Michael Jackson: Man Behind the Myth
September 3, 2011
This is a great documentary that deserves its own post rather than just a simple mention in a comment!
Posted on Vimeo by Walking Moon Studios on 30 August 2011
Who was Michael Jackson really? Michael Jackson’s work, life and his “troubles” are not what you thought they were.
Jackson was used and abused relentlessly by a media gone mad because any mention of his name drew crowds and cash.
Learn the truth of who Michael Jackson really was as we take a look at the story behind the myth.
64 Comments
leave one →
Vindicating Michael 
Yup i knew this
LikeLike
Have you guys seen this? Someone was walking by a lake, and saw an image of MJ in one of the rocks! It really looks like him! Take a look and see for yourself!
LikeLike
This documentary is really great.
Regarding LMP’s interview with Oprah…
LMP definitely believes that MJ is innocent.
She truly cares and loves MJ.
On the other hand, she has her father’s legacy to protect- that Elvis should always remain “The King”.
MJ is the true King no matter how hard they try to put MJ down.
LikeLike
Also, limited in the sense that he was not there. T-mez mentioned that on a recent interview. I answered my own question so read all my comments.
LikeLike
@TatumMarie,
“Tom Mesereau is awesome, but his knowledge of the 93 case is limited as well,”
I have to disagree, Mr. Mesereau would have thoroughly interviewed Michael throughout the preparations for the trial. Attorneys will demand to be informed of anything which could kill their defense strategy. It was a given Sneddon would try and introduce the 93 allegation. T. Mes will also have seen the entire Grand Jury Transcripts, Law Enforcement. DCFS and all lab results in their original form which is something no Fan has. Because Mr. Mesereau does not discuss it, does not mean he is uninformed he had Michael and the documents to do that.
LikeLike
I saw a term used in connection to Michael earlier today. I told the poster I’d share this with any I came across. The term is: “Tall Poppy syndrome”.
Tall poppy syndrome
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the Leprous album, see Tall Poppy Syndrome (Leprous album)
“Tall poppy syndrome (TPS) is a pejorative term primarily used in Australia, but also in New Zealand, Canada and other Anglosphere nations to describe a social phenomenon in which people of genuine merit are resented, attacked, cut down, or criticised because their talents or achievements elevate them above or distinguish them from their peers.”
The history of this term is found at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome
LikeLike
@lynande51
Oh I believe that too. Michael is not innocent when it comes to “flirting” with women. Lol. He could have stimulated June’s illusion of being Mrs. Jackson in some ways. Still, as he mentioned in LWMJ he is attracted to the inside, and maybe he found her appealing in the beginning but later started to withdraw from her personality. The time line summary shows that he met the Chandlers, spent time with June and her family and then Lisa entered the picture during their friendship. The Evan and Dave conversation helps put the pieces together as well.
LikeLike
The picture on the end of the film is unusual (time 19:50)- shivers through. It’s the perfect choice at the end of the film. Michael was a true gift. He gave us a great lesson of courage, love and humility.
LikeLike
@ Thetis
Yes, I meant that. I know they met in the 70s, but then Lisa was 6 and Michael 16.
LikeLike
Suzy they first met much earlier in one of the Jacksons’ tours when she went to meet him backstage. I guess you mean that incident by using the parenthesis refering to the age
LikeLike
Michael first met LMP (as an adult) in November 1992. In February 1993 he sent her a gift for her birthday. On the 5th of May 1993 Michael attends a charity event of president Jimmy Carter in Atlanta. LMP is also there.
This was also the time when he hang out with the Chandlers, so it’s possible that the Chandlers knew about their blossoming relationship (I was always wondering Evan’s comment to Schwartz about “if Michael loves Lisa”…) and like Lynette said maybe June realized she’s not gonna be Mrs. Jackson…
LikeLike
An IMPORTANT message from the makers of the ‘Man Behind the Myth Video’ – Pls read and share :
http://www.innermichael.com/2011/09/michael-jackson-who-is-he-really-the-video/
The producer and creators of the video wish to remain anonymous. There is no real reason for their identity to be known. What is important is the content of the video itself.
