Skip to content


January 25, 2011

I’ve found a video of  “One more chance”. It is magical and infinitely sad.

Sad because we see him at the moment when he still doesn’t know what is awaiting him tomorrow. Magical because it is like stopping time or reversing it back to the point when all those tragic events have not yet taken place and there is still a hope that everything might still change.

There is something symbolic in it being called ONE MORE CHANCE.

It is really a new chance for Michael – a chance for the world to finally know him as a true human being and not the caricature they painted of him. A chance for him to relive his life again and for the people to learn what he was really like.

Only this time the story should be told not by rogues like DD, but by honest people who will be willing to tell the truth. It will be a chance for Michael to come into this life again and be himself at last.

One More Chance In Love…

One More Chance In Life For Michael . . .

The symbolism of One More Chance video is amazing. Every episode forms a striking association with the present day.

  • People coming into the hall one by one and finally pouring in torrents are like people awakening to Michael’s innocence one after another and then forming a steady flow of his supporters from every corner of the world.
  • The crowd on stage and Michael in the audience instead is like reversing our roles now with ordinary people turning into the main players of the show and Michael watching us from somewhere afar.
  • The surprised look on people’s faces and their somewhat reserved attitude in the beginning which then turns into an enthusiastic welcome is like the initial wary start bringing about Michael’s overwhelming and whole-hearted acceptance in the end.
  • Michael starting performing and people’s disbelief at seeing him again is like watching him miraculously returning to the world to everyone’s amazement and delight.
  • Smiling Michael who runs along the line of people touching their hands while everyone bows to reach for his hand is like all people uniting in a universal greeting of him.
  • Michael walking away from the set with people still applauding him is like the end which has not taken place yet but which is yet to come.
  • And the timing of this video is even more prophetic than anything else – started on the eve of November 18, 2003 but shown only now it makes the video a true miracle linking the past, the present and the future.

Though all of us know what was awaiting Michael the very next day after the video I couldn’t resist going back into the past in order to see the events that followed with the eyes of a contemporary reader.

A journey back is always a highly educational and fascinating thing to do as you have the advantage of knowing the future while they don’t know it yet. So knowing what harassment, trial and tribulations those monsters prepared for Michael’s tomorrow and also knowing that all this ado will end in complete nothing it is highly useful to reverse one’s steps back into November 2003.

Despite the fact that Michael walked out a free man after two years of everyday torture the nightmare of it took away his spirit, ruined his health, and deprived us all of a chance to ever see his talent again until the moment he died. He did eventually regain his inspiration and continue work, but we were denied the chance to see it.

I wondered – was the media uproar and billions of dollars made out of it worth depriving us of the opportunity to ever see Michael Jackson again, enjoy his brilliant dance, listen to his phenomenal music and see everything else his genius could have brought to us if they hadn’t done their best to destroy him? I just wanted to have a look into the faces of those people again and ask whether they realize what crime they have committed….

*  *  *

By the date of this video (November 17th 2003) Michael Jackson and his three children had been staying in Las Vegas for about three weeks.  Michael came to Las Vegas at the end of October to release his Number Ones album and record “One More Chance” with an accompanying video to it. The video was to debut on November 26th at the end of a CBS special about MJ.
Charles Thomson spoke to those who were in Michael’s crew then and reconstructed Michael’s last few days there.

One more chance for him - NOW instead of THEN?

The way it looks the team had only two days for making the video – in the morning of day one Michael did dance rehearsals and worked out how to move around the tables, which was followed by three hours of recording the video with the of extras chosen for the shoot.

  • “Our intention was to shoot from behind Michael towards the audience and then, to save money on all the audience members, the following day we would flip around and shoot Michael’s close-ups,” says a crew member to Charles Thomson. “So pretty much everything we got on the first day was head to toe and shot either in profile or from behind, with the audience in the background.” “He was really sweet with all the extras,” says a crew member. “When he was leaving he said a great big goodbye to them and thanked them for all their hard work. He was such a gentleman.”

But day two was never to come. At 8:30 the next morning Michael’s assistants Backerman and Shaffel learned from a call from Neverland that the ranch had been swarmed by policemen and when they turned on television they saw a helicopter view of the 70-strong police force raiding the ranch. Charles Thomson tells us of Backerman’s impressions:

  • “Honestly, you would have thought it was an army battalion going into an Iraqi village. There were so many of them.”

Charles Thomson’s full story:

*  *  *

I’ve had a look at the papers reporting the news that day and was disgusted to see some of them bubbling with excitement and labeling Michael guilty though it was not even clear what exactly he was accused of.

Some were telling outright lies. Charles Thomson writes in his blog that one of the extras who took part in the One More Chance video was shocked to see a tabloid soon after the shooting of it which quoted ‘sources’ and claimed that:

  • “Jackson had been swarmed by young boys on the set – when in fact he had been present all day and had not seen anybody under the age of 18.”

Here is the man talking about it:


There were several sources however which tried to convey true information. The CNN managed to do that and get across to its viewers the general feeling of anxiety and confusion which accompanied the raid:

November 18, 2003
LARRY KING: Police state a surprise raid on Michael Jackson’s home at Neverland Ranch while he’s away. They say it’s part of an ongoing criminal investigation.

FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Larry, investigators are still here at Neverland Ranch. They’ve been here since about 8:30 this morning. A spokesman for the sheriff’s department here in Santa Barbara County says that some 60 to 70 investigators from the sheriff’s department and the district attorney’s office have been here throughout the day, and they continue to do whatever it is they’re doing.

KING: And we do know it definitely is in connection with a child molestation matter?

BUCKLEY: Well, that’s what one source who is familiar with this investigation has told me. He said that it is having to do with an allegation of the sexual molestation of a child. But again, still just an investigation, at this point. No charges, obviously, have been brought.

KING: Here’s a statement released late today through Michael Jackson’s spokesman, Stuart Backerman,

  • “We cannot comment on law enforcement’s investigation because we don’t know yet what it’s about. We can comment on the malignant horde of media hounds claiming to speak for Michael on this and many other issues. A rogues’ gallery of hucksters and self-styled inside sources have dominated the airwaves since reports of a search at Neverland broke, speculating, guessing, fabricating information about an investigation they couldn’t possibly know about.
  • Michael himself said, quote, `I’ve seen lawyers who do not represent me and spokespeople who do not know me speaking for me. These characters always seem to surface with a dreadful allegation just as another project, an album, a video is being released.’ Michael, will, as always” — again, the statement continues — “fully cooperate with authorities in any investigation, even as it’s conducted yet again when he is not at home.”

Nov. 18, 2003

(CNN) — Investigators from the Santa Barbara County District Attorney’s Office and Sheriff’s Department searched entertainer Michael Jackson’s Neverland Ranch in California Tuesday as part of an “ongoing criminal investigation,” a spokesman said.  The nature of the investigation — or what they were searching for — was not disclosed. Stuart Backerman, a spokesman for Jackson, said the singer was up all night shooting a video in Las Vegas and as of 12:30 p.m. PT (3:30 p.m. ET) was resting, so “he doesn’t know about it [the search] yet.” Backerman said Jackson has been in Las Vegas for the past 2 1/2 weeks, shooting a video to promote a CBS special called “One More Chance.” “We’re unaware of what the substance of this matter is,” Backerman told CNN’s Frank Buckley in a telephone interview.  Backerman said no one was aware that the sheriff’s department was coming Tuesday.

The search warrant was served at 8:30 a.m. (11:30 a.m. EST), said Chris Pappas, a spokesman for the sheriff’s department, and investigators were still on the scene several hours later.

Reuters repeated the essence of Michael Jackson’s statement but supplemented it with a big piece titled “AFFECTION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN”.

Over there they refer to allegations of sexual molestation and Michael Jackson “reaching a settlement” with Jordan Chandler (while in fact it was the other way about – it was the Chandlers who finally reached agreement with Michael Jackson as it was them who sought money from the very beginning).
The reporter calls Michael’s behavior “bizarre” and mentions that Gavin openly spoke of his affection for Michael (instead of saying that he liked him) and of enjoying sleepovers with MJ (though Gavin never said he slept in one bed with Michael!!!).

Bashir’s film is quoted saying that “sharing your bed is the most loving thing you can do” for Michael – and no mention is made that it was only a general observation on Michael’s part while what he really said in the film is that he always slept on the floor when he gave his bed to others.

The report closes with a baby-dangling episode (the affected outrage over which is still escaping me) and a recent 12 mln. settlement (?) to avoid a court trial which “threatened to spill details of his financial empire”.

“Jackson has been dogged for 10 years by rumors and allegations stemming from his professed affection for young children. A former child star himself, Jackson has said he thinks of himself as “Peter Pan.”
In 1994 he reached a multimillion dollar out of court settlement with a 14-year-old boy who had accused him of sexual molestation. No criminal charges were brought and Jackson strenuously denied any wrongdoing.
Tuesday’s search warrant follows a tumultuous year for Jackson, whose talents as an entertainer have been eclipsed by his bizarre behavior both on and off screen.
In February, he revealed in a British television documentary that he sometimes shared his Neverland bedroom with young boys. One boy, a 12-year-old cancer survivor called Gavin, spoke openly about his affection for Jackson and of enjoying sleepovers with the pop star at Neverland.
“Why can’t you share your bed? The most loving thing you can do is share your bed with someone,” Jackson said in the documentary.
He later complained that the documentary maker had violated his trust, adding in a statement that “Michael Jackson has never, and would never, treat a child inappropriately or expose them to any harm and totally refutes any suggestions to the contrary.” The documentary sparked calls for an investigation by California child welfare authorities at the Neverland ranch.
In November last year, Jackson stunned fans in Berlin by dangling his barefoot baby from a hotel window.
In June, he settled a $12 million breach of contract lawsuit by his former top adviser, avoiding a trial that threatened to spill details of his financial empire into open court.|top|11-18-2003::19:07|reuters.html

The next newspaper clip focuses on Michael Jackson Knowing Nothing of Neverland Probe
Nov 18, 7:00 PM (ET)

Michael Jackson has been in Las Vegas for almost three weeks shooting a pop video.
“We cannot comment on law enforcement’s investigation because we do not yet know what it is about. Michael will, as always, cooperate fully with authorities in any investigation even as it is conducted, yet again, while he is not home,” said spokesman Stuart Backerman in a statement.
Jackson lashed out at the “rogue’s gallery of hucksters and inside sources” who dominated the airwaves on Tuesday speculating on the investigation.
“These characters always seem to surface with a dreadful allegation just as another project, an album, a video, is being released,” Jackson said in the statement.
The search warrant was executed on the same day that a new greatest hits collection was released, featuring Jackson’s latest single, “One More Chance.”

Fox News tells a totally different story. First they repeat words “sexual” and “molestation” in every possible context and in the first four sentences in a row (I never knew so many repetitions were possible), then reproduce part of Michael’s official statement and mention a CBS special due on November 26 emphasizing that it “mainly” consists of “old concert footage” (forgetting to say that the special was devoted to a new video).

They state that as of midday there was not arrest warrant issued (which makes it sound like a highly anticipated event) and then tell a totally false story of the accuser boy who made “revelations” during a “therapy session” and the “therapist felt compelled to report it to the authorities” (which is an insolent and blatant lie).

The truth of the story is as follows  – for details read this 5-part series

Larry Feldman sent the Arvizo family to psychiatrist Dr.Katz for a interview to check their credibility. According to Feldman Dr. Katz had a hard time pulling the information from the boys. Since this was nothing but a formality the lawyer asked the doctor not go deep into examining them, so any “therapy session” was simply out of the question. Dr. Katz considered their story bizarre but nevertheless approached the DCFS who rejected their report as unfounded after which Larry Feldman personally took the case to Tom Sneddon in his zeal to see Michael Jackson prosecuted.

The FoxNews says the raid “came as a big surprise” to Jackson but presents it in inverted commas thus doubting that it was truly a surprise for Jackson. Michael’s supporters are named a “motley array” and Rabbi Shmuley who is named here as Michael’s spiritual adviser passes an immediate and stunning verdict on Michael saying that it is “the fall of a human being” (!).

This fall is clearly implied by a meticulous repetition by FoxNews of the lurid allegations of the 1993 case – “kissing” Jordan Chandler, “molesting him on several occasions” while “the two were in bed together” and once “took a bath” where the situation “went out of hand”. The incorrect figure of $20 mln. settlement is also mentioned.

The rest sounds like a full dossier on Michael including Jackson’s “terrible mistake” in dangling his baby, him and his children sporting masks, the mother of Blanket being “unidentifiable”, Michael allegedly admitting in Bashir’s film that “he slept in bed with many children” (did Michael really say it?) and him still “inviting children to parties” (what parties?).

They mention that he suffered an anxiety attack, was too weak and dizzy to deliver a deposition in a lawsuit,  “said” he was ill to appear in court but then “made comical faces at people in the courtroom” – the whole of which produces a totally ridiculous effect.

The story traditionally ends with Michael’s collapsing career, his involvement in 1000 suits as his “own lawyers admit it” (as if it were his fault), him being in debt and “teetering near bankruptcy”. Special mention is made of his connection with Anthony Pellicano who has begun “serving federal prison time for possessing illegal explosives” (evidently to put Michael’s name in a solid “criminal” surrounding). The man who was earlier called the King of Pop is now written only in inverted commas as  “the King of Pop”.

In short not a single point in Jackson’s black list was omitted to remind the readers of how crooked and weird the guy was – however let me remind you that all they were supposed to report then was the fact that the police raid was carried out within a police investigation of a case where no charges were as yet made and everything else was nothing but malicious gossip.

Wednesday, November 19, 2003

FoxNewSources told Fox News and other media outlets that a 12-year-old boy had brought sexual allegations against the pop star, who was in Las Vegas filming a music video at the time of the raid.

Authorities would not say whether the allegations of molestation were the reason behind the raid. No immediate arrests were made.

But Court TV, which broke the story, said the allegations of molestation were at the root of the police investigation. Citing unidentified sources, Court TV reported the warrant was tied to sexual abuse allegations brought by a 12- or 13-year-old boy. Sheriff’s officials and the district attorney’s office refused comment.

Jackson publicist Stuart Backerman also refused to comment on any allegations and said neither he nor Jackson knew the details of the investigation.

Jackson denounced media coverage of the search in a statement released to The Associated Press by Backerman, who said the singer and his three young children have spent the last three weeks in Las Vegas for the making of a video.
“I’ve seen lawyers who don’t represent me and spokespeople who do not know me speaking for me. These characters always seem to surface with dreadful allegations just as another project, an album, a video is being released,” the Jackson statement said.

The search came on the same day Epic Records released “Number Ones,” a greatest hits collection featuring Jackson’s new single, “One More Chance.” On Nov. 26, CBS is scheduled to air a Jackson special consisting mainly of old concert footage.

Sixty to 70 personnel from the Santa Barbara County sheriff’s and district attorney’s offices served a warrant about 8:30 a.m. as part of an “ongoing criminal investigation,” Sgt. Chris Pappas said.

Detectives were expected to be gathering evidence all day. As of midday there was no arrest warrant issued, Pappas said at a command post. The district attorney and sheriff planned to provide more details at a Wednesday morning press conference.

The $12.3 million Santa Ynez Valley property, which has a mansion, its own zoo and amusement park with bumper cars, a merry-go-round and Ferris wheel, has often been the site of children’s parties. Investigators were only searching select locations on the property, said sheriff’s Cmdr. Bill Byrne.

A source told “Extra” correspondent Michael Bryant the boy recently approached a Los Angeles law firm and claimed inappropriate conduct by the superstar.

And “Celebrity Justice” reported that it was the 12-year-old boy’s revelations during a therapy session that were behind Tuesday’s search warrant, the show’s producers confirmed to

The boy, who had spent time at Neverland Ranch, entered therapy several months ago and disclosed information the therapist felt compelled to report to authorities, according to “CJ” sources.

Under California law, if a health care practitioner “knows or reasonably suspects” a child to be a victim of abuse, the practitioner must report the abuse to law enforcement authorities “as soon as practically possible.

“News of the raid came as a “complete surprise” to Jackson, a source close to the pop star told’s Roger Friedman.
After word of the search spread, a motley array of Jackson supporters hastily arranged a press conference in Las Vegas Tuesday afternoon.
One woman, Donna Green, said she was a big Jackson fan who had gotten the chance to meet and speak with the singer several times over the years. She was simply there to show her support, she said, and wore a button calling for an end to the “child abuse circus.”
“We love him very much,” she said. “He’s the nicest man I’ve ever met. He’s not this weird person they make him out to be.” She said the timing of the raid struck her as “convenient” since it coincides with the release of his latest album, “Number Ones.”
More than 10 years have passed since the 45-year-old singing superstar faced a child-molestation investigation in a case that never resulted in criminal charges.
The singer who had international hits with the albums “Thriller” (1982), “Bad” (1987) and “Dangerous” (1991) saw his career begin to collapse in 1993 amid allegations he molested a 13-year-old boy.
Jackson has maintained his innocence, and charges were never filed. He reportedly paid an approximately $20 million settlement.
But in the complaint filed, the boy claimed Jackson kissed and molested him on several occasions while the two were in bed together and said he once took a bath with the pop singer. He said the situation got “out of hand.”
Jackson’s spiritual advisor, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, told Fox News he had tried to counsel the singer about being more responsible.”I have sent him many messages,” the rabbi said on Fox News. “We’re not just talking about the fall of a business. We’re talking about the fall of a human being.”
Added Boteach: “He’s not a child, he’s an adult, and he has to accept” the consequences of his actions.
Uri Geller, a psychic and paranormalist who is a longtime friend of Jackson’s, told Fox News that if the allegations are of a sexual nature, he could not believe they were true.
“I’m a father myself and I would never associate myself with anyone who would do anything with a child,” said Geller, describing Jackson as “gullible, innocent, maybe a little confused … but I would never believe he would sexually abuse a child.”
Last year there was a public outcry after Jackson, a former child star, stunned fans by dangling his baby, whom he reportedly calls “Blanket,” from a hotel window in Germany. The child’s face was covered with a towel.
Jackson called the incident a “terrible mistake,” and Berlin authorities said the actions were not punishable.
Not much is known about Prince Michael II, whose mother has not been identified. The singer’s 6-year-old son, Prince Michael I, and 5-year-old daughter, Paris, were born during his marriage to Debbie Rowe, his plastic surgeon’s nurse, which ended in 1999. He was also married to Lisa Marie Presley, Elvis’ daughter, between 1994 and 1996.
Jackson routinely keeps the children’s heads covered with cloth while escorting them in public — and he usually sports a surgical mask himself when out and about. He has said he wants to protect them from the public eye.
In a television documentary broadcast on ABC earlier this year, Jackson said he had slept in a bed with many children. “When you say bed you’re thinking sexual,” the singer said. “It’s not sexual, we’re going to sleep. I tuck them in. … It’s very charming, it’s very sweet.”
As of last December, when Jackson interacted with young fans outside a lawsuit hearing in Santa Maria, Calif., he was still inviting children to his home for parties.
Jackson is also connected to Hollywood private eye Anthony Pellicano, who began serving federal prison time Monday for possessing illegal explosives. Pellicano is being investigated about whether he secretly taped conversations of celebrities and their lawyers. Pellicano, 59, worked for Jackson as a spokesman and security consultant during the abuse investigation.
The “King of Pop” amassed a half-billion-dollar fortune over the past 20 years, but his former financial advisers have said, in a lawsuit last spring, that he is saddled with debt and teetering near bankruptcy. Current financial advisers have denied that claim. Jackson has appeared weak and ghostly pale at many of his recent public appearances, and his own attorneys have said has been involved in nearly 1,000 lawsuits. In June, he suffered a suspected anxiety attack during a visit to Indianapolis to deliver a deposition in a lawsuit and his doctor said the singer was weak, dizzy and dehydrated.
In a separate Santa Maria lawsuit hearing earlier this year, the singer hobbled into court on crutches with his left foot wrapped in bandages because of swelling from what he described as a spider bite and delayed testimony because he said he was too ill to appear in court. When he did finally testify, he giggled during questioning and made comical faces at people in the courtroom.

The next piece concerns Tom Sneddon’s news conference the next day, Nov. 19, 2003.
It calls Michael a ‘self-appointed King of Pop” but otherwise reports the events as they were presented by the District Attorney (which was bad the way it was).

Michael’s ‘surrender’ (as if he were a run-away criminal) has been ‘negotiated’. In reply to ‘get over here and get checked in’ Michael Jackson has already made arrangements to return and immediately confront the authorities. Sneddon says that “charges will be filed” against MJ (so at that moment there were no charges).

The issues discussed included the $3mln. bail, the possibility of Michael’s children taken away from him (!), changes in California law after the 1993 case and invitation from Tom Sneddon for the nation to pool their efforts and find other “victims’ who should come forward and speak against Michael.

The article linked to the one below explains that the change in the law allowed prosecutors to intervene in a civil action to stop it, saying that in 1993 “the alleged victim refused to testify against Jackson, and criminal charges were never filed. Jackson then reportedly paid the alleged victim a multimillion-dollar sum as a result of a civil court settlement”.

By this they mean to say that first the “victim” refused to testify in criminal proceedings and then Jackson paid millions under the agreement.

It is a deliberate, blatant and monstrous lie.

The real story is that it was Michael who insisted on criminal proceedings going first, but Larry Feldman unfortunately managed to put the civil suit before the criminal case. The “victim” continued to cooperate with the police even after the settlement but refused to go to a criminal court which they were avoiding from the very beginning as their sole and main goal was a money settlement only – something they could do only within the framework of a civil suit.

In fact the Chandlers were terrified by the possibility of a criminal trial and it was Michael and his lawyer who insisted on it! And it wasn’t Jackson who paid the money in a civil suit once it went forward – it was the insurance company which did!

News Conference Held Wednesday
POSTED: Wednesday, November 19, 2003
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. — Authorities in Southern California on Wednesday issued a warrant for Michael Jackson’s arrest on charges of molesting a child and asked the pop superstar to turn himself in and surrender his passport.“Get over here and get checked in,” Santa Barbara County District Attorney Thomas Sneddon Jr. said at a news conference.Sheriff Jim Anderson said bail has been set at $3 million.”The service of the warrants was part of an ongoing investigation alleging criminal misconduct on the part of Michael Jackson,” Anderson said.The arrest warrant for the self-appointed “King of Pop” accuses him of violating Section 288(a) of California law, which applies to lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14, an offense punishable by three to eight years in prison.
Jackson spokesman Stuart Backerman issued a statement saying the entertainer “has already made arrangements with the district attorney to return to Santa Barbara to immediately confront and prove these charges unfounded.”
“Michael would never harm a child in any way. These scurrilous and totally unfounded allegations will be proven false in a courtroom,” Backerman said. According to the Backerman statement, Jackson’s lead attorney is Mark Geragos, who is currently defending Scott Peterson in his double-murder trial.
Sneddon Jr. said charges “will be filed” against Jackson.
An affidavit that will provide details into the accusations has been sealed for 45 days while authorities conduct their investigation.The deputy with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department said authorities are negotiating with Jackson’s lawyer for the pop star’s surrender.A spokesman for Jackson said Tuesday the pop star and his family are in Las Vegas for the shooting of a music video.When asked if Jackson’s children would be taken away from him, Sneddon said, “That’s a decision that would be made by a juvenile court.” He said he is confident the young accuser would be willing to testify.
Sneddon led an unrelated investigation into an accusation of molestation against Jackson in 1993. No charges were filed in that case, although a settlement reportedly was reached.
Sneddon, however, said Wednesday that the 1993 investigation led to the California Legislature changing the law. ( Full Story.)
On Tuesday, as many as 70 law enforcement officers spent 12 hours searching the star’s Neverland Ranch for corroborating evidence.
The $12.3 million ranch has a mansion, its own zoo and amusement park.
Brian Oxman said he has represented the Jackson family for 14 years. He’s not representing Michael Jackson but said he has spoken to family members.
Oxman told “The Early Show” on CBS Wednesday that the search warrant is related to a complaint from a 12-year-old boy. He said the boy had claimed that “sexual molestation” took place at the ranch.
Three search warrants have been served — one at Jackson’s ranch and two others in southern California.Sneddon said he’s “sad there’s another victim out there.”
He asked anyone with information about additional victims to come forward.

The 3rd day of the events the CTV News is already assuming a vicious tone of mockery and affected disgust. It is pretty malicios as it is, however I would like to outline a couple of points.

The previous “victim” is again said to have first refused to press charges and as a result of that Jackson “later reached a multi-million-dollar court settlement with the boy’s family” – which is  a blatant lie AGAIN, as it was Jackson and his lawyer Bert Fields who were insisting on a criminal trial instead of a civil suit and it was only due to Larry Feldman’s masterful performance that the Chandlers avoided going to a criminal trial.

The current “victim” Arvizo is described in such a way that he looks like a double victim – first of cancer and then of a predator who took advantage of the boy who was reckless enough to make his “last wish to meet Jackson”.

The article speaks of “numerous framed photographs of young boys” – who are to be identified by the prosecution with a clear implication that there might be more victims than one.

In this context the warm words of Randy Taraborrelli about Michael being a fragile person look like a complete mockery and a joke.

Michael’s lawyer Mark Geragos is presented to the public as a lawyer for the “accused wife killer Scott Peterson and convicted shoplifter Winona Ryder” and the author of One More Chance R.Kelly is mentioned in connection with him once facing child pornography charges, thus making Michael and Kelly look like a p-le gang.

The reporter makes the arrest look like an easy ride for Jackson, “it wasn’t a long stay. After about an hour (which he actually spent in a feces-covered restroom) “Jackson left in a black SUV” .

No one explained why after paying the $3mln. bail Michael had to return to Las Vegas – it looks to the reader that he went back to his work as if nothing happened. However as far as I know he simply had nowhere to go as his Neverland employees cried and told him that the ranch had been cruelly ravaged and was categorically no place to return to.

Following the now-familiar-to-us pattern the article finishes with Michael’s career going down – his songs are yanked, there is no public appetite for his music and the CBS special celebrating Michael’s career and introducing the new video is already cancelled.

I haven’t been able to find a picture of Michael brought over to the sheriff HQ in handcuffs but would like to ask a question: Was there a need to handcuff Michael behind his back and keep him that way in the police quarters? He “surrendered” all by himself and there was no chance for him to escape and no place to go, so why did they handcuff him? For theatrical effect or bigger humiliation?

Jackson out on bail in molestation case News Staff
Date: Fri. Nov. 21 2003 10:45 AM ET
The self-proclaimed King of Pop is free on bail but will have to face the music soon.Authorities expect to file charges against Michael Jackson after the U.S. Thanksgiving holiday. He will appear in court Jan. 9 for arraignment.
Jackson flew to California Thursday to surrender on the child molestation charges he faces.
His convoy was followed by television crews every step of the way to the Santa Barbara courthouse, where he was booked with his arms handcuffed behind his back.He was photographed and fingerprinted. He then surrendered his passport and posted a bond to cover his $3-million US bail.
The mug shot taken of Jackson posted on the sheriff’s Web site showed the 45-year-old singer in lipstick and eyeliner, his cheeks sunken, with hair hanging over one eye.
It wasn’t a long stay: After about an hour, Jackson left the county jail in a black SUV.
He later returned to Las Vegas, where he had been shooting a music video. Television images showed Jackson’s SUV stuck in traffic in Las Vegas. Some people swarmed the vehicle to touch his hand, and he flashed a ‘V’ sign to them. The crowd included children. Security guards moved people along when the crowds built up.
“Mr. Jackson’s people were very co-operative throughout this process,” said Sgt. Chris Pappas of the Santa Barbara County sheriff’s office.
His lawyer made it clear Jackson would be fighting these charges.
“Michael has given me the authority to say on his behalf these charges are categorically untrue. He looks forward to getting into a courtroom, as opposed to any other forum, and confronting these accusations head on,” said lawyer Mark Geragos.
Besides Jackson, Geragos has represented other high-profile clients, including accused wife killer Scott Peterson and convicted shoplifter Winona Ryder.
Geragos said he negotiated with authorities for the pop superstar to turn himself in. The arrest warrant against Jackson, 45, cites a violation of the section of the California Penal Code that prohibits “lewd or lascivious acts” with a child under age 14,
Santa Barbara County Sheriff Jim Anderson told a news conference.
Jackson could face up to eight years in prison for each charge. There have been numerous media reports that the allegations involve a 12-year-old boy who stayed at Jackson’s Neverland Ranch about three months ago.According to Fox News, the boy was a cancer patient whose “last wish” was to meet Jackson. They also report that the boy confessed to his psychiatrist that Jackson plied him with wine and sleeping pills, then allegedly molested him.
Jackson was the target of child abuse allegations almost a decade ago. He was never charged after the complainant refused to press charges. However, Jackson later reached a multi-million-dollar court settlement with the boy’s family.
“I don’t think he ever rebounded from this the last time it happened. He’s such a fragile person,” said Randy Taraborrelli, who has written a biography of Jackson.
Home video of Jackson’s Neverland Ranch house shows numerous framed photographs of young boys.
“As a prosecutor, I want those photos. I want to know who those boys are,” said Jeanine Pirro. “I want to talk to them and I want to find out what they say and what may have happened when they were there.
Three radio stations in Toronto have already yanked the pop star’s songs from their programming. One program director suggests the public’s appetite for Jackson’s music is slim to none.
Jackson’s current single, “One More Chance,” was written by R. Kelly whose owns songs were pulled off several North American stations when he was facing child pornography charges.
And American TV network CBS has scrubbed plans for a prime-time special celebrating Jackson’s career. With files from CTV’s Alan Fryer

Day 4 reporting performed by the NEWS24 (November 22, 2003) by far surpasses all previous reports in the scope and intensity of vicious speculation.   By the tone of the report you can see that this “source of news” is utterly enjoying itself and its disgusting humor.

First they say that while Jackson was wanted by the police he didn’t pay attention to his arrest warrant as he was finishing his music video.

Then come their references to the “OJ Simpson white bronco chase”, “The Day of the Jacko” from Britain’s Guardian, Michael’s “extraordinarily eccentric behavior,” which “falls into the realm of bizarre” and saying that Jackson was already in Las Vegas (not still there) when “dozens of law enforcement agents swarmed his Neverland Ranch” (thus implying that Michael escaped to LasVegas or what?)

Their story is – while he was expected to surrender to police Michael’s “handlers” made arrangements for him to stay in Las Vegas to complete the video. They nastily lie saying that “despite the warrant, Jackson showed up to complete his video early on Wednesday. His father and brother, Jermaine Jackson, were with him, and his mother had flown in for support. “They had to finish it,” said a “witness”.

This source of information (if I may say so) repeats the vile gossip of other similar sources saying he was rumored to be in “about every major casino in town”, “taking his time” heading back to California “to face music” there and having “one more luxurious night” which in the opinion of some learned pundit was a sign of giving him “preferential treatment”.

“God forbid we inconvenience Michael Jackson” was what this law professor of some University said.

The keynote for the story is “strange” in everything Michael is doing – coming, going, riding, staying, leaving or going back to Las Vegas – all is strange and all this strangeness is “just him”. If I were in the place of these Associated Press (!) correspondents I would die of shame for what they were saying at the time.

Where on earth was Jacko?
2003-11-22 21:35
Las Vegas – The whole world seemed to be wondering where Michael Jackson was. Helicopters and reporters were swarming his ranch. Fans were waiting patiently for any glimpse of him.  He was wanted on a warrant accusing him of child molestation charges, but the King of Pop was on a sound stage, finishing up his music video. The song? “One More Chance.”Jackson had one last chance to dance, one more evening with his family and one more night in Las Vegas before he returned to Santa Barbara, California, to face the music on Thursday.  He turned in his passport at the courthouse and posted $3m bail. His mug shot showed a gaunt figure with long, wavy black hair and red lipstick.  He flashed a V-finger sign and blew kisses as he left the courthouse.Then, he was back on a plane to Las Vegas, then off on a strange two-hour, 30-minute jaunt around the city. Fans got out of their cars and cheered on Jackson. Media helicopters and hundreds of motorists followed the pop star and his entourage as if the OJ Simpson white bronco chase was happening again.  Britain’s Guardian called Thursday “The Day of the Jacko.”To former publicist Michael Levine, Jackson was meandering through the twilight zone.  “Most Americans have become accustomed to this extraordinarily eccentric behavior,” said Levine, a prominent entertainment publicist who represented Jackson when he was facing a similar molestation allegation in 1993. “They expect just about anything that falls into the realm of bizarre.”
Jackson was already in Las Vegas when dozens of law enforcement agents swarmed his Neverland Ranch compound near Santa Barbara on Tuesday to serve a search warrant. He had started filming his video on Monday. The shoot was supposed to wrap on Tuesday, but instead, Jackson’s handlers asked CMX Las Vegas Studios if they could come back on Wednesday, said Dean DeLorean, studio vice president.
Wednesday was the day authorities announced that an arrest warrant has been issued. It accuses the 45-year-old Jackson of multiple counts of lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14, an offense punishable by three to eight years in prison. Authorities said they expect to file charges after Thursday’s Thanksgiving holiday.
Despite the warrant, and Santa Barbara District Attorney Thomas Sneddon Jr advising Jackson to “Get over here and get checked in,” Jackson showed up to complete his video early on Wednesday. His father and brother, Jermaine Jackson, were with him, and his mother had flown in for support, DeLorean said.
“They had to finish it,” he said. “It was a must. This sound stage will probably be the last sound stage Michael Jackson will ever step on.”
The media helped orchestrate the “where’s Jackson?” game. He was rumored to be at just about every major casino in town, and an international army of reporters and photographers converged on the recording studio, airports in both states and Jackson’s ranch in California.  A Jackson impersonator serenaded reporters at the studio with his rendition of “Beat It.”
Jackson took his time heading back to California.  To Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola University Law School, letting Jackson have “one more luxurious night” before he surrendered showed preferential treatment. “The way it’s been handled had been to allow special arrangements to tidy up his work schedule before he has to deal with the court,” she said. “God forbid (we) inconvenience Michael Jackson.”
Santa Barbara Sheriff Jim Anderson said authorities were in contact with Jackson’s lawyers and the singer had been given the chance to surrender “within a specified period of time.”  On Thursday, Jackson flew back to Santa Barbara. Television stations went live, showing a handcuffed Jackson entering the courthouse.  His handlers scrambled about, with attorney Mark Geragos saying Jackson came back to confront the charges head-on, and spokesman Stuart Backerman calling the allegations “outrageous.”  Jermaine Jackson went on CNN, comparing the case to a modern-day lynching.
Once Jackson was back in Las Vegas Thursday, news stations went live again, this time broadcasting Jackson’s journey through the city’s streets for two hours. Fans couldn’t get enough. Hundreds followed the entourage and more burst into traffic to try and shake Jackson’s hand.
“I felt like I was on a roller coaster! The thrill was in the chase,” fan Kathy Simmons, who was following Jackson, told the Las Vegas Review-Journal.  It was a strange journey indeed, and Jackson hasn’t even made it to his January 9 arraignment yet.  “I don’t think he’s strange,” said fan Donnette Peach. “It’s just him.”

