Discrepancies between Jordan and June Chandler’s stories
They were always together
This post was prompted by the discrepancy found by a IMDB poster between Jordan Chandler’s interview with psychiatrist Dr. Richard Gardner (to whom he was sent for evaluation of his story on October 6, 1993) and June Chandler’s testimony at the 2005 Arvizo trial.
I decided to make a quick summary of several other contradictory things in the Chandlers’ documents. The package will include the so-called Jordan Chandler’s declaration or statement to Larry Feldman of December 28, 1993 (not a deposition, he never made one!) and a collection of lies told by Ray Chander at various times.
The list of discrepancies is far from complete but I decided not to put off until tomorrow what I can do today and write down what we have for the moment – we can return to the list and supplement it with new information any time. The list will include small and big discrepancies all brought together as you never know which of them will acquire importance in the future.
-
It starts with the description of which party, Michael Jackson or the Chandlers, wanted further communication with the other party after their first meeting in May 1992.
Ray Chandler says it was Michael Jackson who wanted it. He speaks about it in a conversation with Larry King, discussed here:
CHANDLER: That’s how they met. Michael took the boy’s phone number.
KING: Took it right there? The mother had no complaint about or stepfather had no complaint of the taking of the number by Jackson? There was no reason to think of anything?
CHANDLER: No, at that point it was very innocent. Or seemed innocent.
June Chandler said she gave to Michael Jordan’s number and allowed him to give him a call ( see the trial transcript please), though wife of an employee present during the conversation said June was almost forcing her son on Michael (“It was almost like she was forcing [the boy] on him,” Green recalls. “I think Michael thought he owed the boy something, and that’s when it all started.”).
At the 2005 trial where June Chandler testified she worded it as follows:
Q. …do you recall how long you were with Mr. Jackson and Jordan that day?
A. Briefly. Five minutes. Ten minutes.
Q. And did — was there any information exchanged between you and Mr. Jackson that day?
A. Yes.
Q. And what was that?
A. I said, “If you would like to see Jordie or if he could call you or if you’d like to speak to him, here is our number, and you can give him a call.”
Q. And you gave that to Mr. Jackson?
A. Yes, I did.
And Jordan Chandler said in his interview with Dr. Richard Gardner that it was his step-father David Schwartz who gave the telephone to Michael, imploring him to call him:
Jordan: My stepfather took him [Michael] outside to choose a car for him to use. And I guess when my stepfather was outside he said, ‘You don’t have to pay for the car if you just take Jordie’s number and give him a call’.
Dr. Gardner: “Why would your stepfather say that?”
Jordan: “Because my stepfather knows I was interested in Michael Jackson and his music.”
Dr. Gardner: “And this was in your presence?’
Jordan: “No. I was told this by my stepfather.”
Dr.Gardner: “So what happened then?”
Jordan: “Then he [Michael] left.”
Dr. Gardner: “Did he agree to a deal?”
Jordan: “Yeah.”
Dr. Gardner: “Okay, then what happened?”
Jordan: “I don’t remember how many days later, but he called me”.
So Michael called Jordan just because it was a deal with Jordan’s stepfather! He was simply fulfilling his promise to him! If he had only known what would come of it…
…. but the media preferred to show the two of them only
2. The duration of the phone calls between Michael and Jordan Chandler is also a big mystery.
Jordan’s mother says she was always present during all telephone calls between Michael and Jordan. Altogether there were 8 or 10 of them which lasted from 10 min to an hour and a half.
In Jordan’s statement the duration of telephone conversations between Michael and Jordan is extended up to three hours. He says that the first three-hour call was made from his father’s house, and this was repeated not just once.
However from June Chandler and other sources we know that Jordan stayed at his father’s house on very rare occasions, so repeated and prolonged conversations from Evan Chandler’s house are simply out of the question under such circumstances:
JORDAN’S STATEMENT:
“I received many telephone calls from Michael Jackson. On occasion they lasted as long as three hours.”
HIS MOTHER’S TESTIMONY:
Q. Were you present in the house during the time to observe the length of the conversations between your son and Mr.
Jackson?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. On more than one occasion?
A. Absolutely.
Q. So based upon your observations give us an estimate of the number of times, that you know of, that Mr. Jackson called your son Jordan.
A. I would say eight to ten times.
Q. Could you give the jury some idea of how long these conversations lasted?
A. It was from maybe ten minutes, to an hour, or an hour and a half.
3) Jordan says that on their first visit to Neverland Michael took him and Lily to Toys-R-Us to get anything they wanted. It sounds like they were alone there. And the mother says she was accompanying them.
JORDAN’S STATEMENT:
“One evening he took Lily and me to Toys-R-Us and we were allowed to get anything we wanted”.
HIS MOTHER:
“Lily and Jordie and Michael and I went. And they had fun. They were shopping and Michael bought lots of things for them. They picked out stuff, and they were showered with great presents from Toys-R-Us.
Michael always held Lily in his arms
4) Jordan says he stayed in Las Vegas for a week. His mother says it was a 2-3 days trip only.
Their difference of opinion is important as it shows that nothing extraordinary happened during that visit, though both claim that this is when the “sleepovers” started and this was accompanied by some “crying” and heated discussion.
Liars! They cannot even remember how long that notable trip lasted!
JORDAN’s statement:
In late March 93, my mother, Lily and I went to Las Vegas as a guest of Michael Jackson. We stayed at a large suite at the Mirage hotel about a week.
HIS MOTHER:
Q. And when you got to Las Vegas, where did you stay, what hotel?
A. The Mirage Hotel.
Q. Do you remember how long you stayed in Las Vegas on this occasion?
A. Two or three nights.
5) Their individual stories of starting the so-called “sleepovers” are a stark contrast to each other.
First they could not agree on how long the stay in Las Vegas lasted, and now they don’t know how the “sharing-the-bed” thing began (one would imagine that it is so important an issue that at least here they would agree, but they do not).
Jordan says the sleepover started one day during that “week” because he was scared to remain alone in this room after the Exorcist movie:
“We stayed at the Mirage hotel for a week (?). One night Michael Jackson and I watched the Exorcist in Michael Jackson’s bedroom. When the movie was over, I was scared. MJ suggested that I spend the night with him, which I did. Although we slept in the same bed there was no physical contact”.
As we know his mother says they stayed at the Mirage hotel for 3 days only. Her story starts with a statement which surprised even Tom Sneddon – on the first night at the hotel the four of them stayed together in one and the same room in their three-room suite (so their separate “sleepover” was ruled out on that night):
Q. Now, when you got to Las Vegas, did you have — obviously you had a room – in The Mirage.
A. Correct
Q. And who was in your room when you first got there? Who was staying in your room?
A. Jordan, myself, Lily and Michael.
Q. All in the same room?
A. Correct.
….but the media focused on Jordan instead
Now comes the point of “how it started”.
June Chandler says that the second night their sleeping arrangements changed. The short of her story:
Jordan and Michael were going to see a Cirque du Soleil performance. It was starting around 11 p.m. at night, but all of a sudden they returned to the hotel at 11.30 p.m. Michael was “crying” and asked “Why are you doing this? Why are you not allowing Jordan to be with me?” Their conversation lasted for some 30-40 minutes until after midnight. Then she says she “relented” and allowed his son to sleep in Michael’s bedroom for the first time.
To more or less reconcile the version Jordan related to Dr. Gardner (about the Exorcist) and his mother’s testimony, we have to assume that they watched the movie (if they did at all) after they came back to the hotel and had that tearful discussion with June Chandler. This is quite possible though given the duration of the film (approx.2:30) it should have ended at 3 in the morning and on the next day they were leaving Las Vegas.
Okay, but what does June Chandler say about the Exorcist movie at all?
She says that “she was told they had seen it”:
Q. Okay. At some point did you all see an Exorcist movie?
A. No.
Q. Do you recall anyone watching an Exorcist movie?
A. I was told Jordan and Michael watched an Exorcist movie.
All this is very nice of course, except one fact though – to Dr. Richard Gardner Jordan said that the notable soap-opera with “crying” and Michael’s remonstrances with his mother over the possibility to stay in his room for the first time took place after they had seen the movie, and Jordan had already stayed in Michael’s room, and June found out about this fact the next day only, and it was only then that all this “crying” actually took place:
Jordan: “After my mom and Kelly went to sleep, we went to watch the movie The Exorcist. We were in his room, in his bed. And when it was over I was scared, and he said, why don’t you just stay in here. And I did and nothing happened.”
Dr. Gardner: “When you say you stayed in the room – – “
Jordan: “Stayed in the same bed.”
Dr. Gardner: “Slept in the same bed?”
Jordan: “That’s right.”
Dr. Gardner: “When you slept in the same bed was there any physical contact?”
Jordan: “No.”
Dr. Gardner: “Was it a big bed?”
Jordan: “Yeah, I think so.”
Dr. Gardner: “So there was no physical contact. What were your thoughts when he said let’s sleep in the same bed?”
Jordan: “Well, I was scared, and I didn’t think anything was going to happen.”
Dr. Gardner: “You were scared of him or scared of the movie?”
Jordan: “The movie. So I said, ‘Okay, that’s fine.” It was like a regular slumber party.”
Dr. Gardner: “Okay, is there anything else to say about that event?”
Jordan: “Just simply that we talked about how they got the idea for The Exorcist. So the next morning, I was with my mom alone and – – ”
Dr. Gardner: “Did your mother know that you had slept in bed with him?”
Jordan: “Well, I’m getting to that. I said, ‘I slept with Michael in the same bed last night,’ and she said, ‘Well, just don’t do it again’.”
Dr. Gardner: “Did she speak to Michael at all?”
Jordan: “Well, I’ll get to that. So when I told Michael the news of the fact that she said don’t do that again – don’t sleep in the same bed – we were alone, Michael and I, and he burst out in tears and said, ‘She can’t set up barricades like that,’ and ‘Nothing could happen, it’s just a simple slumber party type thing,’ and ‘There’s nothing wrong with it’.”
Dr. Gardner: “He said, nothing will happen, there’s nothing wrong with it, and it’s like a slumber party?”
Jordan: “Right. And so, he came – – I don’t remember if I was crying or not but he decided that he had to confront my mom with his feelings about what she said. What he told me he said, ‘There’s nothing wrong with it, you should allow it because it’s simple and fun and you shouldn’t set up barricades.’ And he got my mom feeling so guilty that she just broke down in tears and decided that, okay, I believe you. And Michael somehow got her to agree that there would be no further questions asked. And so from that point on I was in his bed till the end of our relationship.”
Guys, let us make it clear.
In June Chandler’s version of the events they first had a tearful discussion and then Jordan was finally allowed to sleep in Michael’s bedroom. As regards the Exorcist June Chandler says she does not know anything about it, so we assume that they saw it exactly on that very night after she allowed a sleepover.
And in Jordan Chandler’s version they first saw the Exorcist, then his mother found it out, challenged Michael Jackson with her questions, he cried over it and it was after that that she also cried and “relented” to the whole thing.
Now thanks to the attentive reader we have also noticed that in the version of crying before watching the Exorcist Jordan was allegedly present at the tearful conversation, while in the version of crying after the Exorcist Jordan wasn’t present at the conversation as he was only “told by him” [Michael] about it.
Well, how do you like it?
6) Another interesting discrepancy is connected with the so-called “30 days in a row” which Michael Jackson allegedly spent in Jordan and June Chandler’s house.
Ray Chandler thunders over it:
Ray Chandler speaks to Larry King on November 25, 2003:http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0311/25/lkl.00.html
CHANDLER: And one other place, which I think, you know, is very important to understand that it also occurred in the boy’s home, where he was living with his then family. Michael slept in the boy’s bedroom behind closed doors for 30 nights in a row. Thirty nights in a row.
To answer the above let me refer you to what I’ve written about it earlier (I simply cannot go over all that absurdity again).
Though June Chandler did speak about some vague “30 days” she was quite definite that they were never in a row – she said Michael’s consecutive stays “could be a week or two at a time only:
Q. After you got back from Monaco, did Michael Jackson spend nights at your home?
A. Yes.
Q. Were the 30 nights you’ve described after you got back from Monaco?
A. No.
Q. How many nights after you got back from Monaco do you think Michael Jackson stayed at your home?
A. Oh, perhaps a week or two.
Let me explain this Monaco thing – Jordan claimed in his declaration of December 28, 1993 that it was in Monaco that ‘things got out of hand’ – which was at the beginning of May (May 9, 1993). Even our Diane Dimond as a big expert on Michael Jackson also said that “it” started in Monaco.
However according to June those ‘30 days’ were NOT AFTER Monaco. They were BEFORE it. Which means that even according to Jordan’s or Diane Dimond the period before Monaco was nothing special in the ‘relationship’ between Michael and Jordan.
A simple deduction of 30 days from the beginning of May takes us to the beginning of April which is approximately the moment named by June Chandler and Jordan as the time when Michael invited them to Las Vegas and where Jordan allegedly stayed in Michael’s room for the first time.
We have just heard from June Chandler that Michael spent full 30 days in June’s home after Las Vegas (late March) and before Monaco (May 9) with consecutive stays being no more than “a week or two at a time”. This pressing schedule didn’t prevent them from staying (at least overnight) at Neverland two or three times too and go to Disneyland in Florida on two occasions staying there for two or three days each time. Please note that between Florida and Monaco some two or three weeks elapsed according to June’s testimony within which period June Chandler saw Michael only “at times”.
Well, didn’t I tell you that it would be difficult to understand it?
I don’t understand it either and would be really grateful if someone could explain to me how it is possible to squeeze those 30 days in question as well as numerous other events (with all those breaks in between them) into the maximum of 40 days which passed between Las Vegas (the end of March) and Monaco (the beginning of May) – especially if you consider that besides the Chandlers Michael had other matters to attend to?
For example, Michael worked on “Whatsupwithu” video with Eddy Murphy at the time which was aired on April 11, and attended some South Central educational institutions within the Heal Los Angeles program on April 26 and went with Lisa-Maria Presley to an event organized by Jimmy Carter in Atlanta within the Heal the world project on May 5.
If you don’t believe me please check up June Chandler’s testimony for the timeline yourselves:
Q. Were there other visits to Neverland Valley Ranch after you came back from Las Vegas?
A. Yes, there were.
…Q. Do you remember on how many such occasions?
A. I would say two or three times.
Q. Now, were there occasions after you got back from Las Vegas — let me — where Mr. Jackson actually was invited to stay at your residence where you lived at this point in time?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, what city was it that you lived in at this time?
A. Santa Monica.
Q. We’re talking about 1993, in the spring, right?
A. Correct.
Q. And during this time, did Mr. Jackson ever spend the night at your residence?
A. Yes, he did.
Q. And do you recall on how many occasions Mr.Jackson spent the night at your residence?
A. I would say more than 30 times.
Q. And were some of those occasions on consecutive days or nights?
A. Yes.
Q. And how long consecutively do you think that that occurred?
A. Oh. It could be a week or two at a time.
Q. And when you went to Disney World with Mr. Jackson, who else went with you?
A. Jordan and Lily.
Q. Do you recall where you stayed?
A. I recall The Grand Floridian was one hotel. Q. And during the time that — do you remember how many days — did you go there on more than one occasion?
A. Yes, we did.
Q. How many occasions?
A. Twice.
Q. Do you — I think you answered this, but just in case, how many days did you think you were in Florida?
A. Oh, I don’t really remember, but it’s probably more than two nights. Two, three nights.
Q. And after you came back from Florida, do you recall where you went?
A. After that, I think the next trip was to Monaco.
Q. In between the time that you went to Florida and to Monaco, do you recall where you were — where you were personally staying?
A. No. I guess home.
Q. Do you remember how much time elapsed between the two trips?
A. Not really, no.
Q. Was it more than a month, more than a week? Obviously it was more than a day or so.
A. Yes. It was a couple — it could be three weeks.
Q. And during that time when you got back from Florida till the time that you left for Monaco, were you with Mr. Jackson?
A. At times.
7) The above remarkably inconsistent piece is also remarkable for June Chandler’s invitation to Michael to stay in their house right after the visit to Las Vegas.
“Mr. Jackson actually was invited to stay at your residence”.
What struck me about this statement was its passive form which was confirmed by June Chandler. But how can you be invited into anyone’s home if the master of the house does not invite you there? Wasn’t it no other but June Chandler who invited Michael to her home immediately after Las Vegas – which was exactly after that dubious Exorcist/du Soleil episode which supposedly worried her and over which she cried?
Recently I have found another proof that all talk about Michael Jackson being the initiator of spending time with Jordan Chandler was a complete fabrication. Surprisingly, but the discovery was made in the place least suitable for it – in one of the articles written by Maureen Orth:
She says,
” Pellicano isn’t bothered by admitting that Jackson slept with Jamie at Jamie’s house at least 30 days in a row, either. “They invited Michael to stay there. Michael didn’t crash their house. He didn’t say, ‘I want to stay here.’ They wanted him to stay there.”
According to Pellicano, there was no cause for alarm in Jackson’s having a friend like Jamie. “If Michael has no sexual preference one way or another, male or female, to my knowledge, and the parents of the children are allowing this, you have to look at it in the context—especially at the ranch. They go out and they play and they go on the rides and they have water fights and do all this stuff. And then they kind of like crash. Now, Michael is always fully dressed.” Even at Jamie’s house? “When [Jamie] went to bed, he had pajamas on, and sweats, and Michael had sweats and pajamas on. Michael goes to bed with his hat on. I’m serious.”
As regards the hat I can easily believe Pellicano’s words – Michael was associating with Jordan Chandler exactly after the first leg of the Dangerous tour about which we know (from Karen Faye) that Michael went there with his scalp not yet healed after the balloon stretching of his skin.
So going to bed in a hat was a very natural thing to do, considering that Michael still had a scar and a half-healed burned spot there. No need to laugh, I am being serious, guys.
8) Okay, and the last interesting discrepancy – or rather a notable omission – is connected with the description Jordan Chandler made of Michael’s genitalia.
The initial description was widely reported in the press and was originally found in Jordan’s first interview with Deborah Linden, the sheriff’s assistant – however it was completely missing from the statement he made to Larry Feldman several months later.
Have you ever asked yourself a question why that light splotch “which was the color of his face” and the “circumcised penis” described by Jordan in September 1993, disappeared from his story by the end of December 1993 when Jordan’s gave his account of the alleged molestation again?
What happened in between those two statements which contributed to the notable omission of so crucial an evidence?
Yes, yes, you are right – it was Michael Jackson’s strip search which didn’t support Jordan’s initial story and which made the media, the prosecution, Jordan Chandler and his lawyer Larry Feldman jointly forget by December 1993 the words Jordan said in September the same year.
It was only twelve years later (in 2005) that the description would reemerge in Tom Sneddon’s declaration, but this time it would come in a totally amended version – now he would not talk of “the light splotch the color of his face”, but would cite some indefinite dark spot found at the “relatively same location”, never mentioning the circumcision issue at all.
This is what Tom Sneddon considered a “match”.
Merry Christmas to all of you, guys!
* * *
Click here to see June Chandler’s testimony at the 2005 trial:
Vindicating Michael 
it’s strange that people keep focusing on Michael Jackson. Was he lied or not or guilty or not? Why don’t they question Tom Sneddon or Jordan’s parents or those who called themselves journalists? Are they saints who never lie? And Jordan already said he lied for his parents. Do you people really consider the media will never lie or the accusers and their camp would never lie? I think if the media could lied to Americans in order for the US to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, why not lie about Jackson’s case? It serves their interests, at least, I think people around the world are forced to look at this case(about from 2003 to 2006) because almost all media outlets are talking shit about Michael Jackson, and they didn’t go into Lebanon. But for me, I wasn’t interested in pop stars nor songs, I was more interested in ME and do the media tell you about how many children were killed during those wars in the ME? If you people really are fans of Michael Jackson. How about these songs released in that time: All in your name, What more can I give, We’ve had enough? Especially this song, We’ve had enough. Think about what’s happening in the ME, think about how many children were bombed and burned to death in each Zionist operation in Gaza? Think about what’s really happening in Gaza? That’s the largest concentration camp in the world, that’s holocaust, that’s genocide!!! Can you image a child being incinerated by phosphorous bomb? Do you know what is phosphorous bomb? You all know he died in June 25, 2009, but do you know how many children killed during Operation Cast Lead in 2009. Think about it, not private part of Michael Jackson. The man was innocent and proved not guilty in court. And boycott Sony because their involvement in recent Gaza war!!!
LikeLike
(GOD) KNOWS THE TRUTH :)))! If Michael Jackson LIE or NOT!!!
LikeLike
Sarah b, the Chandlers were concerned about money much more than about their son’s welfare, but it doesn’t matter. They took the money in a civil agreement while the criminal investigation was still going on. And Jordan Chandler was still cooperating with the police – at least for half a year after the settlement, until June 1994.
But the police had no evidence against Michael and that’s the main point. What Jordan said wasn’t corroborated by the photos of MJ’s genitalia and all the rest of the time the police were trying to find something else. In June Jordan finally refused to testify and the police lost their last and only witness. The case was closed in September 1994 but Tom Sneddon promised to reopen it if anything else came up.
The next year, as far as I remember, at the DA’s request the legislators changed the law. Now it allowed the prosecution to introduce evidence without the minor witness, but even then Tom Sneddon didn’t do a thing as he still had nothing to renew the case with – there was no evidence against Michael.
This is why all that Tom Sneddon’s bravado about “the photos matching Jordan’s description” is a big, VERY BIG lie.
He had a chance to introduce those photos without Jordan’s participation (while he was not of age) but never used it. When Jordan became a grown-up the prosecution lost this chance as the law covered only minors, while grown-ups are obliged to come to court and testify personally in case they accuse someone of a crime against themselves.
As far as I remember the right of the defendant to challenge his accuser in court is defined by the 6th Amendment to the US constitution and the only exception to it is made for allegedly molested children – to spare them from the trauma of testifying.
But Jordan, as you know, refused to testify against Michael again, this time as a grown-up. To the police who approached him in 2004 he somewhat mysteriously said that “he had done his part” and said he would sue them if they insisted on his testimony.
For more details please read this post : https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/jackson-case-what-the-public-didnt-hear/
It is called “What the public didn’t hear” and contains 12 unknown facts about Jordan’s case.
LikeLike
hmm, that does make a lot of sense, but again, is it at any way possible that jordie was/thought he was in love with mj and vice versa and that’s why he was always angry with his father and emancipated himself from him and he didn’t come back to testify in 2005? because he felt he betrayed the man he loved or something?
LikeLike
@sarah b:
MJ WAS innocent, there is no question about it. You just have to realize that Evan Chandler wanted money FIRST – and when he didn’t get it, the accusations came. Please pay attention to the chronological order!
If you want to know the whole story you just have to take the time to read everything about the Chandler case on this blog. The whole truth is here, it is just necessary to invest the time to read everything. I know it’s time-consuming, but we all had to do this research and spend a lot of time with reading and studying. It’s the only way to find out yourself what you want to know, without prejudice and without having the media propaganda in mind.
LikeLike
This brings us back to the suicide pic. I stand By my opinion that it was drawn By Jordan and misinterpreted By his father.-Evan threatens to push Michael to death and destructung.. Jordan stands on the roof shouting “dont do it” ot was it” NO”.Jordan was only 14 and By that age not yet gripped By money-hunger as he expressses it in an interview.
LikeLike
i know this probably seems like a bizarre, poorly researched question, but is it at all possible that evan and his family WERE money hungry and amoral people who cared more about money than there own son’s welfare AND mj was not innocent? like, is it possible what jordan said happened did happen, but his family was more concerned with the money than his well being so that’s why they took the money and didn’t press further charges? i’m not trying to be rude at all, i just want to know the whole story.
LikeLike
“Could you re-upload the transcript of the testimony?” -sizzling
To my big surprise I managed to add the testimony to this post. The link has been added to the end of the text. Frankly it’s only now that I’ve learned how to do it. Thank you.
LikeLike
Could you re-upload the transcript of the testimony?
LikeLike
footage of mj in 93 in vegas with JC that supposedly just came out .
Dont know if that is true and if so why it would come out now..
but this would be at the Mirage and it looks like they are at the circus show.
I dont see anything other then two people hanging out, but this would seem to be the night the Chandlers would point to ..the trip to vegas ..pft
LikeLike
@nan the part about the jewelry and private jets that june remebered was that in the post above I am trying to remmeber if i read it there (i looked again i didnt see it) or if it was your comment or somewhere else as he whole questioning during the trial is not posted above right??? i am very curious if MJ was having an affair with June in the bashir documantary he said he only buys jewelry for girls or women he really likes and you said he left jewelry on her pillow when he was at her house… Jewelry is a very personal gift s well and to leave on a pillow correct me if i am wrong and if they did have a relationship why didnt this ever come out in the trial???
LikeLike
I was reading that too because of all that I have seen on TV I don’t think I have ever seen a handwritten statement by Jordan. What I did see that were supposedly from Jordan were in the one Mockumentary of either Bashirs second hit piece or the one by Jacques Perrault. They tried to make it appear as if it were written but it would not have been written by Jordan because when you give a statement to the police it is written down and then you sign it.Then of course is the all important fact that Jordan was not old enough to legally sign anything whether it was a statement to the police or a settlement contract.You must be 18 years of age to sign in California or if you testify in court at the age of 14 you can be held responsible for perjury of perjury is found. Those facts are in the 2005 trial testimony of Davelin Arvizo and Jason Francia.
LikeLike
“Can you help me find a copy of Jordan Chandler’s handwritten statement? I saw a clip of it on a TV show and really want to see it in it’s entirety.”
EmJay, what an intriguing question! In my almost 3 years of studying the Chandler’s case I have never seen any Jordan’s handwritten statement! What did they show to you on TV I wonder? What did they say about that paper?
Was it Linden’s affidavit – the paper made as a result of Jordan’s inverview with Deborah Linden of the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s office on the eve of MJ’s strip search? But Linden’s affidavit is called “Linden’s” because it was a summary made by her as a result of that interview.
Affidavit or a statement is not a deposition (deposition is done in the presence of lawyers from both sides and considered to be equal to a testimony in court. It is fixed in the form of a transcript). A statement is only a summary of the alleged witness’s words made by some official. All this paper has is a signature of such “witness”.
The same goes for the statement Jordan Chandler made to Larry Feldman on December 28, 1993. Again it was a summary of what Jordan said, only it didn’t contain any descriptions which were allegedly made to Deborah Linden. Descriptions (of MJ’s genitalia) could have been compared with the photos and this made Jordan’s statement to Larry Feldman extremely vulnerable and this is why they omitted all that.
So it would be very interesting to know what they showed to you on TV. Could you elaborate on it please?
LikeLike
Can you help me find a copy of Jordan Chandler’s handwritten statement? I saw a clip of it on a TV show and really want to see it in it’s entirety. Thanks much!
LikeLike
June Chandler may have been wrong about the amount of time between meeting MJ and him calling,but I do think that just shows she didnt believe it was an important detail to remember because she knew it was B.S.
I think I would remember that he had called in a few days as opposed to confusing it with a few months if this was the way a predator supposedly infiltrated my family..
That I would not forget..
As pointed out, she remembered hotels . private jets , the Cartier love bracelet, she had admired , but not specifically asked for, and that Jordan and Michael had gone and bought it for her.,the boutique gift certificate was Fred Segal for 7 grand.., that she bought clothes with..
Bought a couple of purses with MJ charge card in Monaco.
Remembered specifically other jewelry he had left for her on her bed at her house..
But doesnt know that Robert Shapiro , who is famous in the states, was at Larry Feldmans office ..
How transparent..
Even the prosecutors thinking that it is a big deal that the bracelet is from Cartiers..What kind of jewelry stores do they think are at casinos?
I remember reading Sneddons opening statement and I think the first thing out of his mouth was MJ had financial problems..He then went on to talk about the SWANKY Turnberry Inn..
Does he think MJ stays at the motel 6 and buys his jewelry at Walmart?
He spent 250 thousand on a bauble for Elizabeth Taylor so she would be his date at Madison Square Garden..
These prosecutors were just crazy,and it had to have had something to do with putting MJ in his place because he is black…What other reason could these people have for going to these lengths..
LikeLike
“It’s possible that she had memory problems. She was speaking about things which happened 12 years before.”
I’ve checked up other sources (if Victor Gutierrez can be considered a “source”) and VG says that Michael did call a week later. So it was June who didn’t remember it correctly.
But it would be a huge underestimation to think that her memory loss is not of importance. It can very well tell a story of its own. This woman remembers perfectly well the names of the hotels they stayed at (the Mirage, the Rega Royal Hotel, the Grand Floridian), the fact that they flew by Steve Wynn’s and Sony’s jets and that Michael had an endorsement deal with PepsiCo and had a share in the Beatles catalog – but she doesn’t remember the simplest things about the alleged story of Jordan’s molestation? Whether Michael called immediately or two months later?
So what was important to her she did remember and what she considered unimportant she didn’t? Doesn’t this alone show that she wasn’t emotionally involved in all that “molestation” story and probably never believed it? She was just answering those questions mechanically.
By the way Jordan answered Dr. Gardner’s questions in an interview in the same mechanical manner, showing no emotional involvement at all. The only time he showed real emotion was when Dr. Gardner asked him when and why he stopped masturbating after he allegedly did it with MJ. Jordan suddenly began talking in so low a voice that Dr. Gardner made a break in the interview.
So Jordan was cold as a fish when he described the horrendous pictures of his “molestation” but grew emotional only when the doctor asked him about what he really cared about? Isn’t it telling the whole story?
And Jordan also had a massive loss of memory – in October 1993, or two months after the alleged molestation Jordan didn’t remember when was what, and recalled it only after remembering about the book (which was probably the only real thing in the whole invention):
(from Jordan Chandler’s interview with Dr. Richard Gardner, October 6, 1993)
LikeLike
It’s possible that she had memory problems. She was speaking about things which happened 12 years before.
LikeLike
I meant to say no wonder Jordan was NOT EVER going to go to court.There are so many GLARING holes in his story, and the sad and horrible thing is if there was a half way normal District Atty involved, Evan Chandler would be behind bars and the Arviso people never would have happened..
I have to say that the more info I get , the more impressed I am with MJ resilience..To have all this garbage thrown at you and have people ignore the exculpatory stuff must have been a tremendous burden to carry..
LikeLike
I was just rereading June Chandler testimony yesterday and honestly, without the boogeyman spin , she really didnt have anything to say , other then she was trying to hook her family up with MJ.
This whole thing is so sickening when you look at it from an objective point of view.
Anyway i noticed Sneddon asked her this
Q. Did — to your knowledge, did Mr. Jackson
21 ever call your son Jordan?
22 A. Yes, he did.
23 Q. And do you recall, for the ladies and
24 gentlemen of the jury, approximately what the time
25 span was from the incident that occurred at your
26 ex-husband’s place of business to the time that Mr.
27 Jackson actually called your son?
28 A. To the best of my recollection, it could 5604
1 have been a month or two after our first meeting
2 with Michael Jackson at Rent-A-Wreck.
—————————————————-
But up the top of this article it says when Jordan talked to Dr Gardner, MJ called in a matter of DAYS>
That is a huge discrepency
No wonder Jordan showing up at court , come hell or high water,
LikeLike
June Chandler supposedly invited a predator into her childs life , which led to headline news all over the world , she hasnt seen her child in years due to this terrible event …
And she is a little fuzzy on the details??
Wouldnt these details be on your mind every single day of your life ?
Wouldnt you think about it every day when your child is no longer a part of your life due to these events?
Cant remember exactly how many times her child was alone with this supposed monster.,?.
Doesnt know who Robert Shapiro is and that he was advising them in case of a criminal case because MJ was accusing them of extortion…
But as i recall does remember getting on steve wynns private jet and using MJ charge card to buy a few purses ..she got some jewelry that MJ and Jordy picked up..Stuff like that ??
She walked into court looking well rested and poised, because she was more concerned with how she looked then confronting the person who supposedly took her childs innocence??
She knew he didnt do anything to her kid ..
She knew Evan was the monster , but hey she took that settlement so she better try her best to play the victim..
Larry Feldman, who is a shark, was pleading a faulty memory under cross examination by Tom Mesereau too…
Jordans statement was suspiciously released to the press,, this supposedly mirrors his case from the 90s and this big shot top tier lawyer cant recall things Mesereau is asking him about the case,,??
And he is one of the most successful lawyers around?
June Chandler says she thought it was MJ idea to give the parents money for a confidentiality agreement ..
Feldman thinks it was jordys.
That always make me laugh ..how it was Jordy suing mj ..
I guess he hopped on his skateboard and went to find a lawyer…
This whole thing is so obvious..
Feldman building a molestation case against mj , being enabled by an ambitious ,self righteous D.A…who overlooks times lines changing , the character of accusors , works around the lies they get bagged telling..
Francia saw this too and acted on it .
Even as transparent as the Arvizo were , Feldman still couldnt resist because it was like taking candy from a baby as long as Sneddon was running the show,
I think if somebody told Sneddon they were molested byt MJ yesterday , he would find a way to convince himself it must be true..
BTW,,in MJ home movies , Elizabeth surprised him in 93 by decorating for Christmas and woke him up..He came out with his hat on so I wouldnt be surprised if he slept with his hat on..
I also wouldnt be surprised a wealthy man as shy as he was with lupus, vitiligo and a burnt scalp would have a buzzer to know if a maid is approaching , or even an intruder,,
Sneddon is a moron.
LikeLike
Hmm am Wondering if Pellicano had found out MJ was doing things far worser than molesting them then why didnt he F*ck him over! like he said.
And i cant think of anything far more worse than molestation! other than Murderr
LikeLike
“Pellicano’s perspective is that he wanted to fight the charges and the lawsuit he was adamant about it so much so that he quit when Johnnie Cochran was brought in to begin arbitration”
Lynette, you are absolutely right. I even remember reading somewhere that Pellicano was outraged by the new lawyers’ plan to make a settlement, but I cannot find the link. What I have found is the article where Pellicano insists that the decision to leave is his only and he is still absolutely sure that Michael is innocent:
“I swear on my children this decision was not Michael Jackson’s,” Pellicano said in an interview Tuesday. “It was my sole decision. If I wanted to, I could be working on this case today.”
In the interview Tuesday, Pellicano continued to stand behind Jackson.
“In no way, shape or form does (my resignation) indicate that Michael Jackson is guilty,” Pellicano said. “Michael Jackson is not guilty, and all the things I said in the past I reaffirm.”
http://articles.latimes.com/1993-12-22/local/me-4447_1_michael-jackson
LikeLike
Let me try that link again: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2011/08/anthony-pellicano-talks-murdoch-michael-jackson-and-mafia/40957/
LikeLike
@vindicatemj @lynande51 Thanks for your input. I guess I like my sources to be more impeccable than Pellicano. According to this link, it probably IS mostly a sound byte for some future memoir he’s hoping to sell. all about “if you want to know more, read my coming memoir. What I liked best about the link is the comments under the article. They set me straight. http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2011/08/anthony-pellicano-talks-murdoch-michael-jackson-and-mafia/409
LikeLike
The thing that I thought about with Pellicano if he said that makes sense if you look at it from his perspective. His perspective is that he wanted to fight the charges and the lawsuit he was adamant about it so much so that he quit when Johnnie Cochran was brought in to begin arbitration. He even said in one article that if you buy the story that there was no extortion he had some swamp land to sell you. That is an American term for selling someone something useless and if you buy it your more than gullible you are stupid.
I am sure he does see the settlement as worse when you consider what Jordan and every other boy went through because of giving in to the demands of Evan Chandler. For Michael because of what Johnnie Cochran told him he seemed to have no choice but to get the civil case out of the way because the police were using the depositions of the ones that they found to investigate the criminal case. How do you think they came up with the same names that Chandler/ Gutierrez did? If they only knew just who it was that they had been listening too…I wonder what they would say then. I know that some people think we are using Gutierrez’ book for information and we are. We are using it to prove what he is and to prove that he was in on the Chandler extortion from the very beginning. Who else do you think gave Evan the idea that this was going on before Jordan and Michael had slept in the same room.
To Pellicano that settlement was just letting that family get away with a crime and what it did to Jordan and the other boys that were named by him to the police.
LikeLike
“It could only have been a weekend thing anyway so it probably was 2-3 days because Jordan never missed any school according to them. I think the thing is that when Evan coached him he wasn’t really aware and just said a week. I am going to post a link to a blog I found today under the appropriate post about Michael Jackson’s enemies being one big happy family.”
Great, Lynette. So we approached the same thing from two different angles but came to the same conclusion – out of the two of them it was Jordan Chandler who was lying (to Dr. Gardner).
LikeLike
“Honestly, I don’t believe it’s a big deal. She testified about something that happened 12 years earlier, it could be just a memory problem.”
I totally disagree – it IS a very big deal and exactly because of the memory problem! When people are emotionally involved in something (and cry, quarrel or argue over the issues sensitive to them) they do remember things and their loss of memory over it is the best test for their lies and slander!
In fact our memory keeps best only the emotionally-colored events (my mother is Professor of Psychology who studied emotions all her life, so I do know).
Why do you never forget the emotionally colored events? Because these events are meaningful to you and your emotions show it (when your emotions are not involved you are indifferent to the subject, so you easily forget). And if something is really meaningful to you, you will NEVER forget it and how long it lasted.
One and the same event witnessed by two people may be neutral for one person and emotionally strong for another one – so one will forget it the next minute while the other will remember it for the rest of his life.
Sorry for the rude but clear example – if you were raped will you forget the event and how long it lasted? You can fall into the opposite condition of course (that of amnesia which is a defense mechanism of the brain to temporarily save you from your trauma), but that is a different story, not related to our case.
So it is the fact that neither June, nor Jordan remembers clearly those days – which as they say were colored for them by tears, arguments, worries, etc. – it most probably means that nothing of it ever happened at all. Neither of them was emotionally involved – and this means nothing special happened on those days. Otherwise both would have given a perfect account of that visit ten, twenty, thirty years later.
This is what psychologists always evaluate during their interviews with alleged victims. Judging by the cold, unemotional and bored way Jordan Chandler related the whole thing to Dr. Richard Gardner, who was the best expert on false child-abuse charges, the doctor must have made a NEGATIVE conclusion about Jordan’s story and said that it was a lie.
Did it ever cross your mind that we had never heard of Dr. Gardner’s report? Moreover, Larry Feldman had to approach another doctor, Dr. Katz after seeing Dr. Gardner? Because he was most probably dissatisfied with the first doctor’s conclusion?
By the way June Chandler was sure that they were in Las Vegas for 3 days only, and that Jordan spent in Michael’s room two nights. And this means that it was probably Jordan Chandler who was lying to Dr. Gardner.
20 Q. Did you at some point in time relent and
21 allow your son to sleep with Michael Jackson in his
22 bedroom?
23 A. Yes, I did.
24 Q. And was it after that discussion on that
25 night?
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. Is that the first occasion?
28 A. Correct. 5620
1 Q. When you were in Las Vegas, do you remember
2 how many of the nights in Las Vegas that your son
3 Jordan slept with the defendant, Michael Jackson, in
4 Michael Jackson’s room?
5 A. I would say two occasions.
LikeLike
Merry Christmas everyone!!
LikeLike
“Pellicano has lost all credibility after the prison interview, during which he said Michael did something far worse to little boys than pedophilia.”
OMG Kris, do you still believe what the media says about the people who knew Michael and speak about him? Isn’t it one hundred percent clear to you that they are simply trying to compromise everyone who says anything good about Michael?
There CANNOT be anything worse than ped-lia – so even if Pellicano said that it must have been a joke, or a pun or whatever.
Have a great holiday and stop listening to every media lie!
* * *
And please remember that on the very same day the Daily Beast published the story by some Pelisek journalist (http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/08/07/hollywood-phone-hacker-anthony-pellicano-breaks-his-silence.html), they also posted a chart with a comment saying that Pellicano “found damning information” about the family of Michael Jackson’s accuser in the 1993 case.
So why do you choose to believe Pelisek’s information and disbelieve the opposite information presented by the same Daily Beast and on the same day?
LikeLike
It could only have been a weekend thing anyway so it probably was 2-3 days because Jordan never missed any school according to them. I think the thing is that when Evan coached him he wasn’t really aware and just said a week. I am going to post a link to a blog I found today under the appropriate post about Michael Jackson’s enemies being one big happy family.
LikeLike
“Jordan says he stayed in Las Vegas for a week. His mother says it was a 2-3 days trip only.”
Honestly, I don’t believe it’s a big deal. She testified about something that happened 12 years earlier, it could be just a memory problem.
LikeLike
Thanks for this posting, and Merry Christmas to you, too. Although I don’t for one minute think Michael was guilty of anything, it seems to me Pellicano has lost all credibility after the prison interview, during which he said Michael did something far worse to little boys than pedophilia. Considering the major role he played in 1993, I’ve been wondering ever since what possessed him to rip the reputation of someone whose side he seemed to have been so firmly on, someone who had just died. I’m still shocked by it, actually, and hope you can help me figure it out. Maybe he didn’t think he got paid enough for his detective work? Or maybe he got so twisted and filled with hate after being in prison for a while that he wanted to lash out at whoever he could? It just makes no sense at all, and it is a very vague and ugly thing for him to have said.
LikeLike
Merry Christmas to everyone.
LikeLike
Merry Xmas to you VMJ.
LikeLike
Dear Michael’s supporters, Merry Christmas to all of you!
LikeLike