Responding to questions about whether the video should/can be placed on YouTube, the producer and the creators of the video would prefer that the video is NOT uploaded onto YouTube.
It was placed on Vimeo to preserve the integrity of the message and protect it from the undoubtedly hateful comments that would ensue on YouTube’s site.
There are further plans in the works for this video and this is a gentle request from the creators and producer.
LikeLike
Is that carrie fischer narrating this video? It sounds like her and she was a friend of his,,just curious..
LikeLike
It’s on page 5
Click to access 010405oppdamotpriors06.pdf
LikeLike
Mesereau also said that about the settlement
LikeLike
@Lyn that was in February 1994
LikeLike
@ Tatum, I think the insinuation that Tom Mesereau was making was that it was June that was interested in MJ and even had some kind of thing going with him. Then in Las Vegas suddenly everything changed. Well LMP used to go to Las Vegas to meet Michael when they were first seeing each other. There is something in an article that I read about him going to see a show right around New Years Eve or sometime close to the body search. He went there and went to a concert where he was seen and he introduced LMP to the group or performer whose name I of course don’t remember.That was supposed to be their first official out in the open date. Did I get that from JRT, maybe but I have read that he left the ranch and went to Vegas to a show in other articles.
Anyway,right around the beginning of May 1994 Michael went to a charity function in Atlanta and LMP was there. He had also taken the Chandler’s. It could be that June just realized that she was not going to be Mrs. Michael Jackson and this is the reason for all of her nonsense. Of course it might have bothered Jordan to think that MJ was going to be his Stepdad and he saw that get messed up by the presence of LMP too, you never know what his reasoning was he was 13 years old.
LikeLike
@nan
I believe that too, she was involved in 93 to an extent. Evan speaks of her on the tape.
LikeLike
When the rabbi came out with his mj tapes and was doing interviews, he was saying at the time he was unsure if mj was innocent or guilty as i recall..I sent him an email saying if you can write a book about this man that you supposedly care about , why cant you take the time to read tom mesereau closing argument,,because that will tell you exactly what happened in 93 and 2003….start there….and enclosed a link for the gavin arviso site..
He has since said he believes him innocent but it could have to do with selling books to fans also..
There have been many times when i have seen family or friends say some lame thing about the accusations..and seen a missed opportunity to get some truth out there…
Surely everyone knows that every time mj sang a note , people made millions of dollars and this garbage was standing in the way…even to say something that simple..could give people pause because everybody knows he was a money making machine……and he was surrounded by people who wanted to keep raking in the cash….
I am not a fan of Oprah but I know she wanted those kids on that show really bad..Fans have urged her to have Mesereau on for a long time..There must have been a hundred people at the Jacksons house when she showed up….but no mezz…I bet money , Mesereau would have gladly shown up had any of the Jacksons asked him….but it seems Katherines book took priority..There are times that i too wonder how come I know so much more then some of the people close to him..
the lame remark from lmp during oprah interview…pfft..perhaps she was afraid she would be sued……..Frankly …Mesereau said the people crying the hardest after he died…..are the people they asked for help during trial and would not..I count her among them…
LikeLike
Not to mention the actual insurance carrier is no longer in existence.
@David, Yes I think the first 2 lines of the Chandler/Schwartz tapes tell us everything we need to know about LMP. Those first 2 lines indicate that Evan intended to tell Lisa something he thought or wanted her to be concerned about. The first two lines also indicate that the Chandlers were much more aware of MJ’s and LMP’s blossoming relationship than they like to pretend later.She should just come out with the truth. Is she still worried about being sued by him? He’s dead so what is her motive for not telling everything? Maybe Oprah told her not to who knows.
She did throw him under the bus during the 2003 and the continuing case too. She actually had to recant something that she said in an Australian interview that Sneddon got hold of and then he was going to subpoena her to the Grand Jury. She had to clarify a statment that she made on order to avoid testifying.She is one who should either shut up or open up.
LikeLike
I don’t understand why is so important if the insurance company forced MJ to settle or he just fallowed the advice of his lawyers to leave the whole thing behind him, especially after the madness with the media coverage.
And yes, MJ did speak about the insurance intervention in one of his songs.
———————
Insurance?
Where do your loyalties lie?
Is that your alibi?
I don’t think so
———————-
LikeLike
This was a great documentary, thanks David for posting it, i will look at the site a bit more, but I wondered if i recognised the woman’s voice who did it. anyway, regardless, do you know if there is any chance this will be on sale? it would be great to be able to give it to people to start them off with a visual “aperitif”.
i saw a short interview with Madonna about her new film about Wallace Simpson and Edward 8th, and she seemed very passionate to show the truth and the human side. she said, of celebrities, that all people see / hear are soundbytes, media chosen snippets and that celebrities are often not seen as human or with more than one character trait. it was very heartfelt and i thought of her speech after MJ passed and i thought maybe she could make a good film telling the truth about Michael. she has the stage to present it. of course she would have to have all the information.
LikeLike
@ Tatum
Yes, exactly! I forgot to mention Lisa Marie! I swear, when I watched her interview with Oprah last year, when she said that “she wasn’t in the same room with MJ and those boys”, I wanted to reach through my TV screen and literally strangle her! How could she throw MJ under the bus like that, when she has defended him in the past? That is what I was worried about.
And please don’t get me wrong guys, because I’m excited about seeing this documentary, and I’m thankful that it is being released (especially on Blu-Ray, which shows that they didn’t take the cheap route when making this. Blu-Ray is much more expensive than standard DVDs.) I just have unusually high expectations because of the vindication work that I do, but I’m optimistic that they’ll adequately defend him.
LikeLike
The only person I hold a grudge against when it comes to defending him is Lisa Marie. She had access to so much knowledge and has not shared any of it. Even a ” he would never do that defense” would have been better than the things she’s said.
LikeLike
@lcpledwards
I know it was you, too bad we can’t correct comments here like we can in MICHAELJACKSON.COM. I had a similar experience in college right after the trial. Many of the people in my class (not being racist: but whites) were saying Michael was guilty and based all their claims on false stories. The only thing I had was that a jury acquitted him and he was found not guilty – which is a lot but doesn’t fully tell the back story, this was way before he died so I had limited research on the case. I bought Aphrodite Jones book first, and then found more documentation and documentaries online.
With this being said the family purposely doesn’t do this because they don’t like the coverage. Jermaine, I noticed, stays away from the really bad egg journalist, ( but admits he watches all the coverage) but the other members are clueless. It’s obvious that they can’t go into depth about anything because they don’t know the specifics. A fan of a legal background would be better speaking with someone from the mainstream media about the allegations than a family member would, I still believe that. There has been a time where each relative has defended Michael strongly, and brought out something that I agree with so I can’t say they don’t defend him properly.
LikeLike
@ David
I agree with you about the family and I know it’s very frustrating that they seemingly don’t care enough about the their brother/uncle/son to investigate the allegations to be able to defend him. But I don’t think it will change, as sad as it is. It seems like we, fans are all alone in this.
“But what I still want to see is someone SPECIFICALLY mention that MJ did NOT offer the Chandlers the settlement; he was sued! I don’t want skeptics thinking that MJ used his fame and wealth to weasel his way out of the allegations.”
Yes. To me it’s not such a big issue if it was Michael’s insurance company who pushed him to settle or he was advised to settle by his lawyers or he had enough and wanted to move on (I could understand this too, with his drug and health problems). None of these would make him look guilty in my eyes. Like you pointed out in one of your articles innocent people settle all the time. JC Penney settled with the Arvizos despite of their guards being innocent as it turned out during the trial.
I think somebody should finally point out that quote from All that glitters (“Had Michael paid the twenty million dollars demanded of him in August, rather than the following January, he might have spent the next ten years as the world’s most famous entertainer, instead of the world’s most infamous child molester.”) and the fact that Michael could have easily avoided the whole scandal had he paid in August and that the Chandlers were demanding money from him from the get-go and tried to avoid a criminal trial like a plague and were always pushing for a civil trial or a settlement – ie. money.
LikeLike
@ Annie Dominio
According to the court documents, MJ’s insurance carrier negotiated and paid the settlement, and it was paid in five annual installments from 1994-1999. It is not unprecedented, as insurance carriers routinely negotiate and pay settlements against their clients wishes (a prime example is Evan Chandler himself, who was forced to settle a few frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits after he reached his settlement with MJ. That was mentioned in the book “All That Glitters”.) I think the reason that neither Mesereau, MJ, or anyone else never mentioned it in interviews is because if they did, it would lead to more questions, such as “Which insurance carrier paid it?”. So it’s understandable why none of them mentioned the insurance carrier, and in retrospect I shouldn’t have said that I wish they mentioned it in the upcoming documentary.
But what I still want to see is someone SPECIFICALLY mention that MJ did NOT offer the Chandlers the settlement; he was sued! I don’t want skeptics thinking that MJ used his fame and wealth to weasel his way out of the allegations. And as Teva already mentioned in a previous comment, I don’t want this to be “just another MJ documentary” that is perceived as being a “love letter” by non-fans; I would like this to be a learning experience to skeptics, or fans who are clueless about the allegations. So far, it doesn’t seem to be “preaching to the choir”, and I’m confident that I’ll be satisfied with it.
If you haven’t done so already, you can read this post I did last year on MJ’s settlements: https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/09/20/analyzing-the-media’s-hypocrisy-in-reporting-on-michael-jackson’s-settlements-vs-the-settlements-of-other-celebrities-part-1/
@Tatum
It wasn’t Shelly who said that some of MJ’s people were too lazy to do any research, it was me. Let me explain what I meant by that, because it certainly wasn’t meant as an attack on them, just as a criticism. 2 years ago when MJ died, I was absolutely clueless about the details of the allegations. I couldn’t factually defend him in the beginning, because I didn’t know the facts at all! But after hundreds of hours of research over the last 2 years, I’m now an admin of one of the best research blogs on the internet! It’s no accident; I’ve poured a lot of my blood, sweat, and tears into this. I feel that if, as a fan, I can take the initiative to learn these allegations backwards and forwards, so can MJ’s family and close friends.To me, if I know more about the allegations than they do, then something is wrong! And naturally, since I’m not the average fan, I will look at things from a different perspective than most fans,
For example, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve watched them not defend MJ against the allegations, or give some half-hearted “MJ would never hurt a child” defense, both of which don’t do anything to clear his name. When Latoya hugged Victor Guiterrez in that interview, or told Joy Behar how much she “loves” her show, or watched Jackie Jackson have dinner with Oprah, it really hurt my morale and made me question why I even do this. I don’t think it’s asking too much to hope that they can at least attempt to factually defend him for once, and not (as they’ve done in the past) rely on Evan’s suicide or Jordan’s phony confession. I’ll give Katherine a pass, because I know she’s old and frail, but any of the other siblings should step up their knowledge. I also hope that Geraldine Hughes and Aphrodite Jones are included too (which is possible, even though they weren’t in the preview).
LikeLike
The reason that Michael didn’t elaborate more in the interviews is that the confidentiality agreement was that he was not supposed to get monetary compensation for talking about it. He thought that Bashir was going to pay $250,000.00 for the right to interview him to a charity and that would have been compensation in Michael’s name. Bashir or ITV never did pay that money to that charity either.And it is still in dispute that Uri Geller got paid to arrange the interview with Bashir. He once said he did, then he said he gave it to a charity and then he denied it altogether so who knows with that one.
LikeLike
@lynande51
We weren’t speaking about why Michael settled or how it came about, we were focusing on how Michael didn’t elaborate in his interviews.
LikeLike
Yes, Oxmans submitted the documents to the courts but it was approved and submitted with the support of Susan Yu, Tom Mesereu and Robert Sanger as Michael’s legal team.
LikeLike
Everyone seems confused here about the complexities of that settlement. In every settlement it is always the plaintiff that settles a case, not the defendant.That is the way the law works. It has to be the plaintiff or in Jordan’s case his court appointed guardian Ad Litem retired appellate judge Jack Goertzen. In this case, once the photos were taken and found to be exculpatory Larry Feldman filed court papers that included Jordan’s Declaration, which as I have said before is meaningless here in the US. For a person to be held legally responsible for a statement, declaration, sworn deposition, or court testimony in the State of California they must be 14 years of age or older. That is why the Declaration was signed on December 28th. Jordan’s 14th birthday was January 11th, 1994.
On the 10th of January 1994 Feldman filed papers with portions of the depositions from the Havenhurst 5 and Blanca Francia a request for a full accounting of Michael’s finances that also included a request to the court for a Guardian Ad Litem. That is when the case went to something called arbitration with the 3 judge panel of arbitrators and the lawyers representing both sides and the Guardian Ad Litem. Now once they had determined that it was Jordan’s word alone against Michael because of the lack of corroborating evidence it was also in his best interest to settle. The Guardian Ad Litem would have interviewed Jordan to see if he wanted to continue the fight or settle for the total amount that is listed. He would then approve the settlement that is why in the press conference Larry Feldman said that the plaintiff settles and the case would soon be dismissed.
For Michael’s side he had to agree to drop the extortion charges (I suppose that Jordan did not want his father to go to jail). Michael got all the claims dropped but the global claim of negligence. Negligence just meant that Michael did not behave in a manner that other reasonably would have and made the claims possible. This could just have easily been a lawsuit where someone slipped and fell. If he had not allowed Jordan to sleep in his room it never would have happened or at least that was the thinking in that room. His insurance company would have looked at his current earning potential and determined the lowest possible offer to make to the arbitrators. That is why you have such an odd numbered total of $15,331,250.00. If Michael himself would have paid it would have been a round figure.
Michael was forced to settle by his insurance company to avoid his deposition that was scheduled for January 18th 1994 and then postponed for one more week. It was then 6 days later that they announced that a settlement had been reached. It is important to remember that none of the Chandler’s were deposed either. They were scheduled to begin on January 27th,1994. Michael had to avoid the deposition because Judge David Rothman had decided that the police investigators and the Prosecutors could have the depositions and other evidence that defense investigators had gathered. In fact it was to protect his 5th amendment rights against self incrimination. Meaning they were going to force him to testify against himself in a deposition. If he were to take the fifth in the civil case Feldman could take that to the court and say “ look he won’t cooperate so he is guilty” of this” and he could have gotten whatever he wanted from Michael because that is the way civil court works.
Now the portion of the settlement that is not in the public domain thanks to Diane Dimond is where the terms of that settlement are. The confession of judgment that Sneddon had was nothing more than a quick claim deed type of thing. It just meant that if Michael didn’t pay Feldman could go to the court and say that he agreed to this settlement and hasn’t so I want to collect whatever I can to get this paid.
Here are the two pleadings from the 2005 trial that talk about the settlement agreement and amounts. If you want to read more about these read the testimony from Feldman and Kris Kallem (Jason Francia’s attorney, he is thanked in the back of Victor Gutierrez’s book).
Click to access 011805mjmolimrcsaad.pdf
Click to access 011805mjmolimrcsaad.pdf
LikeLike
Remember, there was more to that case than just false allegations against Michael there were also extortion charges against the Chandlers. Michael signed a confidentially agreement and withdrew the extortion investigation. This is where it was resolved on his part, possibly advised by his legal team which made it go away officially.
There would have been some form of a trial somehow but at that point Michael wanted everything over. When listening to Michael’s responses in interviews you have to read between the lines because he could easily be speaking of another aspect of the case to avoid getting trouble. Michael never spoke about all the motions his team filed to take the case to trial either but we know that happened.
LikeLike
Just to be precise it was filed by Oxman.
LikeLike
I’m happy about this documentary for the most part. Back to another note, the documents that Tom Mesereau and Robert Sanger filed state that the insurance settled those claims against Michael’s wishes. Yet, it is still a confidential matter which I think i just answered my own question as to why Tom Mesereau didn’t bring it up in interviews.
LikeLike
Thanks for the info. It seems clear that the insurance paid. What is still unclear is whether they insisted on Michael settling. I can understand that the settlement itself is confidential but does that really mean that Michael cannot say what preceded it – why he settled. If the insurance company forced him why can’t he say so? Instead several people – including him – have said that he settled based on the advice of his lawyers.
It would be great if we could definitively state that they forced him to settle. The only evidence I have seen that they did was that one line in a deposition. I don’t want to use this information if it is shaky.
LikeLike
@Teva
Tom Messerau worked for Michael Jackson, he cross examined June Chandler. Mesereau followed up on the situation with thorough questioning, if it never happened there wouldn’t have been such an in depth questioning about it.
LikeLike
Limited knowledge means that there are certain aspects of the situation that some may not know about and when I spoke of the fans knowing more- I was speaking about Michael’s family and friends, I wasn’t including Mesereau in that statement.
LikeLike
“Michael through cross-examination chose to acknowledge it so it must have happened.” – TatumMarie
What cross examination? Michael never cross-examined about Jordan Chandler.
LikeLike
@anniedomino
I know why Michael never gave specifics because as mentioned by Lisa Marie on Diane Sawyer he’s been barred from discussing the details of the settlement. Going into how it was paid I’m sure would go against the agreement unless he was in court which is how we found out about it. Factually, we know the insurance company paid that settlement.
Also, in the Martin Bashir documentary there was a huge gap missing. Michael elaborated on information from 1993 but Bashir admits that due to the confidentiality agreement Michael signed, they were not allowed to show that portion. We don’t know if he mentioned the insurance company or not.
LikeLike
@Shelly,
Sneddon tried to spin it as MJ crying because he couldn’t be with Jordan, when in fact he was just offended that she would jump to the wrong conclusions about him.
Sneddon tried to paint it as June suspected impropriety with his questions of trickery. That altercation was about June not trusting Michael as a man coming into her childrens’ lives and not being there the next moment, like she had experienced before. It had nothing to do with molestation. It was all about someone getting too close to her children.
@All
Was Michael as emotional as stated? He developed a relationship with the children at that point so it’s possible, but these are not credible sources and could have easily elaborated his emotion. Michael through cross-examination chose to acknowledge it so it must have happened.
@Shelly,
If anyone involved in the documentary has a “limited” knowledge of the allegations, it’s only because they’re too lazy to do the research!
I wouldn’t be so extreme to attack the people Michael loved.
LikeLike
I forgot to mention Robert Sanger.
LikeLike
By the way, you forget that, at the beginning he worked with Steve Cochran who worked on the 1993 allegations.
LikeLike
@tatum,
Sorry, but he did know a lot more than we do about 1993. He never brought up the insurance company during interview but he did say it was paid by an insurance in front of the judge but he told the court that MJ settle the case.
LikeLike
@All Who Responded
First of all, please don’t take my comment out of context. Tom Mesereau is amazing, but he never brings up the insurance company when asked about the settlement, this is not an attack in any way but fact, and it’s not like he had as much time to go into these allegations as he did the Arvisos. In a rapid turn of desperation the prosecution raised the issue of “prior bad acts”.
I’m sure he is knowledgeable, of course, but I would answer differently when asked about the 93 settlement. The witnesses and the back story of Jordan Chandler are two different case studies. Just because someone knows the outline doesn’t mean they know the details and it’s the same case with the family and friends. Some people can answer questions in ways so that it can’t be twisted, others cannot.
LikeLike
@anniedomino
I understand what you are saying especially since Michael said on LWMJ that he settled to get on with his life.
LikeLike
@annie,
It’s really hard to know what really happened. Mesereau said in front of the judge that MJ settle the case not the insurance and it’s the insurance who paid.
LikeLike
Just a question. I am sure someone can clarify. I know that at some point court papers were filed stating that the settlement was paid by Michael’s insurance carrier, against his wishes. I cannot remember when and in which case. But neither Michael nor T-Mez, or anyone else has ever said this. They always say that Michael settled on the the (bad) advice of his people at the time.
How can this be? Is it confirmed that the insurance carrier DID settle against Michael’s wishes. Or was it just a sentence in a deposition?If so, can he be barred from saying so? Perhaps as a condition of the insurance carrying the cost?
I am always hesitant to use this point (that the insurance settled) in an argument because I cannot reconcile the court deposition with what various people – including Michael – have said.
LikeLike
@DF
Do you think Catherine could get an interview with them like she did with Joe Vogel? I would really like to know what type of promotion they are planning because if it is that great knowledge of it should go beyond fan websites.
LikeLike
@ David
Oh, OK.
Personally I don’t think the crying part ever happened and I think, like with every other kid, it was Jordan who wanted to sleep in Michael’s room. In fact, in this part of her testimony June admits it:
6 Q. Do you recall anyone watching an Exorcist
7 movie?
8 A. I was told Jordan and Michael watched an
9 Exorcist movie.
10 Q. All right. Did you ever object to Jordie
11 sleeping in Michaels room on that trip?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. And what did you say?
14 A. Jordie, when you come home, go to your bed.
15 Go to your own bed. Come to our bed, not to
16 Michaels bed.
17 He said, Mom, I want to stay there. And I
18 was very upset about that.
LikeLike
@ Suzy
I don’t think MJ cried and pouted as Sneddon said he did, but June did confront him about Jordan sleeping in his room without her permission, and Sneddon tried to use that to prejudice the jury, but Mesereau got June to go into more details about it.
LikeLike
@ David
” In fact, a crucial aspect of his cross examination of June was to get her to talk in more detail about how she confronted MJ at the hotel in 1993 when she found out that Jordan slept in her room without permission. Sneddon tried to spin it as MJ crying because he couldn’t be with Jordan, when in fact he was just offended that she would jump to the wrong conclusions about him.”
I wouldn’t take anything the Chandlers say at face value, so I’m not even sure this story about Michael crying is true at all.
LikeLike
@lcpledwards
I have my doubts about the scope of this documentary. Firstly it is a made for DVD; therefore, the only people that will be interested in purchasing it are fans and haters. If it is any good I hope they will at least get a network to pick it up; otherwise, it will only live in fandom.
Secondly I don’t like the title. I know Michael and Shmuley had their differences, but one of the things Shmuley said that I agree with is people should start seeing MJ as a human. Yes he was/is an icon, King of Pop, entrepreneur . . . . . I heard Don Lemon said on HLN that Michael Jackson was in some ways like a cartoon character, and to me that was disrespectful, but that is how the vast majority of people see him – as unreal. Fans, haters and disinterested already know of all the accolades and insults. Simply give us a title to infer about the man.
LikeLike
Thank you Teva, I just send them a message.
LikeLike
@Shelly
I have kindly asked the admins to forward it to you. You may have to send them a message so they will have your email.
LikeLike
@ Tatum Marie
If the fans (such as myself and the other admins) can research the facts on our time, for free, and with no financial motivation, than certainly David Gest, his producers, and everyone else involved with that project can do the same. You can’t have a documentary on MJ’s life without talking about the allegations, and based on the trailer, we know that they will be a central part of the documentary. I don’t expect them to go into the same level of detail that we get into here on this blog, but what I do expect (and hope for) is that it is detailed enough to win over skeptics, or people who are just clueless about the allegations in general (which, unfortunately, is a significant portion of the fan base).
I’ve seen numerous documentaries over the last 2 years that either gloss over the allegations, or make a lame attempt to explain them. One of the most egregious errors that I’ve seen repeatedly is how they don’t specify that MJ didn’t offer the Chandlers money, nor did he pay them. They say something like “MJ reached a settlement out of court…………”, and leave it like that. That doesn’t win over any skeptics at all. I would like them to specify that MJ’s insurance carrier forced him to settle against his wishes, instead of the usual “He got bad advice, and he doesn’t like going to court, and it was pocket change to him anyway….”. And as I said earlier, I truly hope that the Jackson family doesn’t refer to that fake confession either, because there is so much evidence out there that they shouldn’t have to rely on something that has already been debunked. I’d like to hear them talk about the JC Penney lawsuit, how Evan tried to sue Sony to get a record deal, how Evan tried to murder Jordan in 2005, how Evan committed suicide, how Diane Dimond lied about the love letters, etc. because those are facts that many fans and skeptics don’t know about. If this documentary isn’t going to educate people about things they don’t already know about, then what is the point of it?
Also, Mesereau knows everything about the 1993 case because, as Teva and Shelly already stated, he had to prepare for a possible cross examination of Jordan, Evan, and Ray Chandler, and he actually did cross examine June Chandler. In fact, a crucial aspect of his cross examination of June was to get her to talk in more detail about how she confronted MJ at the hotel in 1993 when she found out that Jordan slept in her room without permission. Sneddon tried to spin it as MJ crying because he couldn’t be with Jordan, when in fact he was just offended that she would jump to the wrong conclusions about him.
If anyone involved in the documentary has a “limited” knowledge of the allegations, it’s only because they’re too lazy to do the research! There is NO EXCUSE for them to not hit a grand slam with this documentary, and totally annihilate the allegations. Like I said, I don’t want this to be a 2 hour “love letter” about MJ, and it doesn’t appear to be, and I’m keeping my fingers crossed that I will be satisfied with it.
LikeLike
Sorry Tatum but Mesreau knows a lot more things about 1993 than we do.
For Teva I lost your email.
LikeLike
@TatumMarie
How could Mez’s knowledge of the 93 case be limited? He had to prepare cross examination of the witnesses Sneddon & Melvin brought in under the 1108 evidence. If anything I would think he knows more about that case than the fans.
LikeLike
This is like a quick teaser trailer I made once, no particular reason
LikeLike
lcpledwards
I agree, but at the same time these people don’t know in dept testimonies and evidence about the allegations, like the fans. All they know is that Michael was innocent. Tom Mesereau is awesome, but his knowledge of the 93 case is limited as well.
LikeLike
Even though Mesereau is in it, I still have my doubts, as I have yet to see a positive MJ documentary that ACCURATELY tells the facts of the allegations, especially regarding the 1993 settlement. I truly hope that David Gest and everyone behind this documentary thoroughly explains that MJ neither offered the Chandlers the settlement, nor did he pay it! I also hope that they play excerpt of Evan’s phonecall, and that some of the jurors from 2005 are included as well.
LikeLike
Between “Man Behind the Myth” and “Life of An Icon” perhaps we can begin to shift the public’s perception of who Michael Jackson really was and not what the media tried to force feed us.
LikeLike
David, I couldn’t believe it myself while I was watching it! By the way, in that Gest’s documentary you are talking about, Mesereau is being interviewed and he also talked in good terms about the documentary in a recent interview about Murray
LikeLike
Thanks Olga! I didn’t know it would be that great! It was amazingly detailed and well researched. I was skeptical of it at first because I thought it was “just another” fan video, similar to the dozens that are already on youtube, but I was very impressed!
Speaking of MJ documentaries, here is the preview for a documentary coming out on October 31st on DVD and Blu-Ray. It’s called “Michael Jackson: The Life of an Icon”:
It looks impressive, judging from that preview, and I’m glad that it will talk about the allegations in detail. I truly hope that they go through as much exculpatory evidence as possible, and give viewers the complete timeline, as well as a general summary of the testimonies from the Arvizos. If someone who either thinks MJ is guilty, or is utterly clueless, can watch this documentary and walk away thinking that he’s innocent, then this will be a complete success!
I also hope that neither Katherine, nor anyone else, tries to merely insinuate that MJ is innocent because of Evan Chandler’s suicide, or because of the fake “confession” of Jordan Chandler, which has already been debunked. In the past, they have clung to those as absolute proof of his innocence, instead of presenting the facts.
I’ll definitely be pre-ordering this and I’ll probably post a review as soon as I watch it!
LikeLike
Michael Jackson was a gift from God. This document is great.
LikeLike