It is probably time now to have a look at what Michael Jackson was really doing since the moment the police raided his home. Dieter Wiesner described to Charles Thomson a heart-breaking picture which is decidedly different from the hilarious account of the NEWS24:

Charles Thomson says:

  • “In Las Vegas, it fell on manager Dieter Wiesner to break the news to Michael Jackson. “Michael was still in his room,” Wiesner explains. “He was sitting next to the fireplace when I came in and he was very quiet. I had to tell him and it was not easy to tell Michael things like this because he was in such a good mood. He saw a future. When the Bashir situation arose he was very down. Now everything had changed and Michael was ready to do new things. Then, to go to his room and tell him such a bad situation… it was a disaster.
  • Jackson spent much of those two days crying, says Dieter Wiesner. “I was sitting with him day and night. He was shocked; he was crying… he didn’t know what to do. It was such a bad situation. We were supposed to go to Europe. He was ready to move on in his life and everything was prepared. It was just a beautiful situation and this news shocked him deeply. Really, it killed him.”
  • However, “two days after the Neverland raid Jackson’s depression turned to anger. When it emerged that the boy behind the accusation was none other than Gavin Arvizo, the boy whose hand Jackson had held in the Martin Bashir documentary, Jackson decided to fight.
  • “You know, when it was clear that this allegation was because of the Arvizos, then he started to really fight the situation,” says Wiesner. “Michael told me, ‘Dieter, you know what, they should bring this young boy into a big place, invite all the press and he should look me in the eyes and tell me that I did this.’ So he was ready to fight.”

While Michael was in a state of a complete shock not knowing what to think reporters like Nancy Grace and Diane Dimond were already passing a guilty verdict on him, stigmatizing him as a serial child molester, who cannot help repeating his p-le crimes, etc.

Nancy Grace’s biggest and only argument was the number of officers taking part in the raid – if there are 70 of them it was enough proof for her that the person was guilty and no other evidence was required to prove the case.

Both Nancy Grace and Diane Dimond took part in the interview with Larry King on the day of the raid – November 18, 2003 – with which this account started and the sane voices of the host and two lawyers Brian Oxman and Johnnie Cochran were practically sunk in the shrill and excitement these two “ladies” poured on their TV viewers.

Nancy Grace doesn’t seem to know a thing about the previous case but is confident enough to say that the first “victim” was molested since the age of 5 or 7 ! (while Jordan was 13 when he first came to Neverland and none of the lawyers even corrected her!). And 70 officers of course! This alone is better than any proof of anyone’s guilt!

The multi-million settlement she calls a way to keep the case out of court – while everything was the other way about and it was Michael’s and his first lawyer Bert Fields’s aim to take the case to court! (and again Johnnie Cochran does not even correct her! He just says how difficult a time it was for him as a lawyer. He even offered to bring Michael back from Europe where he was undergoing treatment – “if the prosecutors wanted it”. And PLEASE don’t tell me after that that he was the best lawyer for Michael at that time!)

And while she and Diane Dimond seem to know everything about the case Johnnie Cochran looks confused and unconvincing. Both he and Biran Oxman are (naturally) totally ignorant who the current accuser is, but Brian Oxman is at least much more insistent on Michael’s innocence than Cochran. In the commotion of it all of them call Jordan Chandler’s declaration an “affidavit” (which is sometimes a way to call a declaration but which is much less than a deposition, as you know).

Here is their conversation (slightly shortened):

KING: What do you make of this, Johnnie Cochran?
JOHNNIE COCHRAN, JACKSON’S ATTORNEY IN ’93 MOLESTATION SUIT: Well, it sounds like dej… vu to me, from that standpoint. I don’t know very much about this at all, Larry. It’s unfortunate, clearly, and we’ll have to see how it plays out. I mean, I think that Tom Sneddon was involved in the investigation back in 1993. So…
KING: Tom is who?
COCHRAN: It’s Tom Sneddon is the district attorney there in Santa Barbara County, and I understand he was there — one of the people there today. So probably hear more from him in the near future. I don’t know what the allegations are or where this is going. I do know that Michael is — maintains his innocence. I know that. And that’s all I know, at this point.
KING: Brian, you’re the Jackson family attorney. Does that include Michael?
BRIAN OXMAN, JACKSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: We’ve represented most of the family in their divorce cases, and we’ve represented them for 14 years. And I have always been a defender of Michael, never wanted to speak for him because he speaks for himself. And what I want to do is let Michael be able to answer any of these allegations that he has made. But I can tell you the entire family is very upset about the whole thing, and they see this…
KING: Upset at Michael or upset about the coverage, as the statement says?
OXMAN: The statement. The statement is — the allegation, I think, is the correct way to look at this. They are just upset. It’s dej… vu, as Johnnie says. But more important, it’s here we go again. Michael just seems to be a sitting target for anyone who wants to take a potshot at him, and this appears to be another one of those cases. And it causes a worldwide hysteria.
KING: Diane Dimond, when she joins us, will be by phone. She’s covering a story that she may tell us about, connected with this.
KING: Nancy Grace, what would they be looking for at the house in connection with child molestation evidence?
NANCY GRACE, COURT TV: Good question, Larry, because, of course, unless there is a child victim there to tell them some type of evidence, some type of verbal statement, we’re wondering what could be found at the house? But I’ve got a clue. Larry, we know that there are about 70 members of law enforcement there. We know that a member from the district attorney’s office is there, which is, in my mind, very significant. This is something that is a joint effort by police and the DA’s office. They would be responsible for a preliminary hearing or a grand jury…
KING: So what would…
GRACE: … proceeding.
KING: So what might they…
GRACE: That means that…
KING: … be looking for?
GRACE: That means to me it’s much more serious, if a DA is in. Also, a locksmith was brought in earlier today, reported by Diane Dimond. We have heard reports that there are lockboxes there, possibly photos, who knows, something that is significant to the alleged complaint of a 12-year-old boy.
And Larry, I just heard Brian Oxman state that Michael Jackson’s there for anybody to take potshots at, but I would like to point out that not long ago, we were discussing this affidavit of a 13-year-old boy. Sound similar? Yes. This boy — I will only call him J. Chandler (ph) — signed an affidavit, a sworn affidavit, describing sexual contact when he — starting around the age of 5 to 7 with Michael Jackson. This resulted in a multi-million-dollar settlement.
Now, also in my experience as a felony prosecutor, that’s one type of offender that can’t help but repeat…
KING: All right…
GRACE: … offend, and that’s a child molester.
KING: Is that — is that the case you settled, Johnnie?
COCHRAN: Yes, I think she’s probably referring to that case, and that case was resolved and, you know, the record was pretty clear about it. You know, there’s a — it’s very complex. It’s not as easy as Nancy makes it for anybody involved in it to talk about that. It was resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.
KING: But you can’t talk about that, right?
COCHRAN: It’s very — it’s very limited, what you can say about that.
KING: Of course, the obvious thinking of the public is, if someone didn’t do anything, why settle for a penny?
COCHRAN: Well, I think that it had — you just look back at what happened, and the record was that both sides maintained that they brought — the young person’s side and his lawyer, Larry, felt and maintained they brought their case in good faith. The defense said they’d making that in good faith. And the matter was resolved and it never went further. There was never any criminal charges.
KING: But the public thinks?
COCHRAN: Yes. Perhaps so. But you know, at any rate, Michael Jackson has always been a target by many — for many. You know, one of the things that I think that Brian was thinking about today is that, isn’t it ironic, though, these charges are brought on the day of the release of his latest album. And these things always seem to happen.
KING: Do you see a connection, Jann Carl?
CARL: Yes. I mean, this is something…
COCHRAN: … it’s always coincidental.
KING: What must they show to get a warrant, Brian?
OXMAN: There has to be some kind of showing of probable cause. And what we’ve seen with, like, the Kobe Bryant case is an accuser who makes the allegation, can establish the probable cause merely by the accusation itself. But it’s so interesting. There are 60 officers, vans, trucks — this is an invasion more than it is anything else. I’ve handled child molestation cases for 27 years, and I’ve never seen 60 officers approach anybody’s house in this manner. Something is amiss…
GRACE: That’s because this is…
COCHRAN: … in the Santa Barbara’s office…
GRACE: … a fortress, Brian! This isn’t a regular…
OXMAN: Oh, I — oh, I’ve had…
GRACE: … one-bedroom apartment! This is a fortress…
COCHRAN: I’ve seen fortresses…
GRACE: … the police are searching!
OXMAN: … I’ve seen houses where they have to batter the door down, and they don’t bring 60 officers. This is incredible.
GRACE: You know, Brian, I only have one thing to say. This affidavit says, “Michael Jackson and I in bed together,” “He had me twist his nipples”…
OXMAN: You are reading the Jordie Chandler affidavit, which is 10 years old and…
GRACE: “He told me nothing was wrong with it.”
OXMAN: The affidavit…
KING: That case is settled.
OXMAN: … is just long history. It’s digging up old history. And here’s the point of the problem. Michael settled that case and, it appears that what the accusation here is, it’s mirroring the 10- year-old accusation. It’s a deja vu all over again, and I’m wondering about that.
KING: But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true, Brian.
OXMAN: Correct, Larry. We don’t know. We don’t know who the accuser is and we…
KING: Well, at this point, no one knows anything.
OXMAN: We just don’t know.
KING: You were saying something, Jann?
CARL: The last time when this occurred, 10 years ago, I know that there was — Johnnie we were talking about it — there was a body search. I mean, it was part of the search warrant to search the body of Michael Jackson. And he talked about being…
KING: You mean the kid was able to identify things…
CARL: Well, that was the implication.
KING: Is that true, Johnnie?
COCHRAN: Well, again, without going into details regarding the case per se…
KING: No charges were ever filed, right?
COCHRAN: No charges were ever filed. There was a humiliating search warrant for Michael’s body. That was one of the…
KING: And did they follow through on that?
COCHRAN: Oh, yes. They did. And that was a — it was a court order.
CARL: They photographed it.
COCHRAN: It was a court order.
COCHRAN: It was one of the most difficult days I ever spent as a lawyer.
KING: Nancy, are you hooking one with the other because — just because that’s the only basis you have to go on, the similarity of a matter 10 years ago?
GRACE: Larry, I am basing this on over a decade of handling startlingly similar cases. Larry…
KING: Yes, but no one was convicted in this.
GRACE: Yes, I know that, Larry. There was a multi-million- dollar settlement in order to keep it out of court. And when Johnnie’s referring to a full body search — it was apparently a photographic session of Michael Jackson’s body to corroborate, in my mind, what the alleged child victim — how he described Michael Jackson without his clothes on.
Now, Larry, you know, of course, a defense attorney can paint that as perfectly innocent. In my mind, I don’t think that’s innocent. I don’t think that’s appropriate. In fact, that is a felony. You asked me earlier, what do I think police are looking for? Let me just be blunt. In my mind, they are looking for photographs, they are looking for videos, they are looking for letters, communications between Jackson and this young accuser, something to corroborate what this young boy, if he exists, has said — the description of the inside of the home, the bedroom, whatever, something to corroborate his story.
KING: Yes, back it up. Is this a case, Brian, of sort of like it looks like a duck and it acts like a duck, it could be a duck?
OXMAN: It is a case of excitement and hysteria because here we have the same accusations that we had 10 years ago. It’s like playing the play-offs all over again. There are more than…
KING: But Nancy is right in getting excited about something like that. I mean, angry excited.
OXMAN: People get excited. Nancy is excited. I understand that.
GRACE: No, I’m not excited! I’m discouraged…
OXMAN: You sure look excited to me, Nancy.
GRACE: … with the justice system — I’m disturbed that the justice system chose not to go forward with an investigation. He had an excellent attorney, I can vouch for that, with Johnnie Cochran. And now, apparently — and I don’t know all the facts yet, nobody does. But apparently, there’s yet another young alleged victim out there. And if the justice system had done what it should have done 10 years ago, there wouldn’t be another alleged victim!
OXMAN: I think the justice system did do what it should have done 10 years ago, and what we’re finding here now is that it happened once, a shakedown took place once, and apparently, it might be the same accusation again. We don’t know. We can’t prejudge this. We don’t know anything about the accuser. We don’t know what it’s all about. And when we find out, we’ll make a reasoned judgment about it.
KING: How serious was that, years ago, Johnnie? I mean, by — the allegation…
COCHRAN: I think it was very serious. It was a very serious, very serious case
KING: Were they close to indicting?
COCHRAN: You know, it’s hard to say. I mean, it was — there were both offices. There was Gil Garcetti in Los Angeles and Mr. Sneddon, I think, in Santa Barbara. It was a — I took it very seriously. And at the end of the day, when the matter was resolved, you know, I felt it was the appropriate resolution for all parties involved.
KING: Are there times a client will resolve something financially. even though he didn’t do the alleged act?
COCHRAN: I think there are.
KING: And what would be those times?
COCHRAN: I think that — I think you look at a number of factors — without speaking about that particular case, which I’m really precluded from doing. I think if you felt that your name was going to be drug through the mud and it would do great damage to your career, it would last a long period of time, one might make that decision.
KING: In other words, hypothetically, Kobe Bryant might have done nothing wrong but might settle this just to let it go away?
COCHRAN: To not have to have all this exposed and lose all his corporate…
KING: In other words, Brian, I would say that if that was — if I was accused of that, the natural thing to say, I would never settle if I didn’t do it.
OXMAN: Well, sometimes it’s not your choice.
KING: If I did do it, I would settle.
OXMAN: I have brought child molestation cases against defendants, and I always include a negligence allegation in that because that means that the homeowners’ insurance policy takes over and a homeowners’ insurance policy…
KING: Really?
OXMAN: … can settle right out from under the defendant. The defendant can scream, I will not settle that case, and they have no choice because the insurance company settles it.
KING: Nancy, how do you respond to that? What if the insurance company says, We’re going to settle this.
GRACE: You know what, Larry? You know, how I respond to that? This is not, in my mind, a matter of money or insurance companies and settlements and civil suits! This is about, in my mind, a young boy, in this case, an alleged 12-year-old boy! You say we don’t know what the facts are? You’re right. But I do know this. Something a 12- year-old boy said sent 70 people out to Neverland…
KING: By the way…
GRACE: … on an exhaustive search…
KING: But Nancy, let’s…
GRACE: … and a judge agreed signing a search warrant!
KING: Let’s be fair. A 12-year-old boy could also fantasize, and he could imagine.
GRACE: Sure, Larry. It could happen.
KING: So the mistake we make on this program frequently is we jump to conclusions.
GRACE: Larry, I’m not…
KING: We make a leap.
GRACE: … jumping to a conclusion. I know…
KING: In other words, you have made no conclusion yet? You don’t believe this boy, is what you’re saying. You believe this boy or don’t believe him?
GRACE: I haven’t made any conclusion, but I know what I see. I know that we have been told by sources that have openly stated this is the result of something alleged by a 12-year-old boy.
KING: OK, but…
GRACE: I think we can accept that as true.
KING: Could it be possible…
GRACE: And because of that…
KING: … that a 12-year-old boy could fantasize? Is that possible?
GRACE: Well, of course, it’s possible. But don’t you…
KING: So why don’t we say two things are — two things are possible. He might have harmed him, the kid might be lying. Is that true?
GRACE: Absolutely true.
KING: So why are we so mad?
GRACE: Larry…
KING: I don’t understand it. We don’t know enough.
GRACE: I find it very difficult to believe that an entire fleet of police officers and the district attorney’s office and an impartial magistrate, a judge, would go to this extent based on a 12-year-old’s boy fantasy, OK?
KING: So what more could they have, then, other than…
GRACE: If you want to believe that, fine. I don’t believe it.
KING: … a statement?
GRACE: They could have physical evidence. They could have evidence on this boy’s body.
KING: But we don’t know.
GRACE: Well, of course, we don’t know! We won’t know until we get the return on the search warrant!
KING: So how can you be angry at Michael yet, if you don’t know?
GRACE: A, I’m not angry!
KING: You’re not angry?
GRACE: B, I’m disappointed. I’m disappointed that…
GRACE: … this has been allowed…
KING: I’m sorry. I was — I apologize, Nancy.
GRACE: … to continue, and that our justice system apparently, from outside observances, allowed a molestation to slip through its fingers.
KING: All right. I was reading you as angry. I apologize. I didn’t know that you were concerned.
KING: Let’s take some calls. We go to Norfolk, Virginia. Hello.
CALLER: Yes. I have been wondering, has anyone considered doing DNA testing on Michael Jackson to confirm that these children are his biological children? They do not look anything like him, and I wonder if he has fathered them.
KING: Why would — who would do the testing, and for what purpose?
CALLER: Well, I just wonder if anybody has wanted to see if he has bought these children, if they are, in fact…
KING: Brian, do you want to comment?
OXMAN: I can tell you that they are Michael’s children. He’s had the first two, who were Prince, and then he had Paris with Debbie Rowe. They are his kids. And the third child, who is Michael, Jr., Prince Michael, Jr., is his biological child had with the surrogate. There’s no allegations concerning these children. They are absolutely fantastic, beautiful kids, and there’s not any problem with them by way of a DNA test or anything that would be required with a DNA test..
KING: Kirksville, Missouri. Hello.
CALLER: Yes. I have a question for the panel.
KING: Sure.
CALLER: In a case like Scott Peterson’s or Michael’s, does the defense attorneys know the truth?
KING: Johnnie?
COCHRAN: That’s a good question. I think that — who knows the truth? I mean, from a standpoint — your client says they’re innocent. And you go in and investigate the facts. And you — you know, from a standpoint, you present what the facts are. You can’t change the facts. They are what they are, and you just deal with it. Now, if a client says they’re guilty, Larry, that’s when you dispose of the case. You plead them guilty. You make — you work — you enter them into a plea bargain.
KING: You can’t let your client lie.
COCHRAN: No, you don’t let them lie at all. Now, if the client says, I’m guilty, and…
CARL: But I want you to get me off.
COCHRAN: … you try to work the best deal you can. But if he’s says, I’m guilty and I want to — you can’t let them testify…
KING: Nancy, what if 10 years ago, the prosecutor didn’t have a case because the kid dropped the charge?
GRACE: Well, you know, Larry, when a case becomes a criminal matter, the victim cannot drop the charge. At that point, the prosecution represents the people, the state, justice, society. And at that point — and I have had victims want to drop charges and not testify, but it’s not just about that victim, although, in my mind, they are paramount. It is about future innocent victims, and therefore, my practice was to subpoena the victims and have them come to court anyway.
KING: What if the father or mother of the victim said to you, I’m the mother. The victim is 12. I will not let him or her testify. Do you want to put them in jail, put them in jail.
GRACE: You know, Larry, you got me between a rock and a hard spot because I would not want to harm — emotionally harm the victim or the victim’s family. But on the other hand, when you don’t seek justice and you don’t chase the truth, no matter it tastes going down, you have a repeat offense, like what I believe we may be seeing right now.
KING: Rockford, Illinois. Hello.
CALLER: Good evening. This question is for Nancy.
KING: Yes.
CALLER: Could it be that some parent has some trumped-up idea that they’re going to bleed Michael for some money and extort money from Michael by lying about a molestation that really didn’t happen?
KING: Isn’t that a possibility?
GRACE: You are so correct. And Brian was correct earlier. When somebody’s got a lot of money and the rest of the world knows about it, they’re sitting targets for scams. But it’s hard for me to believe, frankly — to the caller — that the district attorney, probably several assistant district attorneys, lawyers, an impartial judge and 70 people from law enforcement would buy into a scam without checking it out first.
KING: Now, CBS has a show what, scheduled when?
CARL: CBS has a one-hour special with Michael Jackson scheduled for November 26. We contacted — “Entertainment Tonight” contacted CBS and asked, you know, if there are any thoughts about the special, what they may do with it. Today they said they’re waiting to hear more information, which… KING: He’s singing in the special?
CARL: He is. And in fact, he was — he’s in Vegas right now, which is why he wasn’t home when the police arrived. He’s there — he’s working on a music video for the special that — and what we heard was that Michael actually didn’t want to go through with the special at this time, but contractually, our sources tell us, that he had to. So he’s been down there trying to play catch-up, get the music video completed. When CBS says they’re going to wait to hear more, to me that says…
KING: They’re waiting.
CARL: … there’s a possibility…
KING: They may not.
CARL: … they may or may not air this special.
KING: Santa Barbara. Hello.
CALLER: Hi. This question is for Johnnie. Johnnie, do you think it’s any coincidence that the — that it was served on the day the album was released?
COCHRAN: No, I don’t think it’s — I don’t think it’s — I think it’s probably more than coincidence. I think it was planned. I think you can get a warrant at any time. If it’s an ongoing investigation, they could have picked it any time. I think the fact that the — I think it’s a big news day. His album comes out by Epic Records and this happens the same day…
KING: What’s the purpose?
COCHRAN: If you look back at Michael’s history, you’ve seen these things before. Whenever he’s had any particular big (UNINTELLIGIBLE), there’s always some countervailing thing. You know, he has been really, really a target throughout his career, pretty much over this last decade. Anything he does is blown out of proportion. You know, if he…
KING: So the prosecutor…
GRACE: Oh, Johnnie! Johnnie…
KING: … the record’s coming out, I’m going to file today?
COCHRAN: No. I don’t think he said — I don’t think he said that. I think that…
GRACE: But Johnnie, he’s not a target…
COCHRAN: I think that — I think it’s not just a coincidence. Now, when I say…
GRACE: Only reason he’s a target is because…
GRACE: … he wears a big bullseye! He goes on national TV…
COCHRAN: Well, Nancy, I don’t know that he…
GRACE: … and says, yes, I sleep with little boys in my bed.
COCHRAN: I know he wears a big…
GRACE: Of course!
COCHRAN: He did say that on national — but he said also…
GRACE: Yes, he did.
COCHRAN: … he would never harm a child. He said he loved children. He would never harm a child. I mean, he said it was all innocent, very innocent. Now…
GRACE: It’s all in your definition of love.
COCHRAN: … as his lawyer — we’d all advise him, Don’t ever put yourself in that position. That’s who Michael Jackson is. He’s a very, very naive person in many respects, and there’s no question about that. So I think that, yes, he does wear a bullseye on him, and so…
CARL: Johnnie, I’d like to know, as an attorney, at some point, have you all said, Don’t sleep in bed with little boys anymore, as his attorney?
KING: Has somebody said that?
CARL: Has somebody…
COCHRAN: Well, I think it’s not appropriate for us to say what we’ve said to him. But obviously, you could probably surmise that many of us…
OXMAN: I think you can look at how Michael travels. He always travels with an entourage of adults. And people say, Why are all these people all around you? Very simple, Larry. He has these people there to make sure that there are not these kinds of accusations being made against him.
KING: Let me get a break, and then we’ll have Diane Dimond with us on the phone. Don’t go away. You’re watching LARRY KING LIVE. Stay there.
And joining us on the phone is one of the best journalists in the business on covering stuff, Diane Dimond, Court TV anchor and contributor to “Hollywood at Large.” She’s been covering the Jackson story since sexual abuse allegation case back in ’93. What can you tell us of news late, Diane?
DIANE DIMOND, COURT TV: Well, Larry, first of all, I’m sorry I can’t be on camera here with you today, but I’m still in Santa Barbara, I am still working this story as best I can.
There is new and breaking information that will come out tomorrow, and that’ll come from the district attorney himself and the local sheriff. They’re going to have a news conference about 11:00 a.m., but I have learned something very important and I will pass it on to you, in that there was not just a search warrant out there today at Neverland. There was also an arrest warrant. And had Michael Jackson been there, they would have put handcuffs on him and taken him to jail.
KING: Does this mean, Diane, they’re going to go to Vegas and arrest him?
DIMOND: Well, I’m trying to determine that. And I get a coy answer from all of my law enforcement sources here. You have a warrant like this, it’s good in all 50 states. If he’s in Vegas, are you pursuing this, I’ve asked. And they with a smile on their face say, you can imagine that we are pursuing it. That’s all they’ll answer.
KING: Did you learn what he’s being arrested for?
DIMOND: The charges will be simple. Penal code 288, child molesting.
KING: What do you make of this, Diane, as a reporter?
DIMOND: Well, Larry, as you said, I’ve been covering this since 1993, ’94. You know, once you bite into a story like this, you always stay involved, whether you’re covering it on a day-to-day basis or not. It was tough at times. He sued me for $100 million, for goodness’ sake. Johnnie Cochran can tell you about that, although the suit was filed by a different attorney.
COCHRAN: It wasn’t me.
DIMOND: We won that case, and it’s been a long road.
Do I know that he’s guilty? No, I don’t know he’s guilty, but I do know that from what I’m hearing, this case is going to go to trial. There is nobody that wants a monetary settlement here. They want justice.
KING: Was an arrest warrant issued years ago, Johnnie Cochran?
COCHRAN: No. There was not. In fact, when I got involved in the case, we had offered — Michael was in Europe as I recall — and he came back, and I told the prosecutors if they wanted him, I would bring him down, because he maintained his innocence and he would come into court, he would come in and (UNINTELLIGIBLE) himself. That never happened in that case. This is perhaps different.
KING: Nancy, what do you make of this report by Diane, that they had an arrest warrant, as well?
GRACE: I think her report is accurate and I think that because simply I do not normally see people from — representatives from the DA’s office going on a regular search unless there’s a lot to it.
I am not surprised. I think that, Larry, we are who we are. You can’t change your nature. And if Michael Jackson agreed to a multimillion dollar settlement 10 years ago in a similar allegation, I would be willing to bet the behavior not only didn’t stop, Larry, but couldn’t stop. It is his nature.
KING: OK, Brian. What do you make of an arrest warrant?
OXMAN: Obviously, an arrest warrant causes a serious concern, and we’re very disturbed that there would be an arrest warrant out there. Michael is not someone who is going to flee the scene. Michael is not somebody who’s going to never be heard of again. As you see with celebrities, they come in voluntarily, almost inevitably. So for there to be no communication between the district attorney’s office and Michael and his representatives…
DIMOND: That’s not true, Larry. No. That’s not true. There have been at least two attorneys for Michael Jackson talking to law enforcement here. In fact, Steve Cochran, I don’t think he’s any relation to Johnnie, but Steve Cochran was down at Neverland today.
OXMAN: He’s a good friend, and we know him and he’s excellent.
KING: So you’re saying the prosecutor has informed Jackson’s representatives of the arrest warrant?
DIMOND: Not only that, but he was told that, you know, there’s plenty of room for cooperation here. We’re not here to drag anybody’s name in the mud. If you want to bring him in, bring him in.
OXMAN: I am certain there will be cooperation, and what I’m criticizing here is that…
DIMOND: Really?
OXMAN: … there’s no prior communication. This is an investigation…
KING: You mean, like yesterday?
OXMAN: Correct. Yesterday or the day before. And Diane has said that this has been ongoing for two months. So, this is a surprise to all the attorneys, and Michael is not someone…
DIMOND: Brian, Brian, wait a minute. You want the law enforcement people here to telegraph what they are going to do in a criminal investigation? Come on.
OXMAN: I think in a molestation case of this nature, I think absolutely so. Because it’s a past incident.
DIMOND: Oh, if there was a man down the street with three children and he was molesting the children, they certainly wouldn’t call his attorney and say, oh, by the way, we’re coming in tomorrow.
OXMAN: You’re talking about an ongoing problem. This apparently is something which happened months and months ago.
KING: Your source is who, Diane? People in law enforcement?
DIMOND: Very high, high, high.
KING: And you’re saying they have an arrest warrant? Is it your probability then they’re going to arrest him in Vegas unless he surrenders?
DIMOND: Well, again, I can’t get a straight answer on that, but it wouldn’t surprise me, Larry.
KING: Johnnie, what would you recommend?
COCHRAN: Well, I would recommend that some accommodation be made that he come forward. I believe he’s going to fight these charges, and I expect he’s going to come in and say get, you know, get it done and get it going.
KING: If he called you to come in again, would you?
COCHRAN: No, I wouldn’t, because — it’s not because of this case, though. When I finished the P. Diddy, Puffy Combs case in New York, I said no more criminal cases for me. And I’ve remained true to that.
KING: Diane, we thank you very much for this exclusive. You are staying right on top of it again. You’ve got it from a top police source. They won’t tell you if they’re going to serve it in Vegas. Maybe they’ll make an accommodation. Would you expect that, Diane, to let him come back and surrender?
DIMOND: Oh, I think they absolutely would, they would open the door wide for him to step right through it. I don’t, however, think they’re anticipating that’s going to happen, Larry.
KING: Well, thank you all very much.
DIMOND: Let me tell you too…
KING: Yes, go ahead.
DIMOND: I’m still working this story out here, and tomorrow on Court TV, 9:00, both coasts, 9:00 a.m., big exclusive interview. Tune in.

Let me remind you that it is the FIRST day of the events – which is actually TOMORROW for Michael Jackson we see in the “One More Chance” video.

Only one day has passed but he is  already ACCUSED, TRIED, CONVICTED and his career is already OVER.

CBS Pulls Jackson Show … For Now

CBS has postponed its plan to broadcast the entertainment special, “Michael Jackson Number Ones,” which was scheduled to air the night of Wednesday, Nov. 26. The network released the following statement:
“Given the gravity of the charges against Mr. Jackson, we believe it would be inappropriate at this time to broadcast an entertainment special. However, we are very mindful that Mr. Jackson is innocent until proven guilty. We will consider broadcasting the special after the due process of the legal system runs its course.”
A replacement program for the special will be announced at a later time.

Jackson – ‘forever tainted’

2003-11-20 13:29
Los Angeles – Fresh child sex allegations against the “King of Pop” Michael Jackson are likely to seriously damage his already shaky public image and legendary musical career, industry experts said.
US authorities on Wednesday ordered Jackson, 45, one of the world’s best-known entertainers, to surrender to police and hand in his passport saying he faced charges on multiple counts of child abuse.
“This is not good for his career, to say the least,” said Daily Variety music writer Phil Gallo of the charges against Jackson that each carry a maximum penalty of eight years in jail.
“There is not a lower crime to be accused of. Artists can recover from murder allegations, from drug addiction and jails sentences, but the fact is that when you have a stigma of mistreating children, it sticks with you.”
After spending 30 years building up a global image that has made billions of dollars, the latest charges will taint Jackson’s image forever, said Peter Montoya, an author on personal branding.
But, he said, some die-hard fans will remain doggedly loyal to the “Gloved One”, just as supporters of onetime celebrity murder suspect OJ Simpson stuck by him.
“For most in the mainstream, Michael Jackson’s brand will forever be poisoned by his bizarre, reprehensible, and possibly criminal behaviour, but his hard-core fans will surely rally around him and make charges of racism and persecution,” he said.
Jacko, as he is known to many fans, has faced a litany of very public legal problems in recent years, including accusations in 1993 that he molested a 13-year-old boy, and is likely to go on the offensive against the latest charges, Montoya predicted.
The singer has already alleged a conspiracy to scupper the success of his first album in a year, Number Ones, that was released on Tuesday just as police raided his Neverland Ranch in search of evidence.
Battered image
Jackson’s image has been battered in recent years by increasingly eccentric behaviour, including a reclusive lifestyle, penchant for wearing face masks in public while covering his three children with veils and dangling a baby from a fourth floor hotel window.
All that leaves Jackson, whose record sales and fortune have seriously declined from their record-breaking peak over the past 10 years, with a badly tarnished image and a career that is under threat.
“These new charges will hurt his record sales in the long run in terms of his catalogue – and he’s mainly a catalogue artist now because its been a long time since he put out a sucessful new record – because nobody is going to want to be in the Michael Jackson business,” Variety’s Gallo said.
“People are going to want to be very, very careful of using his music, especially licensing it for with anything to do with children. You will want to be very sure that his songs can’t be misinterpreted in any way, shape or form.”
The entertainer is likely to disappear from music radar for some time, irrespective of what happens with the allegations against him, Gallo said.

Jackson: Industry cautious

2003-11-20 06:55
New York – The entertainment industry quickly distanced itself from Michael Jackson on Wednesday after an arrest warrant was issued against the superstar on child molestation charges.
CBS television immediately announced it would postpone a Michael Jackson special that was to have aired next week. None of Jackson’s traditional allies, including actress Elizabeth Taylor, would comment on the charges.
The singer’s entourage meanwhile suggested the charges were deliberately timed to coincide with the release of his new greatest hits album, Number Ones.
CBS was to have broadcast a special show on Jackson’s career next Wednesday.
But it said in a statement “Given the gravity of the charges against Mr Jackson, we believe it would be inappropriate at this time to broadcast an entertainment special.”
Multiple counts
Jackson, who was in Las Vegas recording a new video for Number Ones, has been charged with multiple counts of child molestation in Santa Barbara.
The US network said it was “very mindful that Mr Jackson is innocent until proven guilty” and it will “consider broadcasting the special after the due process of the legal system runs its course”.
The Michael Jackson Number Ones show has already been recorded and features top pop names including singer-actress Jennifer Lopez and arranger Quincy Jones. Jackson was to perform his new single, One More Chance.
Jackson’s album was released on Tuesday as dozens of investigators raided his Neverland Ranch in California searching for evidence related to the latest allegations.
Shares Sony Music, the recording company that holds his contract, fell 1.8% on Wednesday to $34.37.
Jackson has one of the most expensive recording contracts in history but his career has waned in recent years following earlier allegations of child abuse.
His last album, Invincible, released in 2001, sold about two million copies. Normally this would be considered a success but Jackson spends huge sums making his records and has to generate greater profits.
One More Chance , the only new music on the latest album, which is devoted to the singer’s greatest hits, is already struggling to get airplay in the United States.
On Tuesday, Jackson’s spokesperson Stuart Backerman quoted the singer as saying: “These characters always seem to surface with a dreadful allegation just as another project, an album, a video, is being released.”
But prosecutors have strongly denied any link between the timing of the warrant the release of Jackson’s new album.
Santa Barbara district attorney Tom Sneddon said, “It really has nothing to do with his album or whatever else he’s doing in his life. We don’t – we don’t track him.”
Sneddon said that he and Santa Barbara Sheriff Jim Anderson did not even know about the new release.
“Like, the sheriff and I really are into that kind of music,” he quipped before insisting that the arrest had been originally planned for several weeks earlier but was postponed because police had to cope with about 500 000 visitors arriving in Santa Barbara for Halloween.


This nightmare was to last for a year and half and was to end in his full acquittal.

But his health was to be ruined, his music was to be stopped and we were never to see him again – until after his death.

It makes you incredibly sad that it was due to their viciousness, their nastiness, their greed for ratings at the expense of an innocent man that we were deprived  of a chance to see him again, listen to his magical music and lyrics, and enjoy his brilliant dance. They made this decision for us – and we allowed it to happen – and all their efforts ended with was just a puff of useless smoke and billions of money put in someone else’s pockets.

Was all the money they got out of it worth it?

They destroyed him and orphaned us. But if the number of decent people had been bigger at the time the whole outcome could have been totally, completely different.

And this is what makes it so infinitely sad…

Now that I see this Michael’s video which started then but is finished today I hope against all hope for the time to have flown differently.

I hope to see the things broken off in 2003 to be continued today in their totally different version and want to see Michael enjoying another great chance now – of a new life and a new love for him starting anew.

42 Comments leave one →
  1. Dialdancer permalink
    January 25, 2011 1:24 am


    R Kelly says the 2nd part of the video with him on stage and the audience at the tables was scheduled to take place the following day.


  2. lcpledwards permalink
    January 25, 2011 2:04 am

    Helena, did you only recently see this video? It premiered almost 2 months ago!


  3. Suzy permalink
    January 25, 2011 7:02 am

    I like “One more chance”. And I have the same feelings as you: it’s heartbreaking to think of what was coming at him the next day. 😦


  4. Suzy permalink
    January 25, 2011 7:09 am

    Helena, I’m sorry to hear what happened in Moscow yesterday. I’m glad you and your loved ones are OK.


  5. Susanne permalink*
    January 25, 2011 9:22 pm

    Helena, I am glad that you are o.k. I feel so sorry for the people killed and injured in Moscow. People must feel like “Strangers in Moscow”.


  6. January 26, 2011 2:36 am

    “R Kelly says the 2nd part of the video with him on stage and the audience at the tables was scheduled to take place the following day”.

    Dial, yes, Charles Thomson says the same:

    “Jackson was scheduled to return the following day to film frontal shots and close-ups. “Our intention was to shoot from behind Michael towards the audience and then, to save money on all the audience members, the following day we would flip around and shoot Michael’s close-ups,” says a crew member. “So pretty much everything we got on the first day was head to toe and shot either in profile or from behind, with the audience in the background.”


  7. January 26, 2011 2:39 am

    “Helena, did you only recently see this video? It premiered almost 2 months ago!”

    Yes, David, it seems I am always the last to learn the news.


  8. January 26, 2011 2:54 am

    I like “One more chance”. And I have the same feelings as you: it’s heartbreaking to think of what was coming at him the next day. 😦

    Suzy, it is absolutely heartbreaking. He had barely survived the Bashir blow and by then was slowly regaining his strength again. This was the beginning which turned out to be the end.

    But the fact that this video is appearing now – with him touching hands of so many people and them smiling at him and him being happy to greet them – looks to me like resuming it from the point when it was broken off. It feels like the future he hoped for is finally starting. Cannot say for sure of course but keep my fingers crossed about it.

    Everything depends on us now.


  9. AnnieDomino permalink
    February 1, 2011 11:25 am

    Random question. I was going through some old scrapbooks I have of Michael from the early 90’s. 91 or 92. There was a very small snippet about security guards from Neverland who claimed to have a “scandalous” videotape of Michael in the jacuzzi of Neverland with two women. Apparently this tape was recorded by the CCTV cameras. I cannot find a trace of this rumour on the i-net. The reason I am interested is that these tapes pre-date the Jordy Chandler thing. And this story came out at a time when everyone seemed to believe that MJ was “asexual” and any story connecting him to a woman was scoffed at. Just wondering if all those employees of Michael’s just substituted “boy” for “women” when they told their lurid tales about sex in the jacuzzi. Does anyone know anything about this? Would it not be a total smoking gun if this tape does exist and all the employees who lied about MJ conspired with Sneddon to lie about activities in the jacuzzi. Also – we always hear about the Neverland employees who sold MJ out to the tabs. Dozens of people have worked at Neverland over the years. The Judases like Blanca Francias don’t number all that many. The employees who remained loyal must vastly outnumber the ones who lied to the DA and the world. Can we not hear from those people. The decent, loyal people who will obviously have good things to say about MJ. If they did’nt, Sneddon would have had them on the stand.


  10. Suzy permalink
    February 1, 2011 11:36 am

    Hi Annie!

    I’ve never heard about this tape. It could be a made-up story. What I remember though was an ex-bodyguard of Michael who worked for him at the end of the 80s, beginning of the 90s and he said MJ had girlfriends, but that’s all he would say. This guy said this during the trial, I believe and he defended Michael saying he never saw anything inappropriate between him and kids. And he said MJ had girlfriends. But he said he wouldn’t say more about them.


  11. shelly permalink
    February 1, 2011 3:35 pm

    Can you post it Annie?


  12. AnnieDomino permalink
    February 1, 2011 4:15 pm

    Hi Shelley. I am a bit technologically challenged. Also, I am South African and the article was in Afrikaans. What I can do is translate it and just add it into the comments. I can also make an educated guess about the time period. Like I said it was just a snippet and only appeared in one Sunday newspaper here. But interesting…Because you NEVER get stories like that about MJ. Pre-Jordy it was just all the “Wacko Jacko” stuff, and after it was just filth and ugliness. This is the only story like this I have ever come across about Michael. Even if the security guards made it up it would indicate that at that time employees at the ranch did not consider accusing MJ of p-lia to be credible.


  13. AnnieDomino permalink
    February 1, 2011 5:14 pm

    Herewith my best-shot at translating the jacuzzi video-tape story I mentioned:

    ‘Jacko touchy-feely in the Jacuzzi”
    “Former employees of Michael Jackson are in possession of steamy photographs of the singer taken in the jacuzzi of his California ranch and are threatening to sell the pictures and shatter his squeaky clean image.
    The photographs were taken from CCTV footage at Michael’s Neverland ranch and show the singer in the jacuzzi with two naked women. The one photograph shows the singer touching one of the women’s breasts.
    A source said: “These cameras were installed for Michael’s protection and now look at what has happened.”
    The guards are asking for $100 000 for the pics. Michael says he will sue if they are ever published.”

    I estimate that this story was published around about June 1992. The newpaper is an Afrikaans-language Sunday broadsheet and this article was printed in the gossip pages. The “Rapport” has a pretty good rep and would not actively invent news, but they probably just reprinted something off Reuters or AP. That is the general practice. It would be nice to know where this comes from!


  14. lcpledwards permalink
    February 1, 2011 6:42 pm

    @ AnnieDomino
    Since you asked about whether there were any Neverland employees who defended MJ, I have 2 right here for you!

    This post from several months ago quotes two ex-Neverland employees who defended MJ in 1993! They’re names were Shanda Lujan and Francin Orosco, and they came forward to discredit Blanca Francia and lablel her as a thief and ungrateful worker who was obsessed with MJ! Open the link and scroll all the way down to the section on Blanca and Jason Francia for more info!’s-hypocrisy-in-reporting-on-michael-jackson’s-settlements-vs-the-settlements-of-other-celebrities-part-1/


  15. shelly permalink
    February 1, 2011 10:07 pm


    Thank you.


  16. AnnieDomino permalink
    February 2, 2011 7:54 am

    Thanks for the link to Lujan and Orosco. The thing about the “Blanca’s” is that they create some misconceptions (beyond the obvious!!). When all these people were coming out of the woodwork the general public believed that MJ must be guilty because “so many” of his employees are saying so. That is why I am interested in the employment records of Neverland. I bet that dozens of people worked there over the years. And if you work out a simple % calculation I would guess that less than 1% of the people who worked at N’Land sold their souls to the tabs. Even pro-MJ reporters joked about the hiring practices at N’Land – that MJ employed so many bad characters. Another pillar to support the idea that Michael was some kind of barely functional addict. If you check through ALL the people that work at N’Land you get a very different picture. I read somewhere – I am vague again – of a policeman who was moonlighting as a N’Land security guard and spoke of MJ calling him from his station at all hours of the night inviting him to watch TV with him (Michael that is). Would it not be interesting to know how many of Sneddon’s own cops were moonlighting at Neverland and what they thought of the charges against Michael?


  17. Suzy permalink
    February 2, 2011 9:25 am

    @ Annie

    If you are looking for employee information. One witness of the prosecution during the trial was maid Kiki Fournier. I don’t think she said anything very damning and if the prosecution were trying to imply with their questioning something sinister the defense put that right during cross-examination. Although she was called by the prosecution I think she was basically honest and testified to the best of her knowledge.

    After Michael’s death she gave an interview to a Swedish Christian magazine that you can find here:

    Now she goes by the name Kiki Chambers. You can find an English translation of her interview with the Swedish magazine here:

    In it she clearly states she doesn’t believe Michael was guilty and that she never saw anything suspicious. She has fond memories of Michael.


  18. Dialdancer permalink
    February 3, 2011 3:21 am

    @ Annie,

    One of the issues the DA tried to push was the turnover in Michael’s household, but if you take a close look at domestic staff for the famous it is pretty much a merry around. I suspect the cause is finding out your housekeeping is getting paid by the Tabloid to report personal information on you.


    I saw this video early on and do enjoy it, but after learning of the historical significance it has become bittersweet.


    It is your fault for not keeping Helena informed better on MJ non-vindication matters.


  19. February 10, 2011 11:49 am


    TOP CLASS performance from violinist DAVID GARRETT!

    More of it:

    David Gariett and Orianthi perform Michael Jackson’s medley – Berlin 8.06.2010:

    Diane Dimond, Victor G, Tom Sneddon, Maureen Orth and the like will turn into dust which people will shake off their feet in disgust while MICHAEL JACKSON WILL BE FOREVER!


  20. February 10, 2011 2:07 pm

    If you think that Michael Jackson is not for organ music or acoustic guitar you are mistaken.

    LISTEN TO THIS BILLIE JEAN! Amazing rendition on the organ…

    Organist: Albinast Prizgintas


    Guitarist: Igor Presnykov

    SERIOUS MUSIC FOR CENTURIES TO COME. And these are the first birds only…


  21. February 10, 2011 10:31 pm

    Guys, I’ve added a couple of things to “ONE MORE CHANCE” which I didn’t finish up due to my accident. It is nothing but a chronicle of the events that immediately followed that video and how the media reported the news then, on November 18-20, 2003.

    It is about only two or three days in Michael Jackson’s life.

    It is also about what we’ve lost and a fraction of what we can probably regain now.


  22. AnnieDomino permalink
    February 14, 2011 11:46 am

    Just reading the Larry K transcript. I am feeling depressed today. I have been a fan of Michael since “Don’t Stop”. I was 8.I always loved and believed in him. But around about 2000 I stopped talking about him to people I did not know well. I just got tired of getting into fights about Michael. I was afraid of people saying that he was crazy, a child molester, etc…because then I would take them on and create conflict or not say anything and feel guilty. So I just avoided getting into conversations about him unless it was with my family or people I had known for a long time. So occassionally I get the guilts. I comfort myself with the knowledge that amongst my nearest and dearest I made many “converts”. My Mom and I followed Michael’s trial together and listened to the verdicts together. And she was not a fan at the beginning.
    So when I see these transcipts I REALLY feel terrible. Because I feel that when Michael needed me I should have shouted his innocence from the rooftops.Especially when you see the level of hatred and stupidity those women exhibit. They pin the Arviso thing on MJ based on the number of officers who searched Neverland and that the “justice system” did not do its job in 1993. I get back to my earlier point. If these creatures believed that MJ was guilty of the Arviso thing simply because Michael settled the JC case , is it not logical (by their standards!) that they now believe he was innocent of the Chandler allegation because he won the Arviso case. And the realy sickening thing is that Johnnie bloody Cochrane – lawyer extraordinaire – cannot seem to string two words together in Michael’s defence. If he had nothing to say why the hell did he agree to go on LKL??? I never liked Brian Oxman – mainly because he is so associated with the Jackson family – but he is making a far better case for Michael than Cochrane. Larry King is more eloquent than Cochrane in Michael’s defence for goodness sake. I think the worst thing that happened in 1993 was Johnnie Cochrane being hired. That was the biggest mistake Michael made.


  23. February 14, 2011 12:29 pm

    “So when I see these transcipts I REALLY feel terrible. Larry King is more eloquent than Cochrane in Michael’s defence for goodness sake.”

    AnnieDomino, I had the same feeling too. And when we recently heard from Carl Douglas, the 2nd “defense” lawyer involved in 1993 who took part in the September Frozen in Time seminar and who explained to us how they “defended” Michael at the time, this made me even more sick at heart:

    The revelations of this “defense” attorney look even more astonishing when they are compared with the real defense done by Honorable Thomas Mesereau and his team in 2005.


  24. AnnieDomino permalink
    February 14, 2011 3:01 pm

    Thanks for the Carl Douglas link. I have read it before. I am a daily visitor to this blog! My comments. At that time in his life Michael needed a legal defence team – not a “fan” – as Douglas describes himself. He comes across as an immature and unprofessional media-whore. He is almost giddy with excitement at the idea of being in Michael’s presence. My God! His mention of the cameras and the car is just disgusting. And it comes across very clearly that Michael’s future was decided by the “old boy” lawyers of LA. How did Cochrane ever get his reputation? I got up in the middle of the night to watch his OJ closing arguments and he was excellent, I admit. But his representation of Michael should blot his career. At least Bert Fields believed in Michael’s innocence and was prepared to fight. I also read that Fields had a near perfect success record in litigation. Of course Fields was not a criminal lawyer – but I think in the end I would rather have had Fields convincing Michael to fight the case, than these jokers from Cochrane’s office.
    ITO the settlement. I remember what Mesereau said about Michael’s “entourage”. That he was surrounded by people who were keeping him off-balance so that they would be needed by him. Whenever the media talk about the settlement, they speak of it ito the legal case. No-one ever talks about Michael’s state of mind at the time. This was undoubtedly the worst accusation that could have been made against him, he was emotionally shattered to the point of becoming dependant on medication, he was in the middle of the Dangerous tour (in itself a taxing undertaking) and he was being advised by a motley crew who had no idea how to deal with this storm. His future wife was also telling him to settle. She was no doubt focused on his health and well-being rather than his reputation – understandable if you really love someone and can think no further than how hurt they are.
    I also think of when this happened to Michael. Just after his ratings triumphs of early 1993 (Oprah,the Superbowl), Dangerous was on track to becoming the second biggest selling album of all time. He had finally shown the doubters that he could deliver the goods without Quincy Jones. Black or White had been his biggest hit since Billie-Jean. In August of 1993 Michael Jackson was on top of the world. I guess there were people who just did not like that.


  25. February 14, 2011 5:05 pm

    “Black or White had been his biggest hit since Billie-Jean. In August of 1993 Michael Jackson was on top of the world. I guess there were people who just did not like that.”

    AnnieDomino, yes, at least one good thing Johnnie Cochran said about all those accusations was that each time Michael was releasing a new album some strange coincidences would take place to ruin it.

    My personal opinion about why Johnnie Cochran and Carl Douglas strangely refrained from real defense of Michael Jackson in 1993 was the fact that their opponent, Larry Feldman, prior to those events had held the top position in the bar of lawyers – he served as President of the Los Angeles County Bar Association and the Los Angeles Trial Lawyers Association (1987-88) and ever since was a highly influential authority in their profession.

    He was so influential that Maureen Orth in her “Nightmare in Neverland”, Jan. 1994 unwittingly discloses that even such attorneys as Gloria Allred were dependent on him:

    “The flamboyant feminist attorney Gloria Allred, who briefly represented the boy, promptly called a press conference and announced that her little client was willing to come forward and tell his story. The horrified parents then hired the unimpeachable Feldman, a past president of the L.A. County Bar Association and the L.A. Trial Lawyers’ Association, whose lawyer wife works with sexually abused people. He fired Allred by letter and warned her that if she talked about the case she could be disciplined by the California bar.”

    Gloria Allred quickly left the case without a single comment…

    Let us read it once again:

    – Larry Feldman FIRED Gloria Allred by letter and warned her that she could be DISCIPLINED by the California bar.
    – What for?
    – For saying that Jordan Chandler was willing to come forward in a CRIMINAL TRIAL and tell his story.
    – And Jordan’s parents were HORRIFIED to hear that!

    It means that the Chandlers were horrified by the idea of a criminal court and them having to tell their story there!
    And Larry Feldman even warned to discipline Gloria Allred through the California bar if she ever talked about such a possibility…

    Does anyone doubt now whether the Chandlers wanted to go to a criminal court or not?
    Does anyone doubt now how powerful Larry Feldman was – so powerful that he managed to silence even Gloria Allred?
    Does anyone doubt now that Johnnie Cochran and Carl Douglas had their careers to think of first before they ever tried to do anything in the defense of Michael Jackson?

    In O.Simpson’s case Johnnie Cochran did not have to restrain himself due to Feldman’s influence – hence the result, but in Michael Jackson’s case he was clearly warned to be cooperative with the other side, or his ‘disobedience’ would have cost him his career.

    This was most probably why Johnnie started negotiating settlement with Feldman the very moment he was retained….


  26. Anna permalink
    February 14, 2011 7:21 pm

    I wasn’t sure where to post this but just in the past day I saw a few random but positive MJ articles. There really didn’t seem to be anything particular about Michael that they were talking about they were just generally positive. I can’t help but wondering if well see this from a few Pro-MJ or atleast MJ friendly/balanced journalists in the days and weeks before the Murray trial. I say this because right now with the Superbowl past (one of MJ’s most famous venues), the “Glee” MJ Thriller episode making a hit with high ratings and the Murray trial just around the corner Michael Jackson is one everybodies mind. (well maybe not everybody but alot of people)

    It would be nice if the MJ friendly media would continue put out some positive press like this before the trial because the defense will no doubt drag Michael’s name through the mudd. Any thoughts?


  27. okunuga permalink
    February 15, 2011 4:29 pm

    I feel that the only way all the tabloids trash can be stopped or at least reduced to the bearest mimimum is if two things were to happens number one,California sheild law was repealled or changed so that jornalists will not lie or obtained their stories under false pretence and when caught hide under the shield law not to testified on it, secondly the law that says dead persons/relatives can’t sue for libel should also be repealled or tested up to the supreme court its only then we can start seeing the changes we wanted about the way MJ was treated by the press because when the owners of this media esterblishments start loosing big money and the reporters starts going to jail for lying it will all stop.well that’s what i`m hopping for.


  28. February 15, 2011 4:50 pm

    “I feel that the only way all the tabloids trash can be stopped.. if two things were to happen:
    – number one, California shield law was changed so that jornalists will not lie or obtain their stories under false pretence and when caught hide under the shield law,
    – secondly the law that says dead persons/relatives can’t sue for libel should also be repealled or tested up to the supreme court.
    Its only then we can start seeing the changes we wanted about the way MJ was treated by the press because when the owners of this media esterblishments start loosing big money and the reporters starts going to jail for lying it will all stop.”

    Oh, Okunuga, you are looking into the very root of the problem! If journalists were not allowed to lie in both cases and had to answer for their lies in some way, it would indeed settle the problem. But this, I am afraid, is fully beyond our power and is only something we can hope for…


  29. February 16, 2011 9:41 pm

    Guys, the speed with which Michael Jackson’s music is turning into CLASSICAL MUSIC is astonishing!

    Now the two cello virtuosos are performing “The Smooth Criminal”.

    Well, I can virtually see Michael’s detractors twist and shudder at his music suddenly coming on them from most unexpected quarters. They wanted him forgotten and done with? So let the need to listen to him coming from every corner be the worst punishment for them….

    Cellists: Stjepan Hauser and Luca Culic


  30. Alison permalink
    February 20, 2011 5:33 pm

    on amazon you can now buy MJ instrumental sheet music specifically for many classical instruments, maybe they were there before but i only noticed yesterday, i’d only seen the usual piano and guitar music.


  31. Suzy permalink
    February 20, 2011 6:04 pm

    Great finds, Helena!

    I also love “Ben” and “Earth Song” by André Rieu. Look at the audience’s reaction!


  32. Suzy permalink
    February 20, 2011 6:09 pm

    Oh, and here’s another I like: Michael’s music (Little Susie and Childhood) accompanied by pictures of Antoni Gaudi’s art:


  33. February 20, 2011 6:25 pm

    Helena, London Symphony Orchestra released a cd with Michael’s music in 1995 and Vienna and Moscow recorded his songs as well. Many symphiny orchestras played his music in concerts since ever. It’s not new.

    This is a good one:


  34. February 20, 2011 6:38 pm

    I also love “Ben” and “Earth Song” by André Rieu. Look at the audience’s reaction!

    Suzy, unfortunately I cannot see any of them as I am now in the country and my mobile internet here is so slow that the most it allows is write a couple of sentences and post them at a third attempt – that’s all. I hope to watch those videos later though.


  35. Hannah permalink
    February 20, 2011 11:40 pm

    “Black or White had been his biggest hit since Billie-Jean. In August of 1993 Michael Jackson was on top of the world. I guess there were people who just did not like that.”

    Did you know that at that point, Dangerous (which I think is highly underrated) was actually out-selling Bad, Michael was the top earning artist in the music industry that’s why his “fall from grace” would be even more lucritive for certain media outlets. The bigger the star the bigger the fall.


  36. July 17, 2011 6:49 am

    ““These new charges will hurt his record sales in the long run in terms of his catalogue – and he’s mainly a catalogue artist now because its been a long time since he put out a sucessful new record – because nobody is going to want to be in the Michael Jackson business,” Variety’s Gallo said.

    “People are going to want to be very, very careful of using his music, especially licensing it for with anything to do with children. You will want to be very sure that his songs can’t be misinterpreted in any way, shape or form.”

    Hell why did he just say to all of you in the entertainment business if you use or play Jackson’s music; if you do any business with him or personally associate with him we are going to ruin you as well.


  37. lynande51 permalink
    July 17, 2011 7:37 am

    When was that written?


  38. lcpledwards permalink
    July 17, 2011 7:54 am

    Here is an unreleased demo written and recorded by R. Kelly called “You Are My World”. It was intended for MJ, and you can clearly hear how R. Kelly imitated MJ’s singing style and ad libs, especially near the end of the song. I don’t know if MJ recorded this song or not, but obviously I hope he did and it’s one day released! The demo is OK (the beat was very simple, and there wasn’t any instrumentation), but we all know that with the right production and tweaking, we’ll have another hit song on our hands!


  39. Tahlia permalink
    September 26, 2011 6:53 am

    Here’s an example of how far people will go to make others believe Michael was guilty:

    I recently had a conversation with a man on a news story on Yahoo. The story was about fans protecting Michael’s name on the eve of Conrad Murray’s trial. There was the usual mud slinging by uninformed readers, but one said something I hadn’t heard before.

    This man was trying to convince people that Michael was guilty because he was apparently looking for property in Bahrain and Liechtenstein because they have no extradition treaty with the USA. He was trying to say that Michael was going to buy property there so that if he was found guilty he could take off there and couldn’t be brought back.

    Bahrain doesn’t have an extradition treaty with the USA, but Liechtenstein does:

    Liechtenstein International Extradition Treaty with the United States
    May 20, 1936, Date-Signed
    June 28, 1937, Date-In-Force
    Treaty signed at Bern on May 20, 1936. It was Ratified by Liechtenstein on October 30, 1936. Senate advice and consent to ratification on April 27, 1937. It was Ratified by the President of the United States on May 19, 1937. Ratifications exchanged at Bern on June 28, 1937. Entered into force on June 28, 1937. It was Proclaimed by the President of the United States on July 8, 1937.

    He had nothing to say about that. I also reminded him that in the event of a guilty verdict the person goes straight from court to prison. I witnessed this for myself when a family friend went to prison for incitement to murder. (It actually wasn’t as bad as it sounds) He hasn’t answered me since, I don’t think he’s very happy with me. You can all this here:


  40. sanemjfan permalink
    October 18, 2012 3:28 am

    Here is a remix of “One More Chance” that contains R. Kelly’s original demo vocals. The beat is different, but the lyrics and cadence are the same as the final version. MJ didn’t change a thing!


  41. October 18, 2012 8:17 am

    Just read up the Nancy Grace,Cochran and King discussion. It is total news to me that guilt is proven (,according to Grace)ie based on the number of police officers sent for search!
    That way you could skip the whole mess with a trial!Just send in dozens and dozens of police officers and people like Grace will be satisfied with that.How can anybody take her seriously.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: