Skip to content

Aphrodite Jones’ VEHEMENT Defense of Michael Jackson in 2010

February 16, 2012

I recently sent my friend and MJ vindication partner LunaJo67 three interviews of journalist and Michael Jackson supporter Aphrodite Jones that she conducted in April 28th, June 19th, and June 23rd, 2010.  I wanted to put them all in a single post so that fans could easily find them and listen to them all in one place. (In addition to those three interviews, she has uploaded almost 40 of my videos to her Youtube account, and has named them her “Vindicate MJ” playlist, in addition to her hundreds of other pro-MJ videos!)

Before I post the interviews in their entirety, I want to focus on a bombshell statement that Aphrodite said in her first interview on April 28th, and I called in and asked her to elaborate on in her second interview on June 19th.  In the video below, you hear her discuss the fact that Martin Bashir instructed Gavin Arvizo to place his head on MJ’s shoulder, and hold his hand, just prior to shooting what would be the most controversial scene of the entire documentary. (You can read this post for information on how Bashir tricked MJ into trusting him to portray him honestly, and this post for a rebuttal to Bashir’s second anti-MJ hit piece that aired in 2005.)

MJ was certainly thinking to himself “Why is this kid holding my hand and putting his head on my shoulder?”

I thought that it was very important to highlight this first because there are many, many fans who don’t know why on Earth MJ would hold hands with Gavin like that, as it certainly helped Bashir paint MJ as a child abuser in the court of public opinion. When Raven Woods, the author of the All For Love blog, was at the MJ Fanvention in August 2010, she said that there was an audible gasp from the audience of fans who listened to Aphrodite relay this information to them, and that reaction is very typical from fans who hear that for the first time, including me!

Here is an excerpt from Raven’s interview with Aphrodite Jones, in which Jones confirmed that it was Jackson’s attorneys Thomas Mesereau and Brian Oxman who told her that Bashir told Gavin to place his head on Jackson’s shoulder and hold Jackson’s hand:

One of the questions I had was where she had gotten the information that Martin Bashir had intentionally set up the scene in his documentary of Gavin holding Michael’s hand and laying his head on his shoulder.

“Where did you hear that?” I asked.

“That came from two of the attorneys who represented him {Michael}. (Later, in her Q&A, she added their names with an aside wink-”Thomas Mesereau and Brian Oxman”).

“Yes, from what I heard, Martin Bashir was saying to Gavin, ‘Why don’t you lay your head on his shoulder, blah blah blah, and Michael said, ‘I hardly knew this kid.’ He hadn’t seen him in two years!”

Before I get to the rest of her interviews, I want to show you an promotional video that she aired in 2010 for her documentary that was based on her incredible book “Michael Jackson Conspiracy”, and for the fans who have not read it yet, I’m happy to say that it is back in print and available on Amazon and other book sellers!

Here is the complete interview with Aphrodite from April 28th, 2010:

Here is the complete interview from June 19th, 2010:

Here is the complete interview from June 23rd, 2010:

And finally, here is an interview she did in 2009 with Debbie Kunesh, the owner of the “Reflections On The Dance” blog.

29 Comments leave one →
  1. cawobeth permalink
    February 16, 2012 6:22 am

    thumbs up !!
    We cannot afford to take all of Aphrodite’s vindication work for granted.
    BTW, she’s reachable and appreciates support.

    She’ s a busy gal, and these interviews go back a ways, but she still cares about MJ vindication.

    Here are the excerpts to her original book, “Michael Jackson Conspiracy”-

    Click to access 070828_MichaelJacksonConspiracy_Sharpton_Website_Chapters%2008_07_AJ.pdf

    and the beat goes on for Michael…


  2. February 16, 2012 12:03 pm

    I was not surprised. if Michael was really trying to cause some involvement with that boy, his body language would have been WAY different. For one thing, he would be “leaning” toward to boy….not sitting straight up. Also, the boy would not have his head placed on Michael’s shoulder in such a strange way. The people who saw that picture knew that. Think of it as a love scene (thats what they tried to turn it into). If that was a love scene the director would have shouted :CUT” immediately. They are both clearly uncomfortable. That scene was not well played at all. Meanwhile, the boy has a look on his face that says, “am I doing this right?”. He is very unsteady. None of the movie directors who had been friends with Michael came forth…they knew it was a fake scene. Years ago, I had a part in the movie “The Spook That Sat By The Door”. I was afraid of the guy I was playing the scene with, I was supposed to be close to him, but I was backing away. 4 different directors showed me what I was doing….it was that OBVIOUS!!! I was able to see it. I also see the physical and emotional distance between Michael and Gavin. I believe Michael was squeezing the boy’s hand out of discomfort. People who have the feelings that they claim Michael had for the boy rarely touch each other that way. The have open palm hands… not at all like what is in that picture. They do not squeeze the other persons hand until their knuckles are white. Anytime you see someone white knuckling it….they are under severe stress. Michael did not want to do that shot. He did it because he loved us, and he was willing to walk an extra mile to get our respect back. I hope he came to know how deeply we love him before he left…


  3. nan permalink
    February 16, 2012 9:35 pm

    First off..,I think a lot of people that didnt follow the trial think that 2005 case was simply a molestation charge and that benefits some people, who would like others , …. ,to think that way, so they can compare it to O.J. charge , guilty or not guilty.
    People need to understand that there were 14 counts , stacked one on top of another , in order to build a fraudulent case , and patch up the exculpatory evidence..
    And that on top of the not guilty verdicts , this conservative jury made a point of having a note from them read in open court to the world, that they were confident in those verdicts..
    I think that is important ..not even a misdemeanor..That in itself , is a comment on Tom Sneddon ..that he even brought this case at all.
    And that should give people pause , to consider the mentality that was going on in the 90s….
    Mr Sneddon should be the one scrutinized, not Mr Jackson.
    His actions are the ones that should be under the microscope…

    One thing that I wish Ms Jones would make a point of mentioning in interviews is that Arvizos , contacted civil atty s all the while still going to Neverland.
    Evan , as well , went to civil attys, before they made those accusations..
    And all three families, Chandlers, Francia,and Arvizos have Larry Feldman in common…
    There is never an accusation outside Sneddons jurisdiction , and they all involve Larry Feldman,in some way….. a very brilliant CIVIL atty ….. , and the same tabloid reporter, Ms Dimond..
    I dont know if Feldman is just that powerful atty , but many times , I see his name left out of the equation,,and I think he is very important because he is the one that uses the pliable Tom Sneddon and his govt authority to squeeze a settlement out of MJ for the Chandlers,.
    Just as Dimond seemed to be an arm of the prosecution , Sneddon seems to be an arm of Larry Feldmans client..
    ..Again we see Feldman involved in the Francia matter and AGAIN , doing pro bono work for the Arvizo family , with the contingency fees all worked out, before the criminal trial has gone forward……, as much as Zonen tries to protest the family isnt looking for money….clearly they are.
    Civil attys are there for money only…and the majority of people , even skeptical people , understand the motivations of civil attys..

    I wish Ms Jones would talk more about the anatomy of civil lawyers building a molestation case ..and that might help people understand the reasons for the settlements in the 90s..

    I learned so much from Ms Jones and the media in her book.I understand her passionate defense of MJ becasue it was so completely unjust , but I think, myself included, we have to try and remain unemotional , and deal in facts…or you run the risk of being dismissed as just another illogical fan..


  4. nan permalink
    February 16, 2012 9:46 pm

    Rather I should say ..the accusations come in L.A. and Santa Barbara in Ca. in the 90s , still involving Feldman, and Dimond..It is always in the same vicinity , with same players..
    As far as people rewriting history, frankly I think it is ridiculous , but that is what they would have to do because history and facts prove Mj innocent of everything..
    The positive thing coming about now is that just like before when it made people money to trash Mj , it is going to make people money to vindicate him.
    Michale is getting mainstream popular these days…And the story of Tom Sneddon is too good for people to leave swept under the carpet..
    There will be money to be made in exposing what he did to MJ as well.


  5. Jovana permalink
    February 17, 2012 6:36 am

    Why am I not surprised. Bashir is a snake, you can see it in his eyes.


  6. February 17, 2012 8:10 am

    cawobeth said:

    “We cannot afford to take all of Aphrodite’s vindication work for granted.
    BTW, she’s reachable and appreciates support.”

    But we have to a degree, her program on Michael on the Discovery Network was the least watched of all of her investigative programs. Why have we not asked what happened to Patrick Traecy’s interview now that the trial is over? She spoke and wrote when it was very unpopular for a journalist to do so. She paid the price for telling the truth Who knows if she had gone the way of NG & JVM she might have her own show today, be very comfortably situated financially.

    Thanks for the timely reminder.


  7. February 17, 2012 8:33 am

    I agree,
    I watched the interview with Diane Dimond and Michael’s bodyguard where she claims that the prosecution introduced too many conspiracy theories and that’s why she believed they lost. If she had any sense she would realize that the courts charged Michael with kidnapping and conspiracy so the jury could have found him innocent of those charges but guilty of molestation. She’s such a liar and fraud.


  8. lynande51 permalink
    February 17, 2012 9:28 am

    I read an article today that said that one of the investigators either Robel, Zellis or Klapakis testified that he did not know until five months into the investigation that the Arvizos had no less that 5 different tapes or videos out where they praise Michael. Well they started investigating in June of 2003 so that would make it November of 2003 when they found all that exculpatory evidence in the search of Brad Millers office and Hamid Moslehi’s house. And yet they still went ahead and created that whole case around thin air. They knew it was a lie and it was the prosecutors office and the lead investigators that were committing the crime of conspiracy in my book.


  9. lynande51 permalink
    February 17, 2012 9:32 am

    Poor Michael, I always said that he looked like he wanted out of that picture. That was shot in the beginning stages of the documentary and yet when it was put together it ended up at the end of the program. Why was it done that way? To leave a very bad lasting impression that’s why and now everyone knows that I wasn’t kidding when I said Bashir staged it to look the way he wanted it to look.


  10. February 17, 2012 12:21 pm

    “Martin Bashir instructed Gavin Arvizo to place his head on MJ’s shoulder, and hold his hand, just prior to shooting what would be the most controversial scene of the entire documentary.”
    Maybe I missed it in the interview, but does Aphrodite mention where she got this information from? I dont remember reading it in her book or any court transcripts. Was it part of someone’s testimony? I only ask because I want to be able to backup anything that further proves Michael was setup.


  11. shelly permalink
    February 17, 2012 1:17 pm

    I think they only learned about the rebuttal video in January 2004.


  12. February 17, 2012 3:46 pm

    I totally agree with catherinemgross re the bodylanguage on that pic. from the Bashir interview.I have seen it before on mjj.777, on the topic of media angles.Could not find it anymore.On that site the pic. included the hands grasp and both faces.Michael sits upright and possibly his face slightly turned away fron Gavins as are his eyes.
    Gavins body looks slumped agaist Michaels while his gaze is steady and fixed looking forward.On the other pic. I saw it seemed that Michaels face was slightly turned away from Gavins.Now I am not sure if these 2 pics. are identical or not.


  13. lynande51 permalink
    February 17, 2012 7:35 pm

    Maybe I missed it in the interview, but does Aphrodite mention where she got this information from? I dont remember reading it in her book or any court transcripts. Was it part of someone’s testimony? I only ask because I want to be able to backup anything that further proves Michael was setup.

    I don’t know about testimony but Aphrodite Jones did say that she had spoken to people that were there and confirmed that was that happened. She is an investigative journalist so she would have interviewed others to find out how the whole Bashir thing happened.


  14. lynande51 permalink
    February 17, 2012 8:37 pm

    Shelly I think you might be right about actually viewing those videos and hearing the tapes in January. They were seized during the searches of Hamid’s house and Brad Miller’s office but they were immediately placed under a special master due to attorney cllient priviledge. They police and prosecution first got to see and hear them when they wee reviewed by the judge for admission and exemption to the attorney client priviledge. That was on January 24th, 2004. Then after finding this out they went and searched Marc Schaffel’s house looking for that script he supposedly wrote for Janet to memorize after the Germans gave it to her. Yeah I know in retrospect that sentence I just wrote looks silly at best but that was her story. What concerned them the most is how the kids and Janet looked in that video.For someone that was being held hostage she sure was all happy and bubbly in front of that camera not to mention melodramatic with her “where were they”over and over again.
    Anyway that is when they decided that they needed to do something a little different. There were a couple of hearings first Michael entered his plea of innocent which is not the same as not guilty in a court of law (look it up) when it comes to a plea.A plea of innocent versus not guilty means that there is a stronger burden of proof for the prosecution.Then they were to set a date to start the preliminary hearing but Sneddon based on the exculpatory evidence asked for a postponement and continuance so he could sneak this in to a Grand Jury instead of in front of a judge. In front of a judge with all that exculpatory evidence he knew he would never get that thing to trial, but in a Grand Jury only the prosecution gets to show their side, not the defense.
    So then they had Janet and the testify in front of the Grand Jury along with other selected witnesses that would say what they wanted said so it was a one sided account of what happened. After that Michael was arraigned on the new charges and had to enter another plea and the second time it was not guilty.


  15. February 17, 2012 8:38 pm

    “I don’t know about testimony but Aphrodite Jones did say that she had spoken too people that were there and confirmed that was that happened. She is an investigative journalist so she would have interviewed others to find out how the whole Bashir thing happened.”

    Hell and thank you for responding and yes you are right, this would make sense. Just wished we had concrete sources, otherwise it kinda comes off as hearsay.


  16. shelly permalink
    February 17, 2012 9:13 pm

    I think it’s Mesreau who told her that.


  17. February 18, 2012 2:50 am

    I believe that Michael was very aware of how Gavin’s resting his head on his shoulder might be construed and thus was uncomfortable with the situation. (As Rev Catherine Gross points out his body language shows this very clearly) His words show that too. He was very quick to try to clarify the situation. He talks about giving his bed up for Gavin – not sharing a bed with Gavin. To me, with what we now know (unfortunately) about Michael’s difficulty sleeping it makes it even more understandable that he would do so. He knew he’d be lucky to get a few hours sleep himself. Plus his bedroom was really a 3 bed 2 story apartment so when he eventually was able to sleep there were other beds he could do so in.

    Martin Bashir took advantage of Michael’s love for children, regardless of whose idea it was to place the head on Michael’s shoulder. Like many of your other readers I do wish we had more than “two sources told me”. I don’t mean to sound ungrateful – Aphrodite Jones does do a lot of great work in trying to get the truth out there. I remember when I first read about Bashir orchestrating this scene (right here on this site about 2 years ago) I remember being so excited to watch the Bashir outtakes or The Footage You Were Never Meant To See as it is called. I couldn’t wait to see it for myself – indisputable proof that Michael had been framed – only to be so disappointed that the moment had not been captured on film.

    Ultimately Michael accepted the affection from Gavin – which, despite the way it was later perceived by some – is entirely innocent. This quote that Cory Rooney attributed to Michael explains why he would allow Gavin to place his head on Michael’s shoulder and hold his hand:

    “I will never deny a child love. If it means that I have to be crucified or put in jail for it, then that’s just what they’re going to have to do.
    When I was a kid, I was denied not only a childhood, but I was denied love.
    When I reached out to hug my father, he didn’t hug me back.
    When I was scared on an airplane, he didn’t put his arm around me and say: “Michael, don’t worry. It’s going to be OK.”
    When I was scared to go on stage, he said: “get your ass on that stage…”
    ~Michael Jackson♥


  18. nan permalink
    February 18, 2012 9:57 am

    I just read Martin Bashir testimony or shall I say , lack thereof, and that was not a question , …..regarding Gavin and the hand holding, Mesereau put to him.I agree MJ looked uncomfortable in that situation , but I just dont think he knew what to do for fear of hurting that little sniper Gavins feelings..
    The scope of questions seems extremely limited and Bashir was not answering nearly every question.His lawyer would site the shield law , if the court told him to answer he would chose not to…
    I seriously wonder what Sneddon had on Melville at times , he was imo , so decidedly pro prosecution it is alarming….
    I have heard that Sneddon was not above finding out info on a judge and holding it over them…
    Must have frightened MJ terribly..


  19. February 18, 2012 11:55 am

    “I believe that Michael was very aware of how Gavin’s resting his head on his shoulder might be construed and thus was uncomfortable with the situation.”

    Karen, I remember reading somewhere of Michael’s reaction when Gavin put his head on his shoulder. It was that of utter amazement and he said so to one of his friends. Unfortunately I don’t remember who he was speaking to and didn’t store it on my computer. But it must be somewhere there in the net!

    So when David noted how surprised Michael should have been when this happened, he was absolutely right – Michael practically shuddered at it and couldn’t understand why Gavin was behaving that way.


  20. February 20, 2012 11:31 pm

    I don’t think there is anything wrong with Gavin putting his head on Michael’s shoulder or holding his hand. Michael may have done this with his own children or his nephews. Truthfully, if Bashir wasn’t speaking about how disturbing it was in the voice over many viewers would feel the same way. From what I recall Michael’s main issue was that in this area of their relationship he was not that close to Gavin so that’s were his lack of comfort came in. He didn’t want to engage in “fake” behavior.


  21. Mona permalink
    February 23, 2012 5:56 pm

    TatumMarie, and all… i don’t think there’s anything wrong with Gavin putting his head on Michael’s shoulder either. Since when is manifesting loving behavior seen as wrong? I remember i heard about Bashir’s documentary as being incriminating to MJ so I wanted to see it asap and then when I did see I just didn’t notice anything odd about it, not in the images, not in Michael’s words. I kept waiting for the proof that Michael was doing something that he was not supposed to and at the end of the film there was still nothing. The only surprising thing were Bashir’s commentaries on the images. I found it weird that he was using such a tone to comment on something I perceived as the actions of a very sweet and innocent man… Unfortunately, people thought Bashir’s attitude was the right one, as grown-ups shouldn’t share their bed with adults. How sad that so many bad things have happened in this world that we are at that point where we interpret even the simplest most loving gestures as incriminating…


  22. June 5, 2012 8:07 am

    I knew about what Aphrodite said, but to be frank, I don’t like using her as a point against haters because she has ‘unnamed sources’ that are giving her this information about Bashir. Dimond also had sources that told her things-and she’s also an investigative reporter *cough cough*- which is what the haters would say back. But to me, what Aphrodite says has some merit.

    The whole Bashir documentary was supposed to make Michael look good, and clear up all the misunderstandings. So, if this was all about making Michael look good, why on EARTH would Michael bring up the topic of young boys on his own? Wouldn’t that be the LAST thing he would ever want to talk about? That’s proof right there that it was Bashir’s idea to bring in Gavin. According to even Sneddon himself, Bashir tricked Jackson (prosecution opening statement).

    Also, Gavin had only been to Neverland a couple of times, a couple of years before that scene was filmed, right? He didn’t even know Michael that well, so why would he lay his head on Michael’s shoulder as if they were best buddies when he barely knows the guy? Bashir could have directed that, but also, these people called Jackson ‘Daddy Michael” (which totally weirded the man out) even though they had a biological father as well as their mother’s new boyfriend as a father figure so it could very well have been Gavin’s idea, but Bashir seems snake enough for something like this too.


  23. sanemjfan permalink
    June 5, 2012 9:25 pm

    I have added the excerpt from Aphrodite Jones’ interview with Raven Woods in August 2010 where she confirmed that it was Mesereau and Brian Oxman who told her that it was Bashir’s idea for Gavin to hold MJ’s hand and place his head on MJ’s shoulder. I would have added that link when I first published this post, but Raven’s website was down at that time, but it’s back up now.


  24. June 6, 2012 7:04 am


    Awesome! When I first heard her say that, I was DYING to know who told her that. I kinda wish it was someone besides Mesereau-like someone who was actually there when it happened-but good enough! 🙂


  25. April 29, 2014 6:59 pm

    Thank you for these, I hadn’t heard these yet. I do have her book but haven’t read it yet. I really like how open and honest she is. For her to stand up and say I was wrong and looking for guilt for the wrong reasons is very good of her. It shows she is a good and fair person and can admit being wrong. I also think the 1993 settlement is the main reason for people believing he was guilty and it also set the path for the 2005 case. I think the prosecution and many others relied on that to get a guilty verdict.Also peoples opinion on him being weird which in my opinion he wasn’t really weird at all, but many people expected and wanted something to be wrong with him because how he chose to live. So thank you very much.



  1. Michael Jackson’s daughter Paris made a bombshell announcement to friends … telling them the MJ album released in the wake of the singer’s death did NOT contain MJ’s actual voice … it was an imposter. « The Hollywood 15
  2. You Don’t Have To Be a “Crazy, Rabid Fan” To Know That Michael Jackson Was INNOCENT!! « Vindicating Michael
  3. February 28th – March 1st, 2005 Trial Analysis: Summary of Sneddon and Mesereau’s Opening Statements « Vindicating Michael
  4. February 28th – March 1st, 2005 Trial Analysis: Summary of Sneddon and Mesereau’s Opening Statements | Michael Jackson Vindication 2.0

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: