manhood to face sentences or pay what justice has been imposed?

    As you can tell that there are issues more important if UD. lived to these stories. Such as a human being so miserable, as a journalist can reach this level of sleaze and dishonesty.

    “I’m not gay, my partner is Gay”
    (Victor Gutierrez, magazine The Journalist, March 31, 2003)

    To my UD. is a despicable person and acknowledged that since homosexuality is wrong experienced sexual deviations to aquarium fish and seeking fame and fortune of the worst ways, away from morality and professional ethics, committing murders and that image when pictures are presented side becomes queers in the most literal definitions.

    Being homosexual is a respectable and self determination and I have absolutely nothing against it, but being a sissy shit like UD openly condemn it and consider it a bastard that pervades the society of evil, of falsehood, hypocrisy and dishonesty.

    UD. never transcend as a journalist for being a real contribution but farandulizar life and distance that has to ethics, decency and values.

    Michael Jackson, thanks for your music happiness flooded my youth parties and for your enormous contribution to world music

    http://www.elnortero.cl/admin/render/noticia/20027

    Like

  113. lulu permalink
    October 7, 2010 9:19 pm

    Well, isn’t this an interesting development. Nothing surprises me anymore. All the people involved in the systematic take down of Michael are lower than scum. It’s sad that most people in the medialoid/entertainment industry/public ran with the allegations instead of thoroughly investigating the backgrounds of the extortionists, leeches & slanderers who were out to destroy Michael’s life.

    I respected Madonna for her words in 2003

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. Vindicating Michael
  2. Anonymous
  3. World Spinner
  4. Jackson Family Betrayal | AllForLoveBlog

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: