LIES ABOUT MICHAEL JACKSON. Will Scott Thorson understand that blood money has never done anyone any good?
Seeing all the hysteria around the Entertainment Tonight program, I finally decided to have a look at what was going on and report to you on the facts found.
Some of the facts will probably be serious enough to require the involvement of Michael Jackson’s Estate and some will simply help us to decide whether we need or don’t need the ET type of entertainment as we can spend our time in many much better ways than listening to their lies.
However the main question which is on our minds now is how to prove that Scott Thorson is telling lies about Michael Jackson. To be able to do it I ask you to carefully go through the materials provided in this post. What you will see here is the record of the research done.
1. GAY ALLEGATIONS
The whole fuss started when Scott Thorson, now 54, a former Liberace’s boy seduced by him at the age of 16, said in an interview to Entertainment Tonight that he had a relationship with Michael Jackson which ‘would cross the boundaries’, thus hinting at a gay affair with MJ. The first part of the interview was about Liberace, but the public was of course interested only in Michael Jackson and held their breath waiting for the second part.
The “staff” of Entertainment tonight described the first part as follows:
Liberace’s Former Lover Details Secret Romance
By ETONLINE STAFF
April 30, 2012
As Liberace’s larger-than-life story is set to hit the big screen in 2013, Scott Thorson, a former lover of the flamboyant entertainer, gives insight into the fascinating world of the late performer.
ET‘s special correspondent Christina McLarty sat down with Thorson, currently known as Jess Marlow, who became lovers with Liberace at the tender age of 16. In 1988, he wrote the book Behind the Candelabra: My Life with Liberace in which he detailed his life with the famous singer. He is presently working on a follow-up.
“It was strange– it was kind of like a father/son relationship,” explains Thorson. “But we had sex.”
The now 54-year-old reveals that Liberace insisted that Thorson undergo plastic surgery to look like him during their then-secret romance, which lasted five years.
“He had a doctor fly from Beverly Hills …And he had a big portrait on the wall of himself. [Pointing to the picture] he said, ‘I want you to make him look like he’s my son.'”
Although he “was shocked” at first, Thorson says he relented to Liberace’s request. “I would do anything to please him,” he admits.
Steven Soderbergh and HBO films are currently producing Thorson’s story with Michael Douglas playing the lead role of Liberace and Matt Damon slated as his young boyfriend.
Tune in to ET for more of our special interview with Scott Thorson tonight and tomorrow night. Check your local listings.
http://www.etonline.com/news/121296_Liberace_s_Former_Lover_Details_Secret_Romance/index.html
The text makes it clear that the above is taking place as a sort of a publicity campaign for the forthcoming movie about Liberace. However judging by the ET’s prelude to the story it leaves you with an uneasy feeling that the goal of the program (and movie?) is to eventually mix the names and images of MJ and Liberace together – through the plastic surgery and other ideas mentioned. What are they preparing us for?
Scott Thorson and Liberace
In the pleasant course of the conversation with ET’s Christina McLarty, the crucial news that Scott Thorson was corrupted at the tender age of 16 by a guy 44 years older than him gets somewhat lost (of course only in case Thorson is not lying about the age he moved in to live with the guy. According to other sources he went to live with Liberace in 1977 when he was 19).
But if he is not lying, then his early corruption is exactly the reason why this man is sitting in the TV studio now at all and is presenting his sad life story as entertainment for the millions of ET viewers.
Frankly, when I look at Scott Thorson I cannot choose between the feelings I have for him – anger at his lies or sorrow for the way his fate was twisted in someone else’s hands…
The second part of Scott’s interview was about Michael Jackson and was reported by the ET the next day:
Liberace’s Lover on Romance With Michael Jackson May 01, 2012
Yesterday Scott Thorson, Liberace’s former live-in boyfriend, shared private details of his five-year romance with the flamboyant entertainer. Today, Thorson drops a bombshell regarding Michael Jackson, claiming he and the King of Pop shared an intimate, sexual relationship in the eighties.
VIDEO: Liberace’s Former Lover Details Secret Romance
“Michael and I had a relationship that… would cross the boundaries,” Thorson reveals in an exclusive sit down with ET‘s Christina McLarty. “That’s about all I’m comfortable saying… We were both young.”
While he concedes that not many will believe that he and Michael were lovers, he says that the two became unlikely friends while he was dating Liberace. After a period of friendship, their relationship blossomed into more.
Thorson details his tumultuous relationship with the King of Pop and more in Behind the Candelabra: My Life with Liberace, a book he wrote in 1998 which is currently being adapted for the big screen featuring Matt Damon and Michael Douglas. He is presently penning a follow-up.
http://www.etonline.com/news/121373_Liberace_s_Lover_Reveals_Michael_Jackson_Romance/
Let us not faint at the above. Instead let us simply pick up the grains of truth from the mud of lies in which these grains are lying.
Scott is extremely cautious in making his allegations (interesting to find out why) and the most he says is that “the relationship crossed the boundaries” adding that this is all he is comfortable saying”.
However the text accompanying Scott’s words is loaded with innuendos – the ET says that it was a ‘relationship’ which ‘blossomed’ and they were ‘unlikely’ friends or even ‘lovers’ though ‘not many’ will believe it (the key word ‘lover’ is said doing all the harm in the world despite the negation). In short the ET text is loaded with meaning though no one says anything specific.
The ET text claims that Thorson detailed the ‘relationship’ with Michael Jackson in his book. This is a flat lie told by Entertainment Tonight for which the ET can and should be directly reprimanded.
Thorson’s book written in 1988 (not in 1998!) was solely about Liberace and absolutely not about Michael Jackson, not to mention the fact that there was nothing about the alleged ‘gay’ relationship with Michael there.
We also learn from the ET that Thorson is planning a new book where he is evidently going to develop his novel ideas about Michael Jackson. It is clear that the ET program is probing the ground to see whether Michael Jackson’s family, Estate and supporters will allow these things to be told about Michael and how far they will be allowed to go in slandering him.
2. SCOTT’S EARLIER STORY WAS EVEN WORSE
Thorson’s story is not new. It goes back to 2004 when Michael Jackson was in the midst of his legal battle with the Arvizos and had no time or strength for disputing Scott Thorson’s fictional ideas. His lawyer Steven Cochran angrily called the lies “false trash” and said they would take action, but in the avalanche that followed the story didn’t get the attention it deserved (later Steven Cochran, not relative to Johnny Cochran, had to leave the defense team for personal reasons and both Michael and Thomas Mesereau were very sorry to part with him).
However if you compare today’s story by Thorson with the one voiced back in 2004 you will see a decided difference – at the time, due to MJ’s vulnerability Scott’s allegations of a gay relationship with Michael Jackson were much more salacious while now he and Entertainment Tonight are much more cautious and are somewhat dancing around the theme (which makes you suspect that they are afraid of a lawsuit).
Compared with today’s version of the same, the story blasted out by the National Enquirer in April 2004 was horrendous. It was absolutely devoid of any restraint and was made in full confidence that since Michael Jackson was heading for prison anyway nothing could be too bad for the victim of their slander. Why bother about the proof of their story if he is already doomed? Who will bother to check the details if or when he is convicted? No one at the time could even imagine that the verdict could be Michael’s full acquittal!
In short, back in 2004 the life of the media was much easier – no one bothered about the truth and people competed with each other in a nationwide game called “who will invent a crazier story about Michael Jackson?”
The typical media report about Thorson’s story claimed that Scott had a gay affair with MJ and that this would be the crucial revelation for the child molestation case. This way the papers gave away the Prosecutors’ intentions to use the alleged MJ’s homosexuality as a bridge to paedophilia and a way to prove him to be a “boy abuser”.
The standard scandalous newspaper reports looked as follows:
‘MY GAY AFFAIR WITH MICHAEL’
Published on: April 15, 2004
“I had gay sex with Michael Jackson!” Those are the shocking words of Liberace’s former lover Scott Thorson — the first person ever to give an on-the-record interview about a homosexual affair with Jackson.
And his revelations could prove crucial in Jackson’s child molestation case.
In the issue that goes on sale Friday, Thorson — who passed a polygraph test — tells The ENQUIRER how he met Jackson in Las Vegas in 1979, began a gay affair with the singer in London and much more.
What else is interesting about these ‘revelations’ besides their vulgar manner and salacious content? Another interesting point is the fact that the article was written on April 15, 2004. And what is so important about this date? Nothing, except that it was the last week of the Grand Jury deliberations on whether to indict Michael or not. Several days after the National Enquirer started its hysterical screams about Scott Thorson Michael Jackson was indicted and the court trial became unavoidable.
If this was not the way to prejudice the jurors I don’t know what else it could be.
3. STRANGE COINCIDENCES IN THE CRUCIAL APRIL MONTH OF 2004
The fact that Scott’s story was published on April 15, 2004 and the indictment came on April 21, 2004 was a pure coincidence (of course), however when studying the Michael Jackson case there are so many coincidences that they alone can make an impressive list to wonder at.
The media reports of the time tell us that the indictment did indeed take place in April 2004. The Grand Jury began convening on March 29 and met for two and a half (working) weeks with the indictment coming on April 21, 2004:
“The 19-member grand jury convened March 29 and met for 13 days to decide whether there was enough evidence to indict the singer.”
A California grand jury investigating child molestation accusations against Michael Jackson indicted the pop star on April 21, 2004, television networks ABC, NBC and CNN reported. The grand jury has met for about two weeks in Santa Barbara under extraordinary secrecy.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-04/22/content_325466.htm
Now that we know that the April month of 2004 was so crucial for Michael Jackson’s life, the strange thickening of lies, allegations and various ‘coincidences’ occurring exactly during the last week of the Grand Jury deliberations, begins to attract the attention on its own.
The very next day after the National Enquirer’s story about Scott Thorson came out, another article dated April 16, 2004 said that another ‘victim’ from Michael Jackson’s very distant past had been found and would probably testify at the trial.
Joseph Bartucci has quite a criminal history. A police photo from a stalking case
The name of the guy was Bartucci and what is interesting about him is that he waited for full 20 years in order to come up with his story in 2004.
He claimed that he suffered from repressed memories and recalled that he had been molested by MJ only in November 2003 when he was watching on TV the press-conference held by the D.A. Tom Sneddon and Sheriff Jim Anderson.
The press-conference will be forever remembered now by the bizarre fact that the two law enforcement officers made a nationwide call for new “victims” of Michael Jackson to come forward please, and it was after this call that Bartucci suddenly recollected that he had been molested 20 years before that.
The police were looking into Bartucci’s story for several months and judging by the fact that the news was released on April 16, 2004 only, they waited for half a year and accidentally decided to make the news public just during the last week of the Grand Jury deliberations – which is another of our beautiful coincidences of course.
Later on Bartucci’s story was thrown out of court as the judge found him to be a “professional litigator” but at that moment the effect on the Grand jury and the public must have been a thunderous one – look, another victim has been found!
No one worried about the strange fact that at the time when the news was announced Bartucci was almost the same age as Michael and at the time of the alleged ‘molestation’ he was 18 years old, and that the ‘crime scene’ was a white limousine in New Orleans into which Bartucci was allegedly forced by slim and frail Michael and then driven to California “while being molested, held at gunpoint and cut with steel wire and a razor blade.”
For details about this and other madmen in Michael Jackson’s life please go to https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/phantom-victims-of-mj/ .
However back in April 2004 the news about Bartucci was published in full seriousness and was released, as we know now, exactly the next day after the Scott Thorson news. The media writing about the case consistently ignored the fact that the person whom they called “minor” was actually 18 years old at the time of alleged molestation:
Jackson Lawyers Dismiss New Claim
By Stephen M. Silverman
Friday April 16, 2004 08:41 AM EDT
Lawyers for Michael Jackson are dismissing this week’s latest child-abuse allegations against the pop star, saying the accusations are an attempt to smear Jackson and damage his chances for a fair trial in his child-molestation case.
Los Angeles police announced Monday they were investigating a new claim of sexual misconduct by Jackson that allegedly involved a young boy during the late 1980s. The Los Angeles Times, however, reports that the new allegations against Jackson came from an adult who claims to have been abused as a minor during a visit to the star’s Los Angeles-area home. Said Brafman and Geragos: “We have to question the timing and purpose of this 20-year-old false allegation being raised at this time.”
A spokesperson for Jackson, 45, told news agencies this week that he was unavailable for comment because he was in Orlando, “visiting some of the amusement parks with his children.”
The visit coincided with a National Enquirer story this week that the lover of the late entertainer Liberace claims that that he had an affair with Jackson back in the early ’80s.
A lawyer for Jackson angrily told New York’s Daily News that the claims by Scott Thorson, now also 45, were nothing but “false trash.”
Impressed by all these coincidences and out of sheer curiosity I randomly picked up Maureen Orth’s articles to see if this author could also accidentally have something thrilling to tell us during the Grand Jury deliberations. And you know what? Just when the deliberations started or in March 2004 she did write an article called “Neverland’s Lost Boys” about the poor nice sick kid Gavin Arvizo and the monstrous Michael Jackson!
After finding all these articles so neatly grouped together at a moment when Michael Jackson’s fate and future were being decided I can bet whatever you like that the list of strange coincidences is far from being full. All it requires is just a little more digging to be able to find more “sensational” articles published just in one special week of April 2004.
However we need to return to Scott Thorson and see what he said about Michael Jackson back in 2004.
4. THE INITIAL SCOTT’S VERSION WAS TURNING INTO A SNOWBALL
The story told by the National Enquirer was awful. Back in 2004 it was screaming from every corner as the media was reproducing the lies initially published by the National Enquirer only. I haven’t got the original text of it but here is one of the typical reprints of the story:
Scott Thorson
Liberace’s Ex Adds To Jacko’s Woes
BY GEORGE RUSH AND JOANNA MOLLOY WITH BEN WIDDICOMBE
Thursday, April 15, 2004
Michael Jackson is lashing out at a former lover of Liberace’s who claims to have had an affair with Jacko.
Scott Thorson, 45, says he twice had romps with the Gloved One shortly before splitting with Liberace in the early ’80s.
Jackson’s attorney Steve Cochran tells us Thorson’s story is “false trash.”
But The National Enquirer, where Thorson makes his claim, reports that he passed a polygraph test and is ready to testify in the singer’s child-molestation case about his relationship with Jackson.
Thorson believes he could prove useful to prosecutors if Jackson’s lawyers assert that their client is thoroughly heterosexual and thus would have no interest in boys.
Thorson says that after meeting Jackson in 1979 in Vegas, the two had their first sexual encounter in a London apartment. Thorson, a former model, says he was trying on some new clothes when Jackson motioned him over to the bed where the singer was lounging.
He contends that they had another tryst the following day after a dinner party.
“[Michael] felt comfortable enough to make the first move on me, and I didn’t resist,” says Thorson. “Michael begged me to leave Liberace. I had to say no.”
Thorson admits in The Enquirer that Liberace evicted him from their L.A. home in 1982 after Thorson became addicted to painkillers and other drugs. Thorson later sued Liberace for palimony.
Thorson claims he saw Jackson off and on over the next few years. Twice, he claims, he saw gay-porn mags on Jackson’s nightstand – once with pictures that “looked like young boys.”
Cochran [Steve Cochran] reacted angrily to Thorson’s allegations, saying: “We reserve our right to seek the appropriate remedies” against “any person who makes this claim.”
http://articles.nydailynews.com/2004-04-15/gossip/18259018_1_scott-thorson-hugh-hefner-liberace
Michael “motioned him over to the bed”? He “made the first move”? He “begged Scott to leave Liberace”? And Scott said “No” to him?? Despite the fact that his love affair with Liberace was drawing to an end??? Who is crazy here to tell us all these incredible stories?
And whom was Scott talking about at all? Was he talking about Michael Jackson? Michael, that innocent little dove who even in the 90s made rounds of people’s homes with the Jehovah’s Witnesses books in his hands to preach the Gospel? That very Gospel which doesn’t approve of homosexuality, by the way?
And did Scott Thorson remember what Michael had been like when he was 20? Could that shy and timid boy confidently “motion” anyone to himself? Was Scott describing someone street smart or the painfully shy young man Michael actually was? Wasn’t Scott mistaking Michael for someone else who really lured Scott into his bed?
A more detailed account of the National Enquirer story is found in this source. Since the source is dated October 2004 it shows that several months after the initial story was released the lie acquired new false details like any snowball would. Now it began to claim a totally wrong (even by Scott’s standards) idea that the “sex started in 1979”, when the two guys met each other for the first time.
But look here, Scott initially lied only about the early 80s and only about two days during a visit to London! We do not expect these liars to tell us the truth, but why can’t these people report even their lies correctly?’
Here is the heavily exaggerated version of Scott’s story:
Last update of this page: October 31st 2004
Scott Thorson was Liberace’s live-in lover for five years. After being showered with expensive gifts he turned around and filed a palimony suit against Lee for $113 million, which Scott won. Scott said he was Liberace’s bodyguard, confidant and chauffeur, and had participated in a homosexual relationship with him. Unfortunately, even up to this point, Liberace continued to deny being homosexual.
Scott later wrote the book Behind the Candelabra, about his life with Liberace.
Scott also made claims to American tabloid the National Enquirer, alleging he had sex with pop star Michael Jackson. Their sex took place in 1979, shortly after they were introduced by Liberace in Las Vegas, Nevada. Scott recalls, “The day Michael and I met we hit it off. We spent days running around Las Vegas together. Michael wanted to spend all his free time with me. We are only five months apart [both 20 y.o.] in age so we had a lot in common with each other.”
Scott claims his relationship with Jackson intensified in London in the early 80s, where Liberace was performing and Jackson was working on a selection of songs with Paul.
Scott continues, “We were two young men extremely attracted to each other. You could’ve cut the sexual tension with a knife. I was standing only a few feet away from Michael when he motioned with his hand to come over to him and join him in bed. I climbed onto the bed. Our lovemaking session lasted about an hour.”
Scott, who claims he had sex with Jackson again for the final time a day later at Lord Montague’s house in the outskirts of London, says he visited the singer on two occasions years later at a hotel where he alleges Jackson was in possession of what looked like gay porn magazines featuring young boys.
While Scott’s romance with Liberace later fizzled, his friendship with Jackson also deteriorated because of the singer’s alleged porn habit. Scott later fell into a spiral of drug abuse and is now battling hepatitis C.
National Enquirer says it put Scott through a lie detector test over the claims – which he passed in the presence of an expert. And now Scott declares he’s willing to testify about his alleged affair in Jackson’s current child molestation case.
He adds, “If the district attorney wants to talk to me about my experiences with Michael Jackson I would be more than happy to tell him the truth. And if Michael tries to deny what I’ve said about our homosexual acts in London, I challenge him to take a polygraph. I did.”
The above is a huge wall of lies. We know it even from the simple fact that today’s story from the same Scott Thorson sounds much more reserved and incomparable to the initial version. He is simply afraid to voice it the way it was told in 2004 by the National Enquirer, let alone venture repeating all the embellishments added by others.
Okay, let us deal with this wall of lies piece by piece taking out one brick after another.
5. WHY DIDN’T SNEDDON SUBPOENA HIM?
Despite the thrill of the gay story the most damaging piece for Jackson at the time were Scott’s words on the “gay porn magazines” which he saw “once” and which “looked like young boys“ to him. Considering the nature of the 2005 trial this evidence from Scott Thorson should have sent Tom Sneddon running after him as a witness, however to our big surprise the Chief Prosecutor remained totally indifferent to Scott’s revelations.
The only explanation I can find for this inexplicable lack of attention on Tom Sneddon’s part is that firstly, the Prosecutor was doubtful, same as we are, that “porn magazines featuring young boys” were in free circulation in the US, and secondly, he had enough headache with Janet Arvizo as a crazy witness and he didn’t want any other craziness to undermine his case further. Whatever the reason for Tom Sneddon’s indifference to Scott was but he totally ignored Thorson’s generous suggestion of help and never subpoenaed the guy – and this tells us all we need to know about the credibility of Scott’s story.
6. IS IT POSSIBLE TO OUTSMART A POLYGRAPH?
The second point which draws our attention in the Enquirer’s story is that Thorson seems to have passed a polygraph test. This information took me by surprise at first, however further reading on the subject brought home to me that outsmarting the polygraph is quite easy – all you need is a good night’s sleep and a couple of pills to calm down your nervous system, and the thing is done. Here is some advice on how to do it from the people who really know:
- The polygraph is just a bull shit tactic to scare ppl into a confession. It has ZERO credibility as some ppl may be just nervous & give off false readings of deception. The best way to beat a polygraph if you ever have to is get a good night’s sleep & take approx 2 to 3mg of clonazepam or any other comparable benzodiazipine which will slow down your nervous system thus making you calmer, or opt for the pin pricking technique. either way, it can be 100% beaten.
- The body does not know the difference between what it is thinking, and what actually happened.
The latter statement explains to us that if you are asked about one man but think about another the polygraph will not be able to tell the difference. So all you need to do to outsmart it is to think of a similar situation with someone else and the polygraph will register your emotions not knowing that you are answering about another person.
Experts say that the results provided by a lie detector are considered so unreliable that they are not even admitted in court:
The Truth about the Lie Detector and Polygraph Tests
These tests are almost never used during an actual criminal proceeding. Both the prosecution and the defense would have to agree to the use of the test results in order for them to be admissible in court and this very rarely happens.
The major problem with Polygraph and lie detector tests is that, while it can measure when the person is under stress, there is no way to tell what is causing that stress. The simple fact that the person may be in the process of being charged for a crime and the fact that they actually have to take the test could be stressful enough to throw their answers out of whack.
The American Psychological Association reports, “the idea that we can detect a person’s veracity by monitoring psycho-physiological changes is more myth than reality.”
A person who does not show signs of stress through their vital signs could easily beat the test. Not everyone shows their stress in the same way, so someone who gets easily stressed could fail the test when they are actually telling the truth.
Wiki’s numerous examples indeed show that “innocent people have been known to fail polygraph tests”.
Summarizing the consensus in psychological research, professor David W. Martin, PhD, from North Carolina State University, states that people have tried to use the polygraph for measuring human emotions, but there is simply no royal road to measuring human emotions. Therefore, since one cannot reliably measure human emotions (especially when one has an interest in hiding his/her emotions), the idea of valid detection of truth or falsehood through measuring respiratory rate, blood volume, pulse rate and galvanic skin response is a mere pretense.
Since psychologists cannot ascertain what emotions one has, polygraph professionals are not able to do that either. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygraph
Since Scott and Michael were almost opposite personality types we can easily imagine that out of these two Michael could easily fail such a test even despite telling the innocent truth, while Scott Thorson could easily pass it despite telling horrible lies.
Rogues are much better suited for fraudulent action and lies than normal people, not to mention the fact that Scott Thorson was most sophisticated in matters of sex while Michael was shy, “prissy, proper and prim” (according to Kit Culkin) and would blush at any question about sex or mere profanity as a “Victorian old maid”.
Kit Culkin, father of Macaulay Culkin found Michael’s shyness in matters of sex and his dissociation from vulgarity, profanity and bad language one of Michael’s most amazing and hilarious features. He also said that Michael was an absolute “scaredy-cat” or excessively fearful as the dictionary puts it – and this makes the story about him being so bold in a stranger’s home as to make passes at Scott look highly dubious to me. Kit Culkin says about Michael’s shyness, puritanism and gentlemanly embarassment at disclosing one lady’s secret which he told with a blush:
“… Michael is always very prissy and proper and prim, and the very essence of the proverbial Victorian old maid. Profanity, vulgarity, bad language and all such other improprieties of speech are things that just might cause him to all but faint. And as to sex itself, this is a something that he can’t bring himself to even mention or give thought.
In a moment of unintended self-revelation, he himself once told me (with his hand cupped over his mouth in a gesture of “I shouldn’t”) about how a highly popular female entertainer (I’ll withhold the name) had once “exposed herself” to him (his words) just to see how he would react; a confession that caused him to visibly blush, I noticed, and through layers of pancake yet!
The other thing about Michael, over and above this rather quaintly prudish and even puritanical attitude, is that attribute of which I have had some cause to mention before; and this is that he is also an absolute scaredy-cat; a fellow who is perfectly terrified of his own shadow. It is a characteristic of his to which I shall have some cause to return.”
In addition to the unreliability of polygraph tests Scott Thorson and the media who published a spectacular suggestion for Michael to take one knew very well that neither Michael nor anyone in his place would ever agree to such a thing for another simple reason – it is totally ridiculous and even insulting to take a polygraph test to defend yourself each time some rogue tells a false story about you. It was really too much honor to take a polygraph test to disprove each and every lie ever told about Jackson – with so many lies around he would have had no time left for composing his music then…
7. FRIENDS IN 1979?
The October 2004 source quoted above gets a little carried away in its lies and claims that Scott and MJ “had sex in 1979”. This is not true even by Scott’s false standards and the outrageous story made up in 2004. He said they got acquainted in 1979 and immediately “hit it off” which means that they immediately became friends (at least according to Scott Thorson).
I doubt it though. Thorson at the time was a sophisticated and street smart guy with more than 4 years of homosexual love behind his back – while Michael Jackson was still a baby and a “Victorian maid” who made rounds of other people’s houses as a devout Jehovah’s Witness preaching God and the way of life according to the Bible.
No matter what Scott thought of him Michael Jackson was so naïve in the early 80s that he could not even understand the reasons for rumors about his alleged homosexuality. He made innocent guesses and thought that it was due to his soft voice. He simply couldn’t imagine what kind of stories were told about about him by Scott Thorson, or to be more exact, would be told about him 20 years later.
A lecturer of gay and lesbian issues at Yale University, Seth Silberman says that Michael was genuinely perplexed as to why some people would perceive him as gay:
On Wednesday, September 5, 1984, Frank Dileo and Norman Winter held a press conference at a West Hollywood sound studio. Norman introduced “what may be an unprecedented move.” He read first: “Superstar Michael Jackson today instructed [us] to ‘once and for all set the record straight.'” Michael’s publicist explained that “the potential risk of reacting to … unfounded rumors” could no longer silence him”. Then, Michael’s manager steps to the podium to read his client’s response. Once done, he retreats to a control booth. Reporters belt, “Hold on! Frank, come on! Why isn’t Michael here himself? What’s going on, really?”
Norman explains that Michael’s upset by reports of his alleged homosexuality: “The fact that they say he’s gay is completely ridiculous. If little girls want to grow up and marry Michael, now they know they’ve got a chance.” Norman’s comments referred to hundreds of fan letters begging Michael to come out, heterosexually. Michael’s statement never mentions homosexuality directly. He starts with, “No! I’ve never taken hormones to maintain my high voice.” He denies he’s surgically altered either his eyes or cheekbones. There’s no mention of his nose. Finally, he proclaims, “I plan to get married and have a family. Any statements to the contrary are simply untrue.”
Five years earlier, Michael confronted a reporter himself: “I am not homo. Not at all. ... I’m not going to have a nervous breakdown because people think I like having sex with men. I don’t and that’s that. If I let this get to me, it will only show how cheap I am. I’m sure I must have fans who are gay, and I don’t mind that. That’s their life and this is mine. You can print that.”
Then, he seemed genuinely dumbfounded that anyone would believe the rumor: “Is it my voice? Is it because I have this soft voice? All of us in the family have soft voices.” Michael’s vocal coach Seth Riggs, who started with him in 1978, came to his employer’s defense before the news conference. Seth’s support sounded like a talking point: “We’re all fed up with the lies and nonsense about this boy we love so much. Michael is different. … He’s not of this world.” When Seth debunked the hormone rumors, he let slip just how mundanely Michael speaks. “He isn’t naturally falsetto,” he resolved. “His voice is as low as yours or mine. Natural, male, husky. But he doesn’t like it. He calls it his ‘frog’ voice, so for personal reasons, after I had taught him to reach that level and maintain it, he decided to stick with it. But it’s just a technique—a trick.”
…biographer Randy Taraborrelli defends Michael’s public actions, but not the possibility of his desire: “Michael Jackson would never allow himself to have homosexual relationships, even if he did have feelings for other men. He is much too puritanical, a result of his religious background.” Sister Rebbie reiterated the family’s investment in Jehovah’s Witness teachings: “Anyone who turned out to be homosexual would be disfellowshiped, cut off right away.”
On set, the star was inspired to assert his interest in women. His video girlfriend Ola Ray remembered Michael talking a lot about Brooke Shields between takes. Then, when “a gay guy and his friend came onto the set,” Michael dismissed them. “Look at him, he’s got his boyfriend with him.” Ola concluded that Michael was “a space person” but noted that Marlon Brando’s long-haired son Miko was around a lot: “They seemed to be best friends.”
http://thisdaymichael.blogspot.com/
Of course Michael had male friends! In this topsy-turvy world of ours is it no longer natural to have friends among their own sex? Or are men supposed to associate with women only? And for sex only? And what about friendship?
8. FORMER MICHAEL’S EMPLOYEE EXPLAINS IT ALL
Speaking about friendship let us ask whether Michael Jackson and Scott Thorson could really know each other and indeed be friends at a certain point in time?
Belinda who is the author of http://michaelandthetruth.blogspot.com/2012/05/truth-about-scott-thorson-liar.html
has found a precious piece of information. It comes from a former employee of Michael Jackson who commented on Scott’s “friendship” with MJ on the National Enquirer’s message board. The employee turned out to be a rare bird for Michael’s surrounding and in fact wrote a rebuttal of Scott’s lies. After all we’ve learned about so many scoundrels among Michael’s employees isn’t it refreshing to find that there were also decent people in his surrounding? And that the former employee can even stand up for Michael Jackson? (sorry, but this was meant to be a bitter joke)
The employee said that Scott Thorson and Michael Jackson did indeed know each other but Michael was “old school” and felt incredibly uncomfortable when Scott made passes at him:
Anybody who genuinely knows Michael (which is none of you), knows that Michael is straight – almost to a fault of himself, considering that he doesn’t look like the most masculine of brothas. You’re so quick to believe Scott, which is hysterical because if you knew their history, you’d know how weirded out Michael was by Scott’s advances.
Michael’s not overtly homophobic, but he is old school and isn’t completely comfortable with it. However, given the nature of his profession, he has tried his best to be accepting and because he tries to be a good Christian, he does not judge, he leaves that to God. He still gets incredibly uncomfortable by advances by anything remotely male….which brings us to Scott.
Scott made a pass at Michael. Michael ignored it, initially. The second time, Michael told him to back the #### off (in more polite language, of course...Michael was still quite young and sweet and innocent back in the ’80s, if a dude tried something similar NOW, he might get punched in the face).
They haven’t spoken since then. The closest he ever got to Michael after about ’84 was that his boyfriend was friends with Priscilla Presley’s makeup artist. The two haven’t spoken since Scott tried to get all up on Mikey.
One may ask themselves, if his motive for coming forward now was out of some sort of moral obligation and a desire to crush MJ’s “strategy” of declaring himself heterosexual, why didn’t he come forward in 1993? Maids, cooks, ex-guards, everybody and their momma was coming forward with “claims,” why not then? Or, if the motivation behind this is genuine concern for the welfare of children and not money, why not go to the police with the things you’ve seen (i.e. Scott claiming to have seen child porn on Michael’s nightstand)?
Simple, none of it happened and Scott was still livin’ the life with all of Liberace’s dough. Poverty brings forth all sorts of “memories.” Isn’t it convenient that just as soon as his cash stash is running dry, he tells the world he had sex with Michael Jackson?
This beautifully clarifies a lot of things, doesn’t it? And answers all the questions we had? And shows the simple truth behind all the embellishments made by Scott Thorson and the media?
Okay, let us move on after this big breakthrough in our little study.
9. THE YEAR 1981 IS THE ONLY CHOICE FOR THEIR “CRUCIAL” LONDON MEETING
Scott Thorson claimed that “his relationship with Jackson “intensified” in London in the early 80s, where Liberace was performing and Jackson was working on a selection of songs with Paul [McCartney]”.
This required verifying whether either Scott or Michael or both of them were indeed in London in the early 80s.
The dates for Michael and Paul McCartney working on the song Say Say Say fall on the period between May and September 1981. Michael stayed in the house of Paul and Linda (and absolutely not somewhere on the outskirts of London in some Lord Montague’s house as Scott Thorson claimed). Even if he visited the house of that Lord, which I doubt, why would he stay the night there? Or did the “bed scene” take place in broad daylight in a house where Michael was a guest? What an incredible thing it is to imagine that a shy and fearful guy like Michael would behave so boldly and recklessly in someone else’s home!
Wiki tells us about Michael and Paul’s collaboration when they were working on Say Say Say:
McCartney had already collaborated with Jackson on “The Girl Is Mine”, from the latter’s Thriller and in return Jackson agreed to work on “Say Say Say” for McCartney’s Pipes of Peace McCartney biographer Ray Coleman asserted that the majority of the song’s lyrics were written by Jackson, and given to McCartney the next day. “Say Say Say” was recorded at Abbey Road Studios between May and September 1981. At the time, McCartney was recording Tug of War, the former Beatle’s’s first solo album after the disbandment of his group Wings. Jackson stayed at the home of McCartney and his wife Linda during the recording sessions, and became friends with both. [This is where Michael learned from Paul about the publishing rights as a good source of income].
The production of “Say Say Say” was completed in February 1983, after it had been refined and overdubbed at Cherokee Studios in California.
The music video (or “short film”) for “Say Say Say” was directed by Bob Girladi, who had previously directed Michael Jackson’s music video for “Beat it”. To accommodate Jackson’s busy schedule the video was filmed at Los Alamos near Santa Barbara, California. McCartney flew in specially for filming.”
Okay, so the above provides the exact time for Michael’s staying in the UK – it was May-September 1981 [which was later reduced by our Lynette to May 1981 only, as it turned out that in June Michael started rehearsals with his brothers for a tour and was already back from the UK. Please see the comments for details]. The rest of the work on the video was carried out in the US and is therefore beside the range of our discussion.
And where was Liberace at the time? Scott Thorson says that he himself was in London because Liberace was “performing” there, so were there any live concerts in the UK in 1981?
I am afraid there were not. All the sources I studied say that the peak of Liberace’s performing career was in the 50s, 60s and 70s (let us not forget that Liberace was 44 years older than his boy lover Thorson), so by the time Thorson was 21 Liberace was already 63 and was performing live on very rare occasions:
In 1960 Liberace performed at the London Palladium with Nat King Cole and Sammy Davis Jr. (this was the first televised ‘command performance’, now known as ‘The Royal Variety Show’ for Queen Elizabeth II).
His career then went into a slump but he skillfully built it back up by appealing directly to his fan base through live appearances in Las Vegas and elsewhere.
Liberace was a favorite subject of tabloid magazines throughout his life and he published an autobiography in 1973.
Liberace owned an antique store for some years in Beverly Hills, California. In 1982 he guest starred on one of his own favorite television programs, ‘Lives…of the curious’ on the renowned two parted, ‘The Mystery of Mother’s Murder.’ He had a keen interest in cooking, often preparing meals for friends and associates. In addition, he owned a restaurant in Las Vegas for many years and even published cookbooks. http://www.monstersandcritics.com/people/Liberace/biography
The official site of Liberace’s Museum says that at that period Liberace gave only three live concerts. All of them were in the USA:
- 1977: Royal Command Performance for Princess Grace of Monaco.
- March 29, 1982: Liberace performs all of the 1981 nominated film theme songs at the Oscars.
- 1986: House record for ticket sales of $528,298 for 8 performances in the Fox Theater in St. Louis, MO.
To make the story short I’ll say that I did finally find the 1981 date consistent with Scott Thorson’s story. The reason why Liberace was in London was because he was picking up an award at London Palladium.
Could Thorson see Michael during those few days while Liberace was in the UK? Probably he could if he was accompanying Liberace on that visit. However even if he did see Michael in London it still does not prove any of his allegations.
So let us set the year 1981 as a hypothesis for the ‘historic’ meeting in London between Scott Thorson and Michael Jackson and move on.
10. WHAT ELSE DID SCOTT THORSON DO IN 1981?
The year 1981 we are focusing on was not an easy one for Thorson. It was the year prior to 1982 when Scott would be thrown (in the literal meaning of the word) out of Liberace’s house due to his drug-addiction and due to Liberace’s involvement with a new man younger than Scott.
By the year 1981 Thorson was already a cocaine drug addict. He acquired this habit due to the surgeon who, at Liberace’s whim, made plastic surgery on the young man and put him on a cocaine diet after the surgeries.
Thorson’s best connection for cocaine supply was a certain Eddie Nash:
“Thorson, who lived with Liberace and served as his chauffeur, secretary and lover from 1977 until 1982, maintained a close relationship with Nash during much of that period.
“Eddie was Scott’s cocaine connection,” one source said.
In an acknowledgment in his recently published book, “Behind the Candelabra: My Life With Liberace,” Thorson names Nash as one of six people who, over the years, offered him “personal support and understanding.” http://articles.latimes.com/1988-09-16/local/me-2258_1_eddie-nash
In June 1981 Thorson went to Laurel Canyon to Eddie Nash’s residence to buy cocaine. When in Eddie Nash’s house Scott Thorson became a chance witness to a beating by Nash of a porn actor Holmes, and this event eventually brought about a murder of four people in the house. The quadruple murder took place on July 1 and both Holmes and Nash were suspects:
|
These and further developments contributed to Scott Thorson’s falling into disfavor with Liberace, and this eventually brought him to a state in which he started to invent stories about Michael Jackson in order to get money for drugs or mere survival.
Here is the timeline of the events in the life of Liberace and Thorson in all their beauty in case you have lost track of some of them:
Timeline
| 27 Sep 1956 | London Newspaper Daily Mirror calls Liberace a “deadly, winking, sniggering, snuggling, chromium-plated, scent-impregnated, luminous, quivering, giggling, fruit-flavored, mincing, ice-covered heap of mother love… Without doubt, he is the biggest sentimental vomit of all time. Slobbering over his mother, winking at his brother, and counting the cash at every second… a sugary mountain of jingling claptrap wrapped in such a preposterous clown.” |
| 1957 | Hollywood Confidential article, “Mad About the Boy.” Liberace sues, wins $40,000. |
| 8 Jun 1959 | Libel trial for Daily Mirror article begins. Trial lasts six days, Liberace awarded $22,400. |
| 22 Nov 1963 | Collapses backstage after inhaling carbon tetrachloride, a cleaning compound. |
| 1970 | Liberace Cooks! Recipes from His Seven Dining Rooms published. |
| 1976 | Meets cute dog groomer Scott Thorson, age 17ish. |
| 15 Apr 1979 | Liberace Museum opens, Las Vegas NV. |
| c. 1981 | Scott Thorson undergoes plastic surgery to look more like Liberace. |
| 1981 | Scott Thorson goes to 8763 Wonderland in Laurel Canyon (site of Charles Manson murders) to buy cocaine, where he witnesses Eddie Nash beat up pornstar John Holmes. On July 1, the house is the site of a quadruple murder, with both Holmes and Nash suspects. |
| 14 Oct 1982 | Chauffer Scott Thorson files a $113 million palimony suit against Liberace. Settled out of court for $95,000. |
| c. 1982 | Liberace replaces boy Scott Thorson with boy Cary James. |
| 4 Feb 1987 | Liberace dies of AIDS, Palm Springs CA. |
| 1987 | Daily Mirror asks for its $22,400 back. |
| Apr 1988 | Over 20,000 belongings auctioned off, Los Angeles Convention Center. |
| 1988 | Behind the Candelabra: My Life with Liberace, by Scott Thorson, in which he claims Liberace was a top. |
| 1997 | Replacement boy Cary James dies of AIDS. |
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/music/liberace/
Frankly, the timeline did not convince me that Thorson could see Michael Jackson in London in the summer of 1981. How could he if Michael was there in the summer of 1981 while Thorson was busy with this cocaine/murder witness event at about the same period of time?
Of course the federal protection program was in effect only in 1990 and theoretically Thorson could still go to London with Liberace after witnessing the quadruple murder. In this case I can imagine what stories he would be telling Michael and how intently Michael would be listening to all the details of that story. Knowing that Scott went there for cocaine he probably even tried to wean Thorson off the drugs he was taking… This I can easily imagine, while the “gay” story still remains totally unproven. [Now we know that Scott got into trouble with Eddie Nash after his visit to London, not before it.]
Roger Friedman wasn’t convinced by the gay story either. He wrote a sarcastic article about it the same day Thorson’s story was published in the National Enquirer.
11. THE 1988 VERSION OF THE BOOK HAD NO GAY LIES ABOUT JACKSON
Before we read Roger Friedman’s article it is high time we recalled once again that today’s version of Thorson’s story in the Entertainment Tonight program says that Thorson described his “relationship” with Michael in his book, which is actually a big, very big, really BIG LIE.
The truth is that at the time of making the book, in 1988 Thorson didn’t say a word about any “gay” relationship with Michael. The book was about Liberace and Liberace alone! And here is the proof of it.
Back in 2004 Roger Friedman met the author of the book Alex Thorliefson . The news about Thorson’s new revelations about Michael Jackson turned out to be a big surprise to her:
Published April 15, 2004
FoxNews.com
Our friends at the National Enquirer have a big scoop today. They’ve paid Liberace’slover, Scott Thorson, to tell how he and Michael Jackson were lovers twice in the early 1980s. Feel like taking a shower?
If Thorson did what he says he did with Michael, it’s news to the author of his book. Back in the late 1980s, Thorson came out with a “memoir” called “Behind the Candelabra.” (I use the word “memoir” advisedly here. Lillian Hellman and Edmund Wilson have also published memoirs, you see.) The writer who worked on the book, Alex Thorliefson, says Thorson told her that he and Jackson had been close friends, but never mentioned anything like this.
Thorliefson told me about her out-of-print book.
“Scott knew Michael for a number of years starting in 1979. In the book, he speaks of Michael and Janet coming to Liberace’s house in Vegas to swim. They couldn’t use a hotel public pool. Scott’s friendship with Michael was in London while Liberace was appearing at the Palladium.
They saw each other every day for a period of time after that. In the book, there is no reference to anything other than a close friendship,” Thorliefson said. “Were they lovers? That I could not say. He said there was a lot of touchy-feely, a lot of sexual innuendo, whenever he was with Michael.”
The Enquirer says Thorson passed their lie detector test and they are satisfied with the results.
What’s kind of more interesting is the rest of Thorson’s story: He’s spent most of the last several years in the Federal Witness Protection program — not for his Jacko or Liberace connections, but because in 1990 he ratted out a mobster in exchange for a lighter sentence for selling drugs.
Unfortunately, the mobster — known as Eddie Nash (aka Eddie the Hat) — was acquitted, which left Thorson high and dry. (Thorson, the Zelig of all high crimes and misdemeanors, claimed that Nash had been responsible for the Wonderland, aka Laurel Canyon, murders in Los Angeles in 1981.)
Thorliefson says Thorson is in dire need of cash, hence the story sale to the Enquirer.
“As for him coming out with it now, I’m sure he sold the story for a lot of money at the opportune moment while Michael’s sexual peccadilloes are in the news.”
Meantime, according to my pal Diane Dimond at Court TV, recent reports of a new Jackson police inquiry are false. That’s right. An 18-year-old boy was claiming he’d been molested by Jackson in 1988. [Bartucci] That would have made him 2 years old at the time. I’m told that this story grew out of control on Monday night until it became fact yesterday. Now it’s dismissed.
Did you notice that with all that messy media reporting Roger Friedman also got totally confused about the age of the “second victim” conveniently found just at the time? Let me clarify to you once again that Bartucci was born in 1965 and at the moment of alleged molestation (sometime in 1983) was 18 years old. The allegations were made in 2003/04 when he was actually around 40. So if even Friedman was confused over the age of the “victim” we can imagine how much more confused the general public was. Everyone really thought that Bartucci was a minor!
Okay, at least the Alex Thorliefson part was reported by Roger Friedman correctly and she had no idea that her book said anything about any “gay relationship” with Michael Jackson. And since this lady was evidently the ghost-writer of the book we can be sure that she did indeed know what she was talking about.
From Roger Friedman’s article we also find out that our supposition that Thorson could go to London only in 1981 and accompanied Liberace to pick up an award at London Palladium turned out to be completely correct – Alex Thorliefson confirms the date and even the reason for going there.
So Thorson probably did see Michael in 1981 after all. However it doesn’t mean that Thorson’s story which emerged only in 2004 is true. In the book of 1988 Thorson did not say a word about any of his allegations and though he was probably in love with Michael at the time he didn’t venture to write about it or invent any lies about Michael in his book then.
But when a convenient moment came in the year 2004 and everyone trashed Michael either for money, out of habit or as a wicked hobby, Thorson offered a salacious story about Michael Jackson for sale to the National Enquirer – and this is how this lie came about at all. By then Thorson was already in dire straits and decided to trade his story for some cash.
However we know that Michael Jackson’s haters are keen on rewriting history about the innocent man and therefore today’s version of the year 2012 of Scott Thorson’s story is being promoted in a totally different variant which skips the year 2004 and claims that his stories about Jackson are based on his 1988 book! This way haters want to move Scott’s lies back into the past and hide the fact that he invented the story only in 2004, when he tried to take advantage of MJ’s legal situation and use it for his financial benefit….
OMG, and what if the movie featuring Michael Douglas is also based on the updated version of it, and they will trash Michael Jackson’s good name in it on the basis of their new lies???
No, the Estate lawyers should definitely have their say on this issue!
See what new lies the media tells us now:
Thorson previously revealed details of his intimate friendship with Jackson in his 1988 book “Behind the Candleabra: My Life With Liberace,” which is currently being made into a movie starring Michael Douglas and Matt Damon
12. BUT WHY DID SCOTT THORSON LIE ABOUT MICHAEL JACKSON AT ALL?
The above is not all we have on Scott Thorson. The most amazing piece I have found about him was written by journalist Roger Jacobs, an acquaintance of Thorson. The journalist tells us of the bleak circumstances which brought Scott Thorson to a huge betrayal of his former friend Michael Jackson and the reasons why he had to tell lies about him at all.
But first here is a short word about Rodger Jacobs:
- Rodger Jacobs has won multiple awards and grants for his work as a journalist, documentary writer and producer, screenwriter, playwright, magazine editor, true crime writer, book critic, columnist, and live event producer. He provided the preface and original inspiration for Jack London: San Francisco Stories (Sydney Samizdat Press) in 2010.
Roger Jacobs is a serious journalist – you can tell it by the manner of his writing. He shows us the sordid side of his trade and calls having to sell his story to the “ghetto of tabloids” a new low for himself. But he hit rough times when the magazines he worked for as a freelance journalist closed (Eye magazine, Panik newspaper and E Commerce Business magazine). As a by-comment let me say that it is high time we stopped supporting trashy tabloids by buying their lies and start paying for the truth told by journalists like Roger Jacobs. Truth is the only goal worth paying, working and living for.
So here is Roger Jacobs’s story about Scott Thorson, the people surrounding him and the reasons why he lied about Michael Jackson.
The only thing I don’t like about it is that it claims that Thorson passed three polygraph tests. However if this is true (Scott Thorson could have easily exaggerated things for better effect) we will have to accept it – Scott’s motivation for lying about Jackson was so huge that anything was possible. He could have passed a hundred tests and jumped into the Niagara waterfall in order to get some money at the time.
If you look at it from another side there might also be a possibility that they made him pass several tests because the experts were in doubt as to the credibility of what he was saying. And by the way even the National Enquirer said that the test was only one, so all the rest was disregarded for some reason.
Here is Roger Jacob’s account of the events in 2004: http://www.popmatters.com/pm/column/93764-depression-2.0-sunday-in-kerouac-alley/P0
By Rodger Jacobs 29 May 2009
“How much money are you looking for?” I asked the man with the high nasal voice.
“Well, Rodger, that’s the thing,” he began, words escaping his throat with the trembling unease of bad notes from a rusty accordion. “I’m really in a bad place right now. I had to have surgery to remove a bullet that’s been lodged near the base of my spine for a long time.”
“How did that happen?” I cradled the telephone receiver between my left shoulder and ear, carefully pouring a shot of rum into a white coffee mug permanently stained by acidic instant coffee.
“Someone shot me five times the day after I got out of the Federal witness protection program in 1990; I turned state’s evidence against Eddie Nash for the L.A. District Attorney.”
As co-writer and principal interviewer for the award-winning feature documentary Wadd: The Life and Times of John C. Holmes, I knew more than I ever wanted to know about the man reputed to be L.A.’s most dangerous underworld figure.
Eddie Nash, aka Adel Gharib Nasrallah, was a Palestinian immigrant who built a small but formidable empire in the drug-fueled ‘80s, a vast, interconnected network of trendy Los Angeles nightclubs and hotspots: the Starwood Club and Soul’d Out in West Hollywood, the Paradise Ballroom, the Seven Seas, Ali Baba’s and the Kit Kat strip club, to name a few. Nash ran narcotics out of his clubs and he was reputed to be a major player in the lucrative arson-for-profit racket.
Since 1981, the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office had been trying in vain to nail Nash for the notorious, high-profile Wonderland murders, the bloody bludgeoning deaths of four mid-level cocaine dealers, the possible result of the robbery of Nash’s home two days before the slayings at 8763 Wonderland Avenue in Laurel Canyon. A key player in the incident, porn icon John Holmes, was acquitted of the murders, and the well-connected Eddie Nash also eluded prosecution.
In 1990, Eddie Nash was tried in California state court for planning the Wonderland murders; emerging as a pivotal witness in the state prosecution of Nash was Scott Thorson, the one-time boy toy of flamboyant entertainer Liberace. Thorson became an instant tabloid and mainstream press celebrity in 1982 when he filed a $133 million palimony suit against his former lover and companion of five years.
Thorson and Liberace settled out of court in 1986 for $95,000, two cars, and two pet dogs, reflecting a common trajectory in Thorson’s life: Selling dirty laundry for a quick buck or anything else he can get out of the deal; this should not, however, imply that Scott Thorson is a shakedown artist. He is a survivalist, living, as the old Arabic saying goes, “close to the ground”, getting by the only way he knows how without punching a time clock.
The former Las Vegas veterinary assistant entered adulthood earlier than most, accepting a job in 1976 as companion and personal assistant to one of the world’s most popular and wealthiest entertainers. Scott was just 16-years-old, plucked from obscurity into a lavish world of Lear jets, Rolls-Royces, multi-million dollar mansions, and ostentatious jewelry.
The sloth of a hedonistic, jet-setting lifestyle soon extracted a toll on the young blonde Adonis. He put on weight. His features sagged. Liberace had the perfect solution to return the spring to Scott’s stride: Thorson would undergo facial reconstruction surgery to resemble the son that Liberace never had. But the surgeries proved to be a nightmare. (The doctor was a chronic alcoholic who would later shoot himself to death.)
After the botched facial alterations were complete, the surgeon placed Scott on the so-called Hollywood Diet: cocaine, Quaaludes, Biphetamine, and Demerol, leaving Scott not only hopelessly hooked on painkillers for the duration of his life, but also with a chronic case of Hepatitis C, the result of a series of blood transfusions required for the facial reconstruction.
In 1987 Thorson wrote a book, Behind the Candelabra: My Life with Liberace, about his life with Liberace. Shortly before the book was released, just as he was about to embark on a nationwide publicity jaunt, the FBI appeared and whisked Thorson away into the witness protection program for his testimony against Eddie Nash in the state’s prosecution of the mobster for the Wonderland murders. The book’s publisher, in the interim, declared bankruptcy and Scott never laid his fingertips on a dime from the slim handful of units that sold.
And so here was Scott Thorson in the year 2004, calling yours truly from his home in Falmuth, Maine, flat broke and disabled, in chronic, horrendous pain from a botched murder attempt and an even more botched plastic surgery mandated by a demented and narcissistic celebrity, hoping that I would serve as his conduit for another lucrative laundry airing.
“Our mutual friend tells me that you’re the man,” Thorson said. “He said that if you can’t sell this story, no one can.”
A brief survey of my bleak surroundings said to the casual observer that the business of selling stories had not been kind to me of late. Divorced for several years, my home and work quarters was a comfortable residential hotel in the L.A. bedroom community of Glendale; the kitchen was comprised of a microwave atop a dresser and a mini-fridge next to my cheap assemble-it-yourself desk. Dishes were washed in the bathroom sink and rinsed in the bath tub.
I had no tangible assets to speak of, no credit cards, no personal vehicle, no savings account, and maybe a hundred bucks in my checking account. As a freelance writer for over ten years, I had hit a bad stretch of road. The heyday of the freelancer was coming to an end—- the buck-a-word magazine assignments had become as fossilized as the prehistoric remains in the La Brea Tar Pits.
“This story is really, really hot, Rodger,” Thorson continued in his nasal whine. “But I need a lot of money. I’m totally tapped out after paying for the spinal surgery and the IRS has put a lien on my bank account. I’m really fucked.”
“How much money are you looking for, Scott?” I asked again, my irritation clearly palpable at this point. The mere idea of dodging into the ghetto of tabloids for a quick cash infusion represented a new personal low for me, but living “off the grid” often means making harsh ethical and moral decisions with little or no time to think, not with the landlord impatiently knocking at the door. “You have to set a price. How much do you want for the story?”
Thorson suggested a low four-figure sum and I laughed. “Scott, if your story checks out, that sum would be my finders fee. You would be getting three times that much, providing you pass a lie detector test.”
“Of course I would pass a lie detector test,” Thorson promised enthusiastically.
“I believe you.”
Scott offered me more mud to sell about forgotten Las Vegas entertainers and yesterday’s movie and TV stars, most of the stories involving sexual scandal of one shape or form, trivia I never wanted to know, trivia I carry in my head to this day like a lingering hangover five years after the party that, in retrospect, didn’t seem like a good idea at the time anyway.
The story that Scott Thorson offered for sale that April afternoon in 2004 was, as expected, a sordid tale, this one involving his ongoing love affair in the ‘80s with a pop music superstar long-rumored to be gay. I briefly flirted with the notion of writing the article myself, weaving the True Confessions element into a profile of Thorson and his peripatetic outlaw lifestyle that I would title The Man with Liberace’s Face.
“Just sell the damn story to the National Enquirer,” a colleague suggested. “It’s a quicker sale and the money will be better.”
I was provided by another colleague, a brand name internet gossip columnist, with a solid and reliable contact at American Media, the parent company of supermarket tabloid the National Enquirer. (Thorson, I would later learn, had brokered a $30,000 deal with the Enquirer in 1988 for a tell-all about his five year affair with Liberace, who died at the age of 67 in 1987 due to complications from AIDS).
In the interest of brevity, let it be said that I have negotiated apartment leases that were more complicated than the deal with American Media for Scott Thorson’s celebrity mud slinging. I was offered a rate to carry back for Scott’s approval and the finder’s fee that American Media offered me, for bringing them the tawdry story was more than enough to compensate for my recent financial losses in the freelance sector.
American Media dispatched a polygraph expert to Falmuth, Maine, within days of my initial phone call to their reporter. Scott passed not one but three polygraph tests, more than enough for the publishing company to trust the veracity of his story, which ran a few short weeks later as a front page banner headline.
“I lost all the money, Rodger,” Scott wept into the telephone one morning just days after his Enquirer confession hit supermarket news stands. He had recently filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, he explained, and the government seized his proceeds from the Enquirer sale mere moments after he deposited the check into his personal account – this is what happens when the chemicals that fuel greed, bad luck, and stupidity are mixed in the same test tube.
Thorson was feral. He had no resources to fall back on after his brief windfall crumbled to dust. He began phoning me several times a day, often under the influence of God- knows-what narcotics that slurred his speech so badly he sounded like a drunken drag queen doing a bad impression of Liberace. Scott offered me more mud to sell about forgotten Las Vegas entertainers and yesterday’s movie and TV stars, most of the stories involving sexual scandal of one shape or form,trivia I never wanted to know, trivia I carry in my head to this day like a lingering hangover five years after the party that, in retrospect, didn’t seem like a good idea at the time anyway.
The windfall that I had enjoyed from the Enquirer sale was a mirage, a brief stalling of an inevitable looming disaster, not unlike governments bailing out ailing financial institutions doomed to fail.
In the middle of 2006, I was forced to give up a freelance trade magazine gig when the magazine converted from a “payment upon acceptance” policy to payment deferred until one month after publication. The rock began rolling downhill and when it came to a rest I found myself far from Los Angeles, ensconced in a cramped residential hotel on Columbus Avenue, rumored to have once been a bordello at some point in its long history, above Molinari’s Delicatessen in the bohemian enclave of North Beach. The room had no cooking facilities, faulty electricity and heating, communal bathrooms and showers down the hall, and overlooked Kenneth Rexroth Alley, a notorious breeding ground for rats.
Unable to face day-to-day life in an 11×11 room with unreliable electricity, I found myself a home for the long mornings and afternoons: the world-famous Vesuvio bar, just across Jack Kerouac Alley from the equally famed City Lights Book Store. I integrated well into the community of writers and poets and artists and musicians, each and every one of them with one foot in the gutter and the other on a banana peel.
An interesting thing happens to people forced into abject poverty, when one is no longer living day-to-day but often literally hour-to-hour: You learn to live not just by your wits but by a sense of ethics you never knew you had. Your empathy meter reads very high. If you can afford to buy a beer or a glass of wine for the broke, depressed, melancholic artist sitting next to you at the bar, you do it without flinching and next time he or she is in the black they will remember the kindness and do the same for you.
In the lower depths you meet people you are bound to never forget, people who would truly take a bullet for you, all they ask in return is that you do the same for them. It’s an unwritten policy that one learns fairly fast.
…Life in state prison for a known snitch can be measured with an egg timer.
In December 2008 Scott Thorson made a plea deal with the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office in California. He admitted to possessing methamphetamine and driving under the influence in August 2008, and possessing methamphetamine for sale in March of 2008.
He also pled guilty to multiple theft charges: $827.60 in groceries from an Albertson’s Market in Palm Springs in April 2007; $171.21 in groceries from a Stater Brothers store in La Quinta in July 2007; and a theft from a La Quinta Target store in December 2006.
In exchange for his plea, the Riverside D.A.’s Office reduced the charges to meth possession with intent to sell and one charge of theft from a hardware store incident in California’s Coachella Valley. He will serve two years in California state prison.
Scott Thorson learned the hard way that some days a guy can’t win.
Life in prison will not be easy for Scott, not with a lifelong reputation as a seller of secrets, a man who trades intimacies for whatever he can get; that is Scott’s survival instinct, it’s all he knows. In the novel Snitch Jacket by L.A. Times reporter Christopher Goffard, the author points out that life in state prison for a known snitch can be measured with an egg timer.
“First they push you into a broom closet,” Goffard writes. “Then they bust out your teeth and take turns while you kneel. Then they cut out your tongue and say, ‘You won’t talk to pigs no more, not even in hell.’ Then they slip the shank, and by then, you’re glad to say: So long.”
In September 2001 Eddie Nash agreed to a plea bargain arrangement on Federal charges under the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act for running a drug dealing and money laundering operation. Nash also admitted to jury tampering in the 1990 trial that had been bolstered by Thorson’s testimony against him, and to ordering his associates to retrieve his stolen property from the Wonderland drug den in 1981, but he denied planning the murders that occurred that night. He received a four and a half year prison sentence with credit for time already served and a $250,000 fine.
Eddie Nash was released in 2002 and today is a free man in Los Angeles”.
13. ONE MORE WORD
Please have a look at the article below. It will tell you why Scott Thorson has resurfaced recently again.
In 2008, Thorson was arrested and pleaded guilty to drug and burglary charges and sentenced to four years in prison.
http://www.celeblegalissues.com/legal-jargon/celebrity-alimony-palimony/
EXCLUSIVE: JACKO’s EX-LOVER BUSTED
Published on: December 4, 2008
Talking about hitting a wrong note! A former BF of the late pianist Liberace and self-confessed Michael Jackson lover has been sentenced to two years in prison for felony possession of methamphetamine, The NATIONAL ENQUIRER has learned exclusively.
Scott Thorson, 49, was arrested on several drug-related charges in Palm Springs on Aug. 27, and has been assigned to an Indio, Calif., jail before going to state prison.
In a 2004 interview with The ENQUIRER, Thorson claimed in the early 80s he had a homosexual affair with Michael Jackson.
Thorson’s five-year romance with Liberace ended in 1982 after Thorson became addicted to painkillers and other drugs, and the flamboyant pianist booted him from their Los Angeles penthouse. Thorson attempted to unsuccessfully sue for plaimony.
After the split, Thorson filed a $113 million palimony suit against the showman, but eventually settled out of court for a reported $95,000.
Liberace died at age 67 in 1987 of AIDS complications.
See how the tabloid is speaking about the allegations as if they were fact?
But this is not the point I wanted to draw you attention to. My main point is that Scott Thorson was jailed at the end of August 2008 and was most probably released at the end of August 2010 (if his term of sentence was cut in half as the rumor had it) or only recently (if he served almost the whole of the term).
This means that now Scott Thorson is a free man who is in dire straits again. And he is unfortunately resorting to the same old well-proven method he used on numerous occasions before – trashing Michael Jackson for the entertainment of the public.
He wants to repeat the success of his earlier National Enquirer deal with the only exception that the money received for his new betrayal of Michael Jackson should be not lost this time.
However he is making a fatal mistake again.
Blood money has never done anyone any good. Will Thorson be able to ever understand it?
* * *
Update May 11, 2012
On the basis of the above information LunaJo67 in collaboration with Sanemjfan made a video about Scott Thorson’s claims. Here is the video:
If LunaJo67 is going to make a sequel to it let me suggest that she also covers the way the media adds its own twists to this story, false as it was from the very beginning of it:
- Thorson drops vague hints and the media lies about the rest. Nothing except ordinary friendship started in 1979 even according to Thorson, but the media says “something” did.
- Thorson speaks of a relationship with Liberace from about 17 years of age but the media explains that it was Michael Jackson instead.
- Thorson just smiles and gives knowing looks and the media immediately explains that “the relationship” turned “intimate” (voiceover) and would “cross the boundaries of friends” to which Thorson says “yes” (with a tinge of doubt to his words), but “this is all he is comfortable saying”.
However “crossing the boundaries of friends” can mean anything – for example, turning friendship into business relations, or even into an animosity as a more exotic interpretation of it. Exotic it is, but the latter variant is probably the most correct one because since the time Scott Thorson started making passes on Michael, Michael told him to **** off and this when the whole thing ended between them.
Yes, Scott Thorson did try to “cross the boundaries of friendship” and it resulted in Michael Jackson totally disassociating himself from this man. So technically Thorson is right – and it is only the meaning of it which is exactly the opposite.
* * *
Update December 7, 2012
Roger Jacobs who wrote the eye-opening article about Scott Thorson that we admired so much, started a blog on wordpress http://silverlakeadjacent.wordpress.com and over there he answered my question “Will Scott Thorson ever understand that blood money has never done anyone any good?”
His answer is NO, and this means that Thorson will never understand it.
Well, Roger Jacobs knows Thorson well and we can believe his word. In another comment Jacobs added:
- “The poor guy is a human traffic accident and truly deserving of pity. Liberace screwed him over in more ways than one and left him a hopeless junkie. (And it should be noted that in private conversation he rarely, if ever, blames Liberace for the mess that his pathetic excuse for a life turned out to be.))” http://silverlakeadjacent.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/vindicating-mj/comment-page-1/#comment-68
I am very thankful to Roger for his reply. As to Thorson I can’t feel anything else but pity for him. If he hadn’t met Liberace at so young an age his life could have been totally different. The young are so reckless, so impatient to try everything that comes their way and so confident that any mistake can be corrected. If they only knew.
* * *
Update October 24, 2013
Someone is terribly concerned about seeing a glimpse of Liberace and Michael Jackson together in England in this video:
Well, tell these good people not to be concerned about it. Thorson and Liberace did indeed see Michael once in England and they invited him to a motor museum of Lord Montagu there. And the piece from this video is about their joint visit to that museum.
Lord Montagu, Liberace, Scott Thorson and Michael Jackson, at Beaulieu in 1981
To prove that it was just an excursion and the one Michael didn’t particularly like we have a rare picture from the MJ PhotosCollectors saying “Lord Montagu, Liberace, Scott Thorson and Michael Jackson, at Beaulieu in 1981″, Beaulieu Motor Museum (UK).
Lord Montagu is driving one of the old cars from his collection. The expression on Michael’s face, especially in contrast to everyone else’s, and the distance he is trying to keep from Scott Thorson tell the whole story.
No, he doesn’t feel any enthusiasm about associating with these people.
Update February 5, 2015
Recently I came across a NY Times article of May 2013 about Scott Thorson which explains a lot about this man and adds the necessary finishing touch to his character and ways. Here is an excerpt from it:
“His approach to communicating with people is always to play it in a manner that reflects best on him,” said Oliver Mading, the man Mr. Thorson calls his adoptive father as well as his manager. On a recent evening, Mr. Mading was sitting in the living room of his home a few miles from Reno’s downtown. Sitting nearby was his stepson, Tony Pelicone, who met Mr. Thorson through a mutual friend a decade ago in Palm Springs, Calif.
At best, these men sounded deeply ambivalent about being enmeshed in Mr. Thorson’s life.
“He’s not a bad person,” said Mr. Pelicone, who has a swirl of brown-blond hair and a cigarette habit. “He’s just twisted and kind of cutthroat.”
Mr. Mading: “He’d sell his mother — ”
“Then he gives you that smile,” said Mr. Pelicone, interruptingThe two admit that much of what they know about Mr. Thorson’s biography they learned from Mr. Thorson and that, at the very least, he has an aversion to telling his life story as a coherent, easy-to-follow chronology. During interviews at the Washoe County jail, Mr. Thorson was often evasive and moody, deflecting questions about his past to rage against the people who have declined to put up the $15,000 in bail he says he needs to get out of jail.
“All these people are getting rich from my story,” he fumed, “and here I sit.”
On Wednesday, he pleaded guilty, and asked to enter a rehabilitation program. He could face as little as probation with a suspended prison sentence to 2 to 30 years and combined fines of up to $110,000.What’s indisputable is that Scott Thorson is no longer named Scott Thorson. He is now known as Jess Marlow, a change Mr. Thorson says occurred when he entered the federal witness protection program as the star witness in the 1989 prosecution of an infamous Los Angeles character named Eddie Nash.
Mr. Nash shows up in the book and movie as Mr. Y., described as a drug dealer with ties to organized crime who made headlines for allegedly ordering the so-called Wonderland murders, a grisly quadruple homicide that took place two days after Mr. Nash’s home was robbed of money and drugs in 1981. (The crime is named for 8763 Wonderland Avenue, where the killings took place.)
Mr. Nash purportedly learned who had committed the robbery after his underlings beat up the porn star John Holmes, an acquaintance of Mr. Nash’s who later admitted to helping the robbers enter Mr. Nash’s home.
A fictionalized version of these events turns up in “Boogie Nights,” with a Nash-inspired figure played by a Speedo-and robe-wearing Alfred Molina.
Mr. Thorson says that Mr. Nash became a drug source for him in the early ’80s, and that he later became a partner in Mr. Nash’s club business. At some point, the two fell out and by 1988, Mr. Thorson was reportedly in a Los Angeles jail for an assortment of charges. There, he says, he was offered leniency by the district attorney’s office in exchange for testifying that he happened to be at Mr. Nash’s home when thugs pummeled John Holmes — which, if true, would make Mr. Thorson a kind of Zelig of the Awful. Eleven members of the jury voted to convict. One held out. Mr. Nash later admitted to bribing that lone juror, and in 2001, he struck a plea bargain in which he was sentenced to 37 months in prison for racketeering.Now, in his early 80s, Mr. Nash is a free man. And he would like to make it clear that he and Mr. Thorson were never partners.
“No, no, he worked for me,” Mr. Nash said on the telephone. “When Liberace dumped him, he had nothing. He was on the streets. So I took him in and he worked at the house. He was good for cleaning. Because I lived with eight girls at the time. Beautiful girls. College girls. It was safe to have Mr. Thorson around, because he is gay. I had a gay cook, too.”Mr. Thorson claims that after the trial, marshals in the federal witness protection program moved him to Florida and gave him a new name. “They had to keep me safe because there was a contract placed on my life by Eddie Nash,” he said during one interview.
“It started with the marshals taking me to different locations around the country for seven to 10 days, to make sure no one was following,” he said. “Texas, Alaska, Seattle.”
It’s an intriguing narrative plot point — man forced to get a new face is later forced to take on a new identity. But the story sounds highly improbable to Bill Keefer, a former federal marshal in the witness protection program. He has doubts because of where Mr. Thorson eventually landed: at a Christian-based homeless shelter in Tallahassee, Fla., called the Haven of Rest.
“How much protection could the marshals provide a guy at a homeless shelter?” Mr. Keefer asked.At the Haven of Rest, Mr. Thorson found religion. And instead of striving for invisibility, he shared his life story in front of church congregations. He says that he became a popular evangelizer, even appearing on a Pat Robertson TV show.
“He would share his testimony about his life with Liberace,” said Danny Heaberlin, who ran Haven of Rest at the time. “We had pictures of him with Liberace, because the story was so out there, nobody would believe it otherwise.”
Mr. Thorson says an East Coast mafia don gave him assurances that he needn’t worry about Mr. Nash. True or not, Mr. Thorson was unable to stay on the side of the angels for long. After three years at the Haven of Rest, he says, he started using drugs again, and in 1991, was shot three times in a room at a Howard Johnson’s hotel in Jacksonville. Local reports described the crime as a robbery committed by a crack dealer.
“They thought he was going to die,” Mr. Heaberlin said, “but he kept living and living.”While he was recovering, a life-changing event occurred: a woman from Maine named Georgianna Morrill came to visit. Mr. Thorson would later claim she had seen him on TV, spreading the gospel, but that is not how Ms. Morrill remembers it.
“I read ‘Behind the Candelabra,’ and I saw the photo on the back of the book and I heard the Lord tell me to pray for this guy,” she said, speaking from her apartment in South Portland, Me. “I thought, I don’t even know this man. But I’m a Christian and when God tells you to pray for someone, you do.”
She found Mr. Thorson through a Pentecostal friend and soon after the two met, she invited him to live with her in a tiny two-story red house in Falmouth, Me.
Mr. Thorson accepted. He stayed for the next 12 years.It was the second time that he found refuge in someone else’s life, but Falmouth was a long way from Vegas and Ms. Morrill was no Liberace. There were periods of domestic calm, with Mr. Thorson cleaning up around the house and collecting disability checks that he was eligible for after the shooting. But Ms. Morrill wanted to get married, despite all evidence that the match was a terrible idea. The couple had sex once, she recalls.
“That was enough,” she said with a giggle.Mr. Thorson’s homosexuality wasn’t the only impediment. He drank a lot and when he did he would sometimes “get stupid,” in Ms. Morrill’s words, prompting her to call the police. Still, she held out hope that one day he would propose. And one day, he did, but with a ring with a pearl on top that she somehow knew he had purchased with a stolen credit card.
“I said to him, ‘I’m looking for a diamond ring and one that you paid for yourself,’ ” she said, laughing. “He got pretty mad that I didn’t want it.”
She speaks with a note of nostalgia about those strife-ridden years. It’s a note you won’t hear when you discuss the subject with Mr. Thorson.
“Horrible!” he said of his Maine phase. “It was so boring. I hated the weather. Five feet of snow. It was too quiet. I had to get the hell out of there.”Mr. Thorson moved to Palm Springs, where he would be arrested a handful of times for stealing groceries and drug possession, among many other charges. Early in this era, he met Tony Pelicone.
“I recently learned that he came by our house to meet someone I was dating,” Mr. Pelicone said. “Later his house burned and nobody was there to pick him up. So I did, thinking he’d stay for a few days. That turned into 10 years.”Initially, Mr. Pelicone was thrilled to meet Liberace’s ex, and he introduced Mr. Thorson to his mother and stepfather, Oliver Mading. Mr. Mading, a businessman with a background in packaged foods, says he negotiated the “Behind the Candelabra” movie deal with the producer Jerry Weintraub, while Mr. Thorson was in prison on drug charges. After his release, Mr. Thorson spent his cut of the movie earnings — just under $100,000 — in about two months, mostly on cars and jewelry.
“We always knew Jess without money,” Mr. Mading said. “Not that $100,000 is King Midas’ trove, but Jess burned through it like a complete idiot.”Mr. Thorson says he’s now penniless because of outlays for cancer treatment. The truth is almost beside the point. An assortment of siblings and half-siblings want nothing to do with him, Mr. Mading says. His only real assets today are the intangibles that Liberace bequeathed him, most notably, a peculiar place in showbiz history as the kid that Liberace once adored and tried to remake in his image.
“There’s always been a love-hate relationship,” Mr. Thorson said when asked to describe his feelings about Liberace today. “At that time, I was so honored to be in his presence. And I didn’t want to go back to my lifestyle in the foster homes, which was pure hell.”Their years together scarred him, he says, and partially explain the troubles that followed. But those years were also the happiest of his life. So though he removed the chin implant, he also had a tribute to Liberace tattooed on his forearm. He rolls up the sleeve of a gray thermal undershirt to reveal an inky cluster of curlicued letters and symbols. In the middle is Liberace’s name, surrounded by floating musical notes, plus the years that Liberace lived and a yellow rose.
“His favorite flower,” Mr. Thorson said matter-of-factly, rolling his sleeve back down.Full story here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/12/fashion/scott-thorson-the-boy-toys-story.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&
Vindicating Michael 
En una entrevista a un famoso e importante periodista en Colombia, ese Scott dijo, explico, que su amistad con Jackson era porque quería dejar las drogas y Jackson no permitía en su círculo a personas con adicciones a drogas y cuando le preguntaron sobre una relación más allá de la línea decente, repitió, la amistad era porque quería alejarse de las drogas. Tal parece que cuando esos personajes que no saben ganarse la vida decentemente tienen que recurrir a artimañas, mentiras y calumnias para ganarse el pan de cada día .
Google translation:
In an interview with a famous and important journalist in Colombia, who Scott spoke to, he explained, that his friendship with Jackson was because he wanted to give up drugs and Jackson did not allow people with drug addictions into his circle and when they asked him about a closer relationship beyond the decent line, he repeated that their friendship was because he wanted to get away from drugs. It seems that those characters who do not know how to make a decent living have to resort to tricks, lies and slander to earn their daily bread.
LikeLike
After reading that, @mjjcritic, and reading this:
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3404503
I must say it’s a pity what the effects of drugs can do to the mind: make a person confused; inconsistent; cause addiction so bad it can turn a man ridiculously dishonest for money to continue feeding that habit.
LikeLike
For those wondering what the full extent of Scott Thorson’s lies were, here is the original story done by the National Enquirer in full.
—
world exclusive interview
My Gay Affair With Michael Jackson
‘It was time to come forward and tell the truth’ – Scott Thorson
“I HAD GAY sex with Michael Jackson!”
Those are the shocking words of Liberace’s former lover Scott Thorson – the first person ever to give an on-the-record interview about a homosexual affair with the King of Pop.
“It was time to come forward and tell the truth – I had to get if off my chest,” Thorson, 45, told the ENQUIRER in his world exclusive bombshell interview.
Thorson mad headlines and became a celebrity himself when he sued Liberace for palimony in the early 1980s and eventually reached a settlement with the legendary entertainer.
He said he’s breaking his silence about Jackson because he feels his information is important now that the singer has been charged with child molestation in California.
Thorson agreed to take a detailed polygraph examination commissioned by the ENQUIRER and conducted by a licensed, state-certified polygraph examiner.
The polygrapher who administered the test found Thorson to be truthful and said: “Scott did not show any signs of deception when asked questions regarding his homosexual relationship with Michael Jackson.”
Scott has said he’d be willing to testify about his sexual experiences with Jackson. And that testimony could prove crucial.
Legal experts say that if the defense asserts that Michael is a normal heterosexual man and therefore would have no interest in little boys, Thorson’s testimony could become important evidence as part of the prosecution’s rebuttal case.
Scott said Liberace first introduced him to Michael in 1979 in Las Vegas, where Scott was living with the flamboyant performer.
HIT IT OFF
“The day Michael and I met we hit it off,” Scott recalled.
“We spent days running around Las Vegas together. Michael wanted to spend all his free time with me.
“We are only five months apart in age so we had a lot of common with each other. Liberace and I were 40 years in age, a huge difference.
“This was before ‘Thriller’ came out, so Michael was famous at the time but nowhere near the fame he was going to attain in the following years.
“Michael would visit me in Las Vegas and stay with us in a guest bedroom at Liberace’s house.
“At the time I was doing a lot of male modeling and Michael loved looking at my modeling portfolio and other pictures of me. Even though he never really said anything about Michael, I could tell at times Liberace was jealous.
“I loved Liberace but I was never really physically attracted to him. It was a different story with Michael.
“He was young and good-looking. This was before he had undergone any plastic surgery.”
Scott’s relationship with Michael reached a new level in the early 1980s in London, where Liberace was performing and Michael was working on some songs with Paul McCartney. Scott told The ENQUIRER.
“While Liberace and I were in London, we were staying at famous female impersonator Danny La Rue’s flat on the River Thames. Danny was out of town at the time.
“One day Michael called me up at Danny’s house and said he wanted to come over.
“Michael was staying at a nearby hotel, so he had his security person drive him to Danny’s house.
IN DISGUISE
“Michael arrived and he looked great. He was wearing tight jeans, boots, a shirt and a cap to disguise himself.
“After a few minutes of friendly banter I told Michael I had gone shopping that day and bought some new clothes and wanted to try them on.
“We both went upstairs to Danny’s master bedroom. Michael jumped up on the bed, a huge 4-poster.
“I started trying on the clothing, changing into different outfits. Michael didn’t take his eyes off me.
“We were two young men extremely attracted to each other. You could’ve cut the sexual tension with a knife.
“I was standing only a few feet from Michael when he motioned with his hand to come over to him and join him on the bed.
“I climbed onto the bed.
“Our passionate lovemaking session lasted about an hour.
“Although I was extremely attracted to Michael and he to me, I knew we never could have a relationship. I was still involved with Liberace, even though our relationship was on shaky ground.
“Afterwards Michael and I lay down next to each other and talked. I told him I recently had plastic surgery, a nose job and cheek implants. I remember how Michael was fascinated by my plastic surgery.
“He told me he hated the way his nose looked. He thought it was too wide. He told me he wanted to get plastic surgery.
“The next and last time we had sex was the following day.
“Liberace, Michael and I had been invited to dine at the palatial mansion of lord Montague on the outskirts of London. We all sat down to eat in the dining hall, which was the size of a small house.
“Lord Montague had a young dining companion that night, a trashy blonde. Right in the middle of the dinner, she bellowed out to me ‘Do you and Michael get it on? You’re always together.’
“I was speechless and embarrassed. I didn’t know what to say, so I didn’t say a thing.
“Liberace either didn’t hear her say it or pretended not to hear. Michael just laughed out loud.
“After dinner Michael and I wandered through the mansion admiring the architecture and decorating. We’d planned to spend the weekend at the mansion while Liberace had to head back to London to give a concert.
“We ended up in Michael’s bedroom. He felt comfortable enough to make the first move on me and I didn’t resist. Michael then begged me to leave Liberace. I had to say no. Within a few days, Liberace and I left London to continue his European tour, and Michael and I never had gay sex again.”
After that Scott admits he fell into an addiction to painkillers and other drugs, and in 1982 Liberace evicted him form their Los Angeles penthouse.
“Liberace traded me for a younger boy,” said Scott. “I was much too old for him. I was 22 years old at the time.
“During the next year Michael and I only saw each other periodically. He was happy I was no longer in a relationship with Liberace. He offered me gifts, a job and whatever else I wanted.
“But the only thing I was interested in at the time was getting high.
“A few years after our gay fling, I went to visit him at the Four Seasons Hotel in Beverly Hills.
“I was shocked when I entered his room and saw a couple of gay porn magazines on his nightstand. The pictures in the magazines looked like young boys.
“Then a few months later I went to The Beverly Hills Hotel to visit him and again I saw gay porn magazines in his bedroom.
“Our relationship quickly deteriorated after this incident. I was addicted to drugs at the time, but I wasn’t and never have been into that kind of porn.”
Liberece died at age 67 from complications from AIDS in 1987. Thorson has quit abusing drugs and is now battling hepatitis C.
He added: “If the district attorney wants to talk to me about my experiences with Michael Jackson I would be more than happy to tell him the truth.
“And if michael tries to deny what i’ve said about our homosexual acts in London. I challenge him to take a polygraph test. I did!”
-ALAN BUTTERFIELD
LikeLike
I see that the article about Scott Thorson is back in the picture. In this connection let me post here an excerpt from a recent NY Times article which explains a lot about this man:
LikeLike
Yeah maybe.And I wouldn’t believe everything he says directly as well.But I think that you cannot label him as a liar.That’s what I meant.Sure he makes some “strange” things but this doesn’t show if he tells the truth or not.
LikeLike
Actually, he is best described by his friend Roger Jacobs who said that “a common trajectory in Thorson’s life’ was “selling dirty laundry for a quick buck or anything else he can get out of the deal; this should not, however, imply that Scott Thorson is a shakedown artist. He is a survivalist, living, as the old Arabic saying goes, “close to the ground”, getting by the only way he knows how without punching a time clock.”
And it was Roger Jacobs who gave a short “NO” to my question in the headline of the post: “Will Scott Thorson understand that blood money has never done anyone any good?”. No, he will never understand it.
It seems to me that out of the three of us Roger Jacobs knows Scott Thorson best of all.
LikeLike
Okay well yes I think so too.Sure he would be different now.But for me it is unbelievable in what way you are speaking of Scott.You said that his story would be noncredible and you mentioned his appearance and his drug addiction as reasons.For me your comments were disparaging concerning him.I’m sorry but when I read it I was just exasperated.
LikeLike
No, I don’t hate Scott. I feel sorry for him and his fate. He was very young when he was corrupted by Liberace. And even wrote about it in this post:
LikeLike
You really hate Scott,don’t you?
LikeLike
I did not read everything but to my mind you cannot really know if it’s right or not.Maybe it is not very believable but maybe there is also a bit truth in it.And to dis him is also not “nice”.
For me he makes a friendly impression and although I do not know if I could believe this story I do not determine that he is lying
LikeLike
Susannerb, what an incredible follow-up to Thorson’s story. Now we see the deepness of his craving for drugs – there is no power on earth (except prison) that can stop him from taking them. This person would sell his own mother, let alone Michael Jackson, for the money to pay for his drugs.
Are people in their right minds when they believe him?
LikeLike
Thorson indeed never understood. Now this liar received what he deserved:
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/5885166/liberace-lover-to-spend-up-to-20-years-in-prison
LikeLike
SCOTT IS JUST ANOTHER”BILLIE JEAN” WHO STALK MJ AN BELIEVES HIS OWN LIES THATS ALL *
LikeLike
When Thomas Mesereau mentioned David Gest’s film on King Jordan’s talk show I looked for it all over the internet, but found only some fragments of it. This fragment from David Gest’s documentary is about Michael not being gay:
Not that gay issues are that important but if Michael wasn’t, he wasn’t, and I cannot understand why others are trying to prove otherwise. What’s the point?
LikeLike
“also, Lynande51, not how AIDS works, it s Deficiency Syndrome, remember? the ass that wrote this article at LEAST educate yourself on what you are rambling on about..” – nineball26
The ass that wrote this article is not Lynande51, but me, Helena, and I didn’t dwell on the AIDS or HIV issues in this post, except mentioning that Liberace and his boyfriend died of it.
“know what dood, NO ONE cares if they had a relationship and there is NO WAY Thorson can get money so what’s YOUR problem?”
My ‘problem’ is that I dig up a lot of material to find out the truth about Michael Jackson and report it here. Is reporting the truth a problem?
so you’re idea is that there is no way he could have had a relationship with Jackson because he didn’t mention it in a book he had written in 88′ when jackson was still alive? hmm, what are the chances he didn’t mention it out of respect for Jackson?”
Mention what? This?
And what “respect” Scott Thorson allegedly had for Michael are you talking of?
LikeLiked by 1 person
so you’re idea is that there is no way he could have had a relationship with Jackson because he didn’t mention it in a book he had written in 88′ when jackson was still alive?
hmm, what are the chances he didn’t mention it out of respect for Jackson?
strike 2
Holly weird, WOW, what would it be without the vivid imaginations?
know what dood, NO ONE cares if they had a relationship and there is NO WAY Thorson can get money so what’s YOUR problem?
lets hear him out without YOUR imagination getting in the way, the chances of Michael meeting Thorson are HUGE, obviously, being in the very same industry..
also, Lynande51, not how AIDS works, it s Deficiency Syndrome, remember? what’s the key term here? oh yea that’s right HIV, remember, – or +, a straight woman could screw the ballz off a gay man with aids and that doesn’t mean she will even end up HIV positive much less suffer from AIDS, so…
HIV = Human Immunodeficiency Virus
AIDS = Acquired immune deficiency syndrome
because you are HIV + that doesn’t mean you are going to suffer from AIDS, Magic Johnson?
and just because you sleep with someone that has AIDS or is HIV doesn’t mean you will be effected, obviously your chance increase significantly but its not 100%!!!
really depends on your health, habits and other things, some people can’t get HIV no matter what, just like some can and can’t get sickle cell or the flu, scientists are busy trying to figure out why some are triggered and some aren’t, hang on
also, if you are going to make ASSUMPTIONS based on rhetoric and “theory” like the ass that wrote this article at LEAST educate yourself on what you are rambling on about..
ALSO, when people have sex they may use a condom or protection against OTHER things aside from AIDS!!!
thank you
LikeLike
Dialdancer, this law is absolutely indispensable! “Thy shall not steal” also means that no one should be allowed to steal a good reputation from a man who died and cannot defend himself any longer. Lack of this law allows all kinds of crooks to keep silent when people are alive but pour dirt on them when they are dead. Allowing them to do that is unfair, unreasonable and is simply revolting.
Adopting a new law will simply allow the living and the dead to have the same rights, with the only exception that the dead will not be able to speak for themselves. Well, at least their successors will be able to!
Denying them this right is like leaving them helpless in the hands of all sorts of rogues who will extort money from the successors by threats that they will drag their dear ones through the mud. Think of WR – if there was a law like that there would be a big chance that he would have never come up with his lies.
THE LAW IS A COMPLETE MUST!
Dial, in reply to the Cadeflaw petition let me repeat Caro Attwell who has just said on a different thread and address these words to all readers:
“Come on fans, this isn’t a time for apathy, helplessness or hopelessness. As Gandhi so rightly said “Be the change in the world you want to see”. Michael was and we owe it to his memory and legacy to continue that sentiment whenever and whereever we can.”
LikeLike
As you know CadeFlaw the Anti-defamation Legacy Initiative for the State of California has gone National. It is now AdLLaw (Ad Law).
Although, I doubt seriously anyone would waste their time on someone like Thorson, there are people who are and do far worse when it comes to slandering the deceased. People who if they had their way would annihilate the Legacy of persons such as Michael Jackson, Trayvon Martin, President Ronald Regan and a young Marine named Lance Cpl Snyder.
I’d like to invite anyone who has not heard of AdLLaw to read from the below links.
Our freedom of speech is precious, but there is no man made law which says you have the right to slander another. There is a law from a higher order which says: “Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” There is another which reads: “Thy shall not steal.” If you are getting tired of nagging, protesting and boycotting these people how about helping to realize a law the successors of the deceased can use to bring civil action when it is warranted?
“What’s So Special About The AdLLaw Initiative and Petition? ”
(The Grandfather clause)
http://cadeflaw.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/an-action-for-defamation.jpg?w=516&h=278
If you previously signed the CADEFLAW Petition, but have not signed the AdLLaw Petition I ask that you do so.
http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/protect-the-legacy-of
LikeLike
This post is not about Michael Jackson’s sexuality. The point of this post is in fact that people lie about relationships with Michael Jackson that they did not have in order to get money for those stories. Think what you like about his sexuality, he said he was not homosexual, both of his ex-wives say he was not a homosexual and multiple friends say he was not. It is usually just the same kind of people that say he was the ones that wanted to make money from their story.
Those that believe lies that were told for money because they have chosen to believe the person telling them rather than the person they were told about should not debate an issue because their minds are already made up.
It is something called cognitive bias. To make it simple let me explain it this way: You have a preconceived notion related to anything Michael Jackson said. You have been told by tabloid news sources, repeatedly, that he lied about everything from the amount of plastic surgery, his vitiligo, his sexuality and the parentage of his children.
This is called confirmation bias a type of cognitive bias. That means that you look for information or interpret it in the way that supports what you already believe. That bias leads to faulty decision making causing an illogical conclusion based on your previous thinking and emotions.
It’s you that thinks that somehow Michael Jackson’s net worth makes it okay for people to tell lies about him and make money from those lies. You in fact are biased against Michael Jackson just because he made money and Scott was/is a financial failure. Is that logical thinking? No it isn’t
LikeLike
You are crazy to think mj was not homosexual. I think it is unbelieveable how everyone criticises scott but does not hold mj accountable for his mistakes and actions. Mj had the world by the balls whereas scott has struggled through life. I find scott to be completely credible and there are tons of photos of them together. Michael should be remembered as a great musician. If you really are his fans well who cares if he is homosexual….
LikeLike
“Your information about the Wonderland murders is incorrect. 8763 Wonderland Ave. is not the location of any of the Charles Manson murders, nor was it the home of Eddie Nash.” – Anion
Thank you for the correction, but if there is a mistake in which location it happened it was the mistake of the journalist who reported it. I fortunately know neither of these people.
LikeLike
Your information about the Wonderland murders is incorrect. 8763 Wonderland Ave. is not the location of any of the Charles Manson murders, nor was it the home of Eddie Nash.
Eddie Nash lived on Dona Lola Drive in Laurel Canyon; not too far from Wonderland, but not the same house. John Holmes bought drugs from Nash and from the residents at Wonderland. He knew both parties and spent plenty of time in both houses. He arranged–basically–for the Wonderland residents to rob Nash’s house. Nash knew Holmes was behind it (if nothing else, some of his friends/employees saw Holmes wearing one of the rings stolen from Nash in the robbery), and the beating witnessed by Thorson took place at Nash’s house in order to get Holmes to tell Nash who was behind the robbery. They all–including Holmes–then drove over to Wonderland Avenue to commit the murders there in retaliation.
Because both the Tate/LaBianca murders and the Wonderland murders are infamous Hollywood murders, and because the Tate murders also took place in Laurel Canyon (on Cielo Drive), websites about one case often mention the other. But there is zero connection between them, and at the time of the Wonderland murders Manson and his followers had been in prison for some time.
LikeLike
“This stupid and homophobic distinction between possible MJ male and female lovers has to stop. It’s disgusting to see how the women have a free pass but Scott or Jason are seen as liars. To me, WITHOUT PROOF male and female lovers are in the same level.” – Sarah
First of all the anonymous article was not written by a fan, it was a person who was very close to Michael and stayed by his side for decades. He knew him inside out. This was proven by the details which could be known only to an insider (and by some other information I learned from a person who actually communicated with that man).
Second, Michael never condemned anyone for anything, but did repeatedly say that gay issues and the Bible don’t go together. At that early an age he was still deep in the Jehovah Witnesses’ religion and it does not tolerate gay issues.
If you are disgusted it is up to you – Jehovah Witnesses will be equally disgusted by your views. If you are so open-minded you should at least accept that pagans (civilians) should not impose their views on believers in God, in the same way believers should not force pagans (civilians) into their creed.
Michael was a deep believer in God and this is all I have to say to you. For you the distinction between male and female lovers is stupid, for him it was not – and if you are not stupid you will accept it.
LikeLike
I don’t know if Scott said the truth or not but it amazes me how claims like these are immediately dismissed as lies. I guess if it was a woman the beliefs would be different, right?
He’s in the Bunny Ranch, receiving treatment. I don’t think he needs money right now. Besides he has nothing to gain on saying his relationship with Michael lasted six years, because he was with Liberace that time.
In fact I believe men who come out with these kind of stories in a hetero-normative society have everything to lose. Money can’t pay the despise and anger from the fans and society itself.
You MJ fans like to talk about the girlfriends he supposedly had but even if those women who already came forward (Shana, Romonica, Johana…) told the truth it wouldn’t make Scott’s statements less true. Gay men has girlfriend and have sex with women all the time. And, don’t forget Michael DENIED dating those women on his site, back on 2005. As for Thorson, their alleged relationship was only denied in 2004 by an anonymous article (without a doubt by a fan) on National Enquirer and by MJ’s lawyer. Why not deny himself?
This stupid and homophobic distinction between possible MJ male and female lovers has to stop. It’s disgusting to see how the women have a free pass but Scott or Jason are seen as liars. To me, WITHOUT PROOF male and female lovers are in the same level. PERIOD.
You know, I think this is funny. how Scott still sticks to his story and yet no women was nowhere in sight. Don’t you think if all these women had had a romantic relationship with Michael they would have came forward by now?
Keep dreaming! And prat Michael wasn’t something worse!
LikeLike
“why don’t this guy get a job instead of trying to live off others:http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/liberace-romance-michael-jackson-article-1.1366082“
Why? You know, I even feel sorry for Scott Thorson. He made a tremendous mistake when he was 17 (many do when they are young) and all his life went downhill after that. It wasn’t his fault that Liberace subjected him to plastic surgery and forced him take drugs in order to lose weight. He was turned into an addict and then thrown away by Liberace as trash. And drugs and jail finished him off.
Now he is battling colon cancer, is a hopeless drug-addict and will tell any story for a little money to buy drugs for.
This good-for-nothing man is selling himself and they are buying him. And the one who buys is no less responsible than the one who sells. His pathetic lies about Michael are deplorable but a much bigger crime is committed by those who are using this wretched guy and his wretched life for their purposes. And their purpose is to vilify Michael – most probably for money too. He sells himself for peanuts, while they sell their lies for huge profits and I am not sure that these people rolling in money are better than Scott Thorson.
What can you expect of this man? Look at him:
Scott Thorson, 54, was recently bailed out of a jail in Reno by a brothel owner.
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/liberace-romance-michael-jackson-article-1.1366082#ixzz2VYuA6Ond
LikeLike
why don’t this guy get a job instead of trying to live off others:
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/liberace-romance-michael-jackson-article-1.1366082
LikeLike
It is clear that Scott Thorson is just another liar looking for attention.
LikeLike
“I read only one paragraph of this tripe and came to the realizaiton that the most amazing part of this story is that ANYONE outside of the immediate families cares about any of this.” – Dana
This is the very essence of the problem. All crimes on this planet are taking place because of other people’s indifference. Someone drags a man through the mud and everyone thinks it is normal. Someone slowly kills him and no one cares. He dies and they kick the dead body and continue laughing.
Dana, look at yourself from aside and you will see what a disgusting sight it is.
LikeLike
@Dana if you didn’t care why did you bother to comment what difference does it make to you and how about your life.Not very busy either is it, because you stopped long enough to comment about people in general on a subject you don’t care about.How silly.
LikeLike
Well if you look at the byline I did not write this blog article.Sad that you obviously did not or could not read that. Second who was talking about HIV either in the article or in the comments.Are you really serious? Clearly I have made a comment somewhere on this blog that has angered or scared someone. I just wonder who it is?
LikeLike
Come on, ignorant little haters. Bring it on 😀
LikeLike
I read only one paragraph of this tripe and came to the realizaiton that the most amazing part of this story is that ANYONE outside of the immediate families cares about any of this. Geez people ….. get a life!
LikeLike
Sorry, Shawn. You’ll have to translate. I don’t understand bullshit.
LikeLike
You are all fucking idiots. Seriously. lynande51 you clearly have NO knowledge of how HIV works. And all this MJ worship is sad. You are all willing to rip Scott apart to protect your precious MJ. He was a p-le and you all know it. Sad.
—–
VMJ: The word you used is not allowed here in connection with Jackson. It has been edited. Read the rules.
LikeLike
the media are big lies
LikeLike
i dont get why people feel they need to lie about michael jackson for saying that hes gay and everthing well i here to tell all you assholes out there that he is not gay or a pedo or a child molester . so sort your lives out and leave him anole hes done nothing to you and if you people think about those thngs well then you are messed up !
i love you michael jackson r.i.p
LikeLike
Guys, you remember Roger Jacobs, the journalist who wrote a smashing article about Scott Thorson, don’t you? I asked him if he remembered anything else about Scott and this is the reply he was kind enough to give me:
I am very thankful to Roger for his reply. As to Thorson I can’t feel anything else but pity for him. If he hadn’t met Liberace at so young an age his life could have been totally different. The young are so reckless, so impatient to try everything that comes their way and so confident that any mistake can be corrected. If they only knew…
LikeLike
Hi Sanemj,
I completely agree with you on Sullivan’s book. This book would not help the vindication of Michael period. Let’s wash away all the stupid tabloid stuff that the book consists of, Sullivan still expressed that he has some concerns about the 93 case and while addressing your question he had the audacity to say that Michael was obsessed with Jordan. Where did he get that information from the liar Raymond Chandler? We know that Michael did not take Jordan anywhere alone, Michael’s family and even Jordan’s own family were always present. Throughout the interview, I was probably more disappointed in Hill and the other MC Hammer fan that was posing as an MJ Fan.
LikeLike
@VMJ
Now he is my family, my brother, my teacher, and the people whom he brought into my life are my dearest friends. Even those of us who I clashed with in the blog only recently are also like a family to me with whom we have a sort of a family quarrel which is forgotten with time.
Happy Anniversary!!!
LikeLike
Guys, Roger Jacobs who wrote the eye-opening article about Scott Thorson that we admired so much, started a blog on wordpress http://silverlakeadjacent.wordpress.com/2012/11/20/vindicating-mj/comment-page-1/. Over there he gave an answer to my question about Thorson and it is a “No” answer, meaning that Thorson will never understand that blood money is no good.
Well, Roger Jacobs knows Thorson well and we can believe his word. So Thorson was (and is) ready to tell any lie in order to get some cash. And fictional dirt about Michael Jackson pays the most, so this is the best explanation to us why he keeps selling it about Michael.
LikeLike
“AND IV’E READ ABOUT THESE SEMEN FROM 2/3 DIFFERENT MEN ON MJ’S BED!!
WHAT THE HECK???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!CAN PLEASE SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME?? IT CONFUSES ME SO MUCH!!!MJ WAS NEVER GAY!! NO I JUST CANT BELIEVE THIS!!”
Apolehead, it is unfair to all other people in this blog that I’m answering only you today. But all the others are involved in a serious discussion and this needs time, while you are playing games only, and this is easy.
So you have read about semen from 2/3 different men on MJ’s bed? Fine. What do you want me to explain to you? The fact that the number was only 2/3 considering how many people slept on that bed, even when Michael was away? Or at least when he went to sleep upstairs leaving the first floor to his guests? I am surprised too – there should have been much more than that.
Giving his bed to others was Michael’s usual practice. For example, when Corey Feldman was in Disneyland with MJ, they stayed in one hotel suite. Michael gave Corey his bed and slept on a cot. Corey was sooooo impressed by Michael’s gentlemanly ways that he mentioned that fact to the police and many others – I myself heard this story several times from him.
You wonder whether there was women’s DNA there too? There should have been, only we need to ask the prosecutors why they did not check the mattress for women’s fluids.
But generally speaking, why is the matter who left what fluids on that bed so terribly important to you? Is it customary for you to check the mattresses of other people? If your parents, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, cousins, nephews, nieces, friends and the friends’ children, parents, brothers, sisters, nephews, etc. come to your home and sleep on your bed, is there a possibility that they will leave their DNA there?
And if they do, does you mean that you are lesbian or gay? How can you prove that you are not? You say you don’t have to prove anything to anyone? I agree, you don’t have to – same as Michael Jackson doesn’t.
LikeLike
AND IV’E READ ABOUT THESE SEMEN FROM 2/3 DIFFERENT MEN ON MJ’S BED!!
WHAT THE HECK???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CAN PLEASE SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME?? IT CONFUSES ME SO MUCH!!!
MJ WAS NEVER GAY!! NO I JUST CANT BELIEVE THIS!!
LikeLike
WHO THE FUCK IS SCOTT??? WHY IS HE LYING?? DID HE RLY USE POLYGRAPH TEST?? WTF?!!!!!!!
MJ IS STRAIGHT!! WHY PEOPLE ALWAYS SAYING HE WAS GAY!!! JESUS!!! IM TIRED OF THIS BULL CRAP!!!
LikeLike
This guy I really dont even want to say his name… He was totally lying threw that whole interview. I’ve been studying body language and he was laughing the whole time. He wasn’t being smitten but it seemed like he was getting pleasure off of fooling people. Obviously michael isn’t remotely gay. He said multiple times he wasn’t gay and I honestly think he was uncomfortable with homosexuality cause of his religion
LikeLike
http://reclaimingafallenking.blogspot.com.au/ Frank Cascio summed it up, Michael was into women not men or boys.
LikeLike
@sanemjfan You’re welcome. I was worried I would offend someone. 🙂
I was just on LaCienega’s site and read about Michael’s collection of porn. DEFINITELY not a little “dove”. 😉
LikeLike
Hillary, thank you for your comments! I appreciate the constructive criticism (as a matter of fact, I always encourage it), and I know you’re not a hater or doubting MJ’s innocence. You made some good points in your comment that I agree with 100%, and we need more readers like you who make substantive comments and ask good questions. I didn’t write this post, so Helena will reply to you about her comment when she returns.
LikeLike
I really liked this site because you guys analyzed things based on FACT and not on your feelings of who you thought Michael was. You tackle issues that haters probably don’t even know about (the underwear in the closet in 2003, for example) and the details of Jordie’s description fearlessly and prove Michael’s innocence using LOGIC, but the following comment really bothered me in this article:
“And whom is Scott talking about at all? Is he talking about Michael Jackson? Michael, that innocent little dove who even in the 90s made rounds of people’s homes with the Jehovah’s Witnesses books in his hands to preach the Gospel? That very Gospel which doesn’t approve of homosexuality, by the way?”
“Innocent little dove”? These types of comments are why a lot of people don’t take Michael Jackson fans seriously. You can know if he was innocent of those horrendous crimes based on FACT, but that doesn’t mean he was this little naive soul in every aspect of his life. By all accounts, he was a major flirt and shrewd businessman. He may have been LIKE a child, but he definitely wasn’t one. And just because the Jehovah’s witnesses’ gospel declares homosexuality a sin doesn’t mean that Michael couldn’t be gay. That’s like saying just because the Arvizos were Christian, then they must not have been lying about Michael because the Bible says the devil is the father of lies. I’m NOT saying he was gay, and NO I am not a Michael hater, as you should know by my past comments on this site, but in the future, I hope you guys refrain from making these kinds of statements which don’t really do anything to prove you argument but will make you vulnerable to attack from haters.
LikeLike
“It’s speculation, how do we know it’w not from a fan who never MJ. By the way the rest of that text said MJ was like a dog having sex for sex and felt in love with Blanket’s mother…it was an anonymous comment made on the National Enquirer, I can’t it where I am but the whole comment was posted on Lipstick alley.”
@Shelly, both of us are talking about the comment which was reprinted by the Lipstick alley forum and taken from Belinda’s blog – this is from where I took it too. I repeated the comment in full, and there was absolutely nothing there about “sex for sex” or Blanket’s mother there. Could you confuse the original text with some Lipstick Alley girls commenting on it?
I also remember that the introduction to the text said that it was posted on a special board of messages in the National Enquirer. Considering that there seems to be no Internet version of the National Enquirer it means that the former employee’s comment about Scott Thorson were published in the paper itself. And the paper it is a totally different thing than the Internet – they don’t publish anonymous letters, they could have even checked the address on that letter and the credentials of the one who sent that message.
What I mean is that the former employee who wrote to the National Enquirer to explain that Scott Thorson was a liar was most probably not anonymous at all. If they didn’t publish his full name it does not mean that he was anonymous – he probably asked them not to disclose his name in the paper to avoid any problem with his former employer’s managers.
And I doubt it very much that the National Enquirer would have published a rebuttal of their own lies if it had come from some anonymous person. They surely double-checked the name before publishing his angry letter.
LikeLike
“I think you freaks should be publicly outted. Especially you hater Helena who fakes to live in Russia.”
I’ve read this statement with some interest. So haters doubt that I live in Russia? Is it because they think that Russians are unable to do this kind of work? Am I to regard it as a compliment rather than a public “outting” of me as a “freak”?
LikeLike
I think you freaks should be publicly outted. Especially you hater Helena who fakes to live in Russia. [VMJ: the rest does not concern me and was deleted]
LikeLike
No, I can’t, it was an anonymous comme’t made on the National Enquirer, I can’t it wherr I am but the whole comment was posted on Lipstick alley.
LikeLike
“It’s speculation, how do we know it’w not from a fan who never MJ. By the way the rest of that text said MJ was like a dog having sex for sex and felt in love with Blanket’s mother.”
Shelly, I have not got access to this article as I reposted part of it from another site. Could you provide a direct link to it? We need to find out the whole truth about this matter. And preferably who said it and how it can be traced to this person. If it is Wayne Nagin, Michael’s former security guard, as Lynette says we can after all ask him if he can confirm it.
LikeLike
“Here is a video that me and LunaJo67 collaborated on. Helena & Lynette: can one of you add this video to the post?”
David, thank you and LunaJo67 for the video – it has been added to the post with some of my comment. I hope Luna makes a sequel to the above because for the sake of absolute truth it is important to differentiate between Thorson’s lies and the media lies – it is the media who presented the whole thing as if “it” started in 1979 (though it was nothing but friendship even according to Thorson) and it was not Michael Jackson but Liberace who had an affair with Thorson when Scott was about 17.
If we include here the even more horrendous lies Thorson and the media told about Michael in 2004, we will also find out that “the relationship” was nothing but two totally fictional episodes in London in 1981 which are a lie because Michael did not stay in Lord Montagu’s house (he was with Paul and Linda in the UK) and the whole behavior described has nothing to do with the shy 21 year old Jehovah’s Witness follower Michael was at the time.
In short both in 2004 and 2012 the media heavily added to Thorson’s story and twisted his lies. What we have here is actually two layers of lies – first Thorson’s vague story and then the media’s huge pile of bs on top of it. Thorson smiles and the media interprets it with their terrible voiceovers, Thorson drops a hint and the media “explains” what it is supposed to mean.
It is a sort of a game for both parties which is played for money and “entertaining” the viewers. And I don’t even know which of them is more disgusting – Thorson or the media.
LikeLike
@lynande,
It’s speculation, how do we know it’w not from a fan who never MJ. By the way the rest of that text said MJ was like a dog having sex for sex and felt in love with Blanket’s mother.
LikeLike
Shelly the speculation is that it was Wayne Nagin Michael’s former security guard. Wayne took over as head of Michael’s personal security after Bill Bray retired. Whether the specualtion is true or not it reads like Wayne would have written it.
LikeLike
Just another point, Thorson never said he had sex with MJ in 1979. He said he met in 1979 and had an affair with him in London. He only claimed it happened 2 times.
LikeLike
Does anyone knows who is this former employee?
LikeLike
Here is a video that me and LunaJo67 collaborated on. We originally posted Scott Thorson’s ET interview in it’s entirety, but then we decided to add info to the video to prove that he’s lying, so that we don’t give the impression that we’re giving him a platform to spew his lies!
Helena & Lynette: can one of you add this video to the post?
LikeLike
kaarin22: It is exactly “Schadenfreude” that a lot of people and especially the media feel about what happened to Michael. It means an attitude where someone feels pleasure or delight or satisfaction from another’s misfortune. And in his case they even created the misfortune. They constructed his downfall and then enjoyed their success and made it look as if Michael himself is responsible for it.
LikeLike
“Despite denials from Michael Jackson that he’s suffering from a lethal lung disease, the National Enquirer remains on “Whacko Jacko” death watch. Now their sources give the singer six months to live.”
Tabloid “anonymous sources” must come up with specific information their actually got from so called “prophets” that actually had the power to put Mike to death bed within “6 months”. By the way, Scott Thorson refered to “some anonymous souces connections” what according to that “specific connection’s” regulation he had to pass polygraph in exchange for a protection program, connections behind wonderland and their dirty story. Michael sexuality has nothing to do with that pure dust over Scott’s persona.
LikeLike
F inally I beieve all these negative and outright slanderous writings about Michael boil down to peoples joy in “Schadenfreude”, a German expression. Just now I cannot think of a very good English one to convey it´s meaning. Schade=damage,freude= happiness.
It is a step over “the keeping up with the Jones”. There is even a saying that “schadenfreude” is the best joy. That says something about humanity. I used to know German, by now very rusty, but some languages have good expressions for phenomena not easily translated. It is very similar in Swedish.
Michael was so gifted in his art and rightly became immensely famous. And still always maintaining concern for those who had less, who were sick and poor. Out of necessity he had to be very private, even secretive if you will. Here even lesser local celebrites complain about the unpleasant feature accompanying fame. And though far from Michaels class I do believe them.
It makes some feel good when somebody so famous, gifted and rich falls prey (in their mind) to bad behavior, misfortune or such. In Swedish there is a saying(poorly translated): The death of one is the bread of another.(Den enas död är den andras bröd)
It is difficult to think of another reason than ENVY. Is that one of the mortal sins btw?
In Swedish”:Skadeglädjen är den bästa glädjen.”
LikeLike
What a very disturbing coincidence 😦
I’ll probably sound crazy. But since I discovered that certain stories within the media and tabloids are usually scripted, like in that email –
¨The story will end with…¨
– I can’t help but think maybe Michael’s life and death was scripted by them as well?
Sounds too crazy to be true, but honest to God, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was. Just look at all the madness that spawned from the minute he died. It’s exactly what them evil SOB’s probably wanted.
LikeLike
But what I didn’t like most about the National Enquirer is that in January 2009 or just when Dr. Tohme Tohme was drafting a “contract” with AEG concerning Michael Jackson (that paper of theirs was supposedly signed on January 26, 2009) the National Enquirer reported that Michael Jackson had only 6 months to live. They said they had their own “source” in addition to Jan Halperin who was also saying some nonsense about Michael’s terribly poor health.
We know that Michael Jackson was in excellent health as his autopsy showed. He was a much healthier man than an average 50 year old man is. His heart was healthy and he had no illnesses which presented a danger to his life. However they wanted to show him to be practically on the death bed and said he would die 6 months later… which he did…
Well, anyone can think whatever they like about it, but I have the impression that the National Enquirer knew what was going on behind the scenes and that Michael Jackson was not meant to live beyond that half a year period alloted to him.
LikeLike
The book was actually written two years before 2005 by the same author David Perel, then going under the name of Ed Breslin as Amazon says (though the cover boasts the name of Nick Bishop for some reason). The book came out in February 2003 or immediately after Bashir’s documentary which aired in the US on February 6, 2003 (if I remember it right).
Publisher: AMI Books; 302 pages, 1ST edition (February 2003) http://www.amazon.com/Freak-Inside-Twisted-Michael-Jackson/dp/1885840055/ref=la_B001H6WMDE_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336506940&sr=1-1
The book is said to be based on the “files of the National Enquirer”. I wonder when they had time to write this 302 page opus if it was not only written but already published in February 2003?
Or did they know in advance?
LikeLike
I think it’s Stacy Brown. He was supposed to be close to Jermaine and did the fake book proposal.
LikeLike
Here is another unforgivable thing the National Enquirer did to Michael Jackson – they wrote about him a BOOK called “FREAK!: Inside the Twisted World of Michael Jackson”, by David Perel (Author), Suzanne Ely (Author). Mass Market Paperback, January 25, 2005
Readers say about the book http://www.amazon.com/FREAK-Inside-Twisted-Michael-Jackson/dp/006077598X:
-“I feel sorry for us as a nation if we continue to feed on these disgusting rag papers like vultures fighting for a piece of a rotting, dead animal. ” FelineFatale | 7 reviewers made a similar statement
-“This book is not recommended by me, not necessarilly because I am a Michael Jackson fan, but because it epitomizes “HATE not love, for our fellow man. ”bonnie | 5 reviewers made a similar statement
-“Save your money and your time and stay away from this book. ”
JGC | 3 reviewers made a similar statement
Here is the full comment by JGC:
Let me add only one point to the above – this book was published at the very beginning of the 2005 trial.
LikeLike
Some of the unforgivable things the National Enquirer did to Michael Jackson. Here is another of their lies:
Well, this is a flat lie because the family stood as one by Michael’s side during the 2005 trial.
But did you notice that the National Enquirer quoted a source who allegedly “passed a polygraph examination”? It is the routine thing they say about everyone who lies about Jackson!
Can it be Scott Thorson again? Maybe, but Thorson was absolutely in no contact with either Michael or any of his relatives since Michael stopped any relations with him in the early 80s.
Now if the person who passed the polygraph test was Scott it shows how effectively he can lie even to a lie detector.
And if it was a different person, it shows how effectively the National Enquirer can lie about Jackson – they tell horrendously slanderous stories about him and refer to some anonymous souces who, according to them, “passed the polygraph examination”.
For all we know it was the National Enquirer which said that Scott Thorson passed a polygraph test (and the same was said to Roger Jacobs whom I quoted in the post), but can we trust anything of what is said by the National Enquirer?
If they lie here the could very well lie there too, couldn’t they?
LikeLike
“He was the biggest, the most unusual and secretive celebrity in existence, and because of this, the media NEEDED things on him. And we can see how they work, when there’s nothing remotely interesting, they’ll make it up”
Rodrigo, this sounds almost like their justification. The poor things found themselves in a situation when they had to invent things.
Understanding someone is the first step to forgiving them. However what the media did to Michael is unforgivable.
LikeLike
“Vindicatemj, when whole timeline has no sense Mike’s hair style wouldn’t mean anything. Paul collaborited with Michael on Girl is Mine in 1982, and in the FOLLOWING year worked with him AGAIN on Say Say Say.[ source authorized by Paul McCartney, wikipedia]”
Skinnyjapaneseboy, it is ridiculous to debate this point because it is somewhat beyond the scope of the discussion but for the sake of absolute truth let me quote Ray Coleman who was engaged in the process of making those songs. It turns out that though Paul and Michael started working on Say Say Say earlier, it was released later, after the Girl is mine because something had to be rerecorded in Say Say Say. Ray Coleman says:
So this is a rare case when both of us are right.
LikeLike
That’s the thing, Helena.
Michael was the biggest star in the world. He remained secretive in his life, because he was sick to death of the media making all these assumptions and lies about him. Michael was already too sensitive, he couldn’t handle things like that.
And because of his lack of cooperation in providing them with interesting stories, they took the liberty coming up with anything that would work.
Because of Michael’s persistence in secrecy, they made stories to fit his ‘bizarre’ private life.
He was the biggest, the most unusual and secretive celebrity in existence, and because of this, the media NEEDED things on him.
And we can see how they work, when there’s nothing remotely interesting, they’ll make it up.
They’ll look at everything in and out, THEN roll with it, knowing nothing can come back and bite them in the ass.
If there was a story tomorrow saying Michael Jackson was going to travel to the Moon in an attempt to find Oompa Loompa’s, it would be believable to many idiots out there. Because it sounds crazy, because it would likely come from another ‘close source’ of Michael, it would work.
LikeLike
I wonder if people out there realize that the current media campaigns against Michael are downright contradictory in their content (Fiddes and Thorson), like it was often in previous cases, and that the only conclusion can be that NONE of them are credible. I hope at least that most of them can see it.
LikeLike
“I hate all the fuzz made from the “babydangling”. The baby did not dangle and michaels arm was firmly around the baby,.It was c. 2 seconds, and then he was forced to make a formal apology!”
Right Kaarin, it was making a mountain out of a molehill. And things went as far as demanding to take away children from Michael due to that episode! Well, this is what is really bizarre!
I’ve read so many horrible stories about parents doing terrible things to their children – starving them, beathing them up to killing them, and small babies being bruised all over, and no one can do anything because this is “private territory”. Usually it is the children who are “to blame” because they were unruly and non-disciplined – and all the society nods in approval and understanding.
And over here Michael just repeated what Debbie Rowe once urged him to do with Prince – show the baby out of the window, and what he got was a worldwide hysteria! It is the disproportion of it which is so amazing – the disproportion between what he did (in comparison with others) and what he received (also in comparison with others).
Here is the episode with Debbie Rowe and little Prince I was talking about. It was a totally normal thing to do, but listen to the voiceover! This News of the World is crazy! And crazy are those who repeat things like that after them!
It is great that God interfered and placed this paper where it belonged – into annihilation and non-existence.
Prince with Michael and Debbie at a hotel in 1997:
LikeLike
“Most of the things he did was to attract attention, the hyberic chamber was part of a promotions plan he was doing. Michael basically said,
¨They say I’m weird. Well, lets give him this to choke on¨. But they caught on to it, and as revenge”
I think that all stars do “things” as part of their promotion. Today it almost comes with the profession (though I personally don’t like it).
But what surprises me is the disproportion between what Michael did and the reaction he got. Elvis did much more than Michael (look at the picture of him performing with a chimp on his back) but despite that he never received names like Michael – bizarre, weird, freak, Wacko Jacko, etc.
What did Michael do? Nothing much. A chimp, an oxygen chamber and those elephant man’s bones which were most probably the invention of his PR man Bob Jones who admitted that much of it was his doing – but nothing else besides those three. Much later came the episode with the baby shown out of the window. It wasn’t the smartest thing to do but nevertheless the reaction was extremely over-exaggerated. I think that Dr. Hoefflin’s climbing a tree with a gun and crying out to the police standing below that he was an undercover CIA agent is much more bizarre than Michael’s episode with the baby, however no one calls Dr. Hoefflin a “freak” or “crazy”. Moreover he receives much better media coverage than Dr. Klein, for example.
Anyway the baby episode came much-much later when the Wacko Jackson campaign had been raging for years already.
The only really weird thing that happened to Michael was his changing color from black to white, but this is the trick the nature played on him and he had nothing to do with it! And no one believed him when he spoke of his disease. But what is important is that even while Michael was still black he was already called all those nasty names.
Listen to his songs in the Dangerous album and you will hear his desperation and anger at what they were doing to him even before the 1993 case – at the end of the 80s, early 90s. “Why do you want to trip on me?”, he cried out. And this song came much earlier than the Scream, which was the ultimate cry-out to his torturers for mercy.
“Once you willingly let a ghost into your house, it’s never going to leave you alone.”
Over here I agree. And that is why I think that Michael’s turning himself into a fake “monster” in Thriller was a wrong thing to do. Even thoughts affect people, and images are even more influential, so by presenting himself in this way Michael made a mistake. But all people make mistakes, especially when they are young.
LikeLike
“I also had a question about that picture – did Michael have an Afro haircut in 1981 when the track was made?”
Vindicatemj, when whole timeline has no sense Mike’s hair style wouldn’t mean anything. Paul collaborited with Michael on Girl is Mine in 1982, and in the FOLLOWING year worked with him AGAIN on Say Say Say.[ source authorized by Paul McCartney, wikipedia]
LikeLike
I know we’ve all seen it, but I’ll post it just to refresh, cause I think it highlights the discussion of how the media works around Michael.
I couldn’t help but laugh when I read this –
“It is not because of any special wisdom, interest or status enjoyed by proprietors, editors or journalists. It is because the media are the eyes and ears of the general public. They act on behalf of the general public. Their right to know and their right to publish is neither more nor less than that of the general public. Indeed, it is that of the general public for whom they are trustees”.
Right…So for example, those emails my cousin received from a journalist, working for a top British newspaper, regarding her time with her a footballer, was for the general public? I agree obviously, who else is it for? Them? So they can make their money? Of course not……. So they agree that what he public want are a concoction of lies as well, regarding certain stories? No denying it. There are the facts I’ve presented, “it’s how this business works”.
Mind you. I pulled that quote from a site regarding the media and their involvement with trials. Which brings me to the point. Regarding what Helena said. How the truth is obscured by the media How could they get away with such damaging things about Michael, without the consequences?
After watching the documentary .
It’s easy. During the accusations, you don’t present Michael Jackson as a celebrity. What you do is, is you present him as a guilty criminal, by whichever way you can. The more you add, and the worse it is, the better it will be.
The media and the likes of Sneddon, did all they could to take the privileges of being a celebrity away from Michael, and replace them with all the privileges of being a criminal. So, the media could easily take full advantage of Michael’s status as a ‘guilty criminal’ and say whatever they liked.
Even after Michael had been found not guilty, it was still very much in the public’s minds that it was a guilty man who slipped away from justice. Because that notion was still there, created by the media, they rolled with it. Why? Because according to them –
“It’s what the public want to hear”. And what the public wants, the media will deliver.
Disturbing or what?
LikeLike
I don’t believe Michael did anything to be mercilessly bullied til his dying day, Helena.
Most of the things he did was to attract attention, the hyberic chamber was part of a promotions plan he was doing. Michael basically said,
¨They say I’m weird. Well, lets give him this to choke on¨
After all the crap they gave him for years, Michael tried to use the media for his own agenda, and send them on a wild goose chase in the process. Good on him! 🙂
But they caught on to it, and as revenge AND knowing it was making them money, said,
¨Right, if that’s the way Jackson wants to play things. Here’s what we’ll do…¨
Once you willingly let a ghost into your house, it’s never going to leave you alone.
LikeLike
Not only Elvis, but many celebrities had exotic animals at that time and today as well. It also irritates me when people like Lisa Marie or Taraborelli blame Michael for the vicious and nasty things people say about him claiming he painted the image. Ignorant ridiculous tabloid gossip like the elephant man’s bones is one thing (he’s cleared most of this up on interviews), but I doubt Michael fed into the crazy, ped-le or black hatred rumors.
LikeLike
I hate all the fuzz made from the “babydangling”. The baby did not dangle and michaels arm was firmly around the baby,.It was c. 2 seconds, and then he was forced to make a formal apology!
LikeLike
Michael was not allowed to be spontaneous. Like the dropping in to try the chamber for burn victims.Why not? he had donated a considerable sum for a burn unit and curiosity is a natural thing. If he cracked a joke, this could be turned into scandal. He longed for doing ordinary things, but for that he had to make arrangements beborehand.
LikeLike
These”scandals” are in the end boring and the people who enjoy reading them are morons.If you ever have seen a play by Moliere where the miser or some otherwise poor character, like a liar striving for monetary gain gets his due, that would be a way to turn the tables.
PS. I don´t mean that they don´t deserve to be exposed, but there are different ways of doing that.
LikeLike
“Michael’s tricks against the media during the 80′s backfired later on. He allowed them to assume what they liked, and this opened the door to the most ridiculous stories to ever be imagined. But since Michael was guilty of deliberately provoking them, they used that trick for themselves.”
Rodrigo, let us not allow ourselves to be the victims of the media propaganda. Michael did not display anything “bizarre” or “weird” enough for calling him these names. He had a chimp? Elvis also had it. He was once photographed in that oxygen chamber? So what of it? It wasn’t a coffin after all!
I hear that Nicolas Cage collects all sorts of strange objects in his home – skulls or things like that, but I haven’t heard the media create hysteria about it. Please name exactly what “weird” things did Michael do to allow the media call him all those names? Say, in the late 80s and early 90s when the hysteria started?
“They weave lies around certain elements of truth…”
When I was first introduced to zoroastrianism * – which is a sort of my hobby – our teacher told us that lies never present themselves as lies in their naked form, because in their naked form they are too ugly. Therefore they always masquerade as the truth and acquire some of its features. The aim of lies is to confuse people and muddle their thoughts. Lies aim to present the subject as too complex for understanding and always contaminate people’s thoughts with the idea that everything is relative – for example, point 1 is truth in comparison with point 2, but is a lie in comparison with point 3.
In reality the situation is different. The truth is absolute in its form, like light, and if you compare points 1, 2 and 3 with each other you will see that one is dark (has no truth), the second is dim (has some truth) and only the third is bright as light (closest to the truth).
Zoroastrians pray to the truth and keep to the formula of “Good thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds”. I am a total amateur of course but I am trying to more or less correspond to it. This hobby may also explain my fixation on the subject of truth about Michael Jackson.
LikeLike
“As long as the public love a good scandal, big or small, there will always be people willing to give them one, coupled with the art of lies and deceit”
I’ve heard that the role of the media is to be the fourth independent power and tell the truth. If there is a scandal they should report it, if there is none, they should find something else to do. What they should definitely not do is invent scandals and fool their readers.
I would more or less agree with their tendency towards scandalizing things if they did it for everything and everyone. But no, they do it on a highly selective basis, and when true material for scandal appears and is thrust in their faces they don’t pay attention. This is the issue I have with the media – they prefer to have artificial scandals instead of real ones.
Is it because real scandals are too serious a matter and may require changes or destabilize the situation? And artificial scandals are relatively safe to invent? The most they risk are some defamation suits from the innocent people they slander. Over here you can always hit and run, hide behind the Sheild law and refer to some mysterious “sources” no one has ever seen. And anyway it is the celebrities who are responsible for being celebrities – they “knew what to expect if they became a celebrity and should have thought twice before becoming popular”!
With real scandals it is different. The police and media paid no attention to what Corey Feldman said about the high-ranking abuser in Hollywood who molested him when he was a boy. All they wanted was a scandal about an innocent man Michael Jackson while the real criminals were not interesting either to the police or the media – though it could be quite a sensation! Why so? Is it because it is easier and safer to substitute artificial scandals for real ones? Or is it because real scandals may be too time-consuming and even dangerous to investigate? Or is it because they want to distract people’s attention from real problems? For example, ped-lia in Hollywood about which Corey Feldman was talking?
Oh, ped-lia in Hollywood is too unpleasant a subject for a good nice scandal! And it can ruin the interests of big peeople in the industry too! It is much better and much safer to choose someone who is an innocent dove and who will not crush you in retaliation for all your nastiness to him. And what fun it is to shift everything you wanted to say about real ped-les onto someone you dislike! What does it matter that he is innocent? The public will be equally disgusted and you can even ease your conscience by saying that you are fighting the problem! So what of it if it is targeted at the wrong person? Who cares???
I am sure that unravelling the mysterious developments around Michael Jackson may be no less sensational than all those artifical stories they invented about him. However no one wants to pursue it. Remember what Thomas Mesereau said about the book deal they proposed to him? As soon as he said that the book would be about Michael’s innocence all publishers suddenly disappeared!
No, the media is interested not in scandals per se. They need “safe” and “harmless” (to themselves) scandals, just to distract the public and turn them into a sort of vegetables who will gape their mouths at some disgusting lies and shake their heads with fury at someone who doesn’t deserve it – while those who do deserve it will go on committing their crimes.
What’s the use of such media? It is pure trash.
LikeLike
I think it can be explained by what you said, Helena. And shown by the emails that journalist sent to my cousin.
The real trick is, there are so many celebrities with ‘interesting’ lives. In truth, there is NOTHING interesting going on with them. Some celebs even go along with what’s said about them, because in that world, ‘some fame is better than no fame’.
As pointed out, the tabloids and media have a brilliant knack for weaving lies around certain things. So convincing to a celebs behaviour, the public WILL believe it.
That footballer does have issues with alcohol, but he did not send my cousin threatening messages. But since those lies were weaved around the expectations of a person like that, they sounded believable and convincing, and of course, the public believed it.
They weave lies around certain elements of truth…
Michael’s tricks against the media during the 80’s backfired later on. He allowed them to assume what they liked, and this opened the door to the most ridiculous stories to ever be imagined. But since Michael was guilty of deliberately provoking them, they used that trick for themselves.
When Michael had enough of the ridiculousness he created, the media continued with their ridiculousness. They knew those stories were their own lies, but they convinced the public very easily…Because they seemed like things Michael would actually do. They were deliberately absurd, because Michael, TO THEM, was absurd, and the more bizarre, the better.
It’s simply a trick to attract, filled with deceit and lies. Happened to Michael, and happens to other celebs. Sometimes they’re participants themselves, but most of them are victims. Victims for the sake of our entertainment, which feeds the pockets of greedy, vindictive liars.
The public aren’t stupid. But when you’re faced with such ‘entertaining, scandalous and believable things’ from all the ‘interesting’ celebs, you can’t help but be drawn in.
LOL! I was actually going to write my previous message using The Truman Show as an example!
To actually find out it’s based on Michael’s life?! My God! What a terrifying world we live in!
Fancy a game of playing God with a celeb’s life, anyone?
LikeLike
“So they will continue to create lies and draw in others one by one, especially those who are desperate for the cash, and to keep their names in the limelight. And we’ve seen plenty of them of late, Aaron Carter, Gene Simmons, Fiddes and now Thorson. Selling their souls.”
I think that the media who use them sell their souls no less than these people.
The four guys you’ve mentioned fall into two different categories – Gene Simmons comes together with Fiddes and Aaron Carter with Thorson. The first two know nothing of Michael and are trashing him solely for money or their 5 minutes of fame (like Gene Simmons who wants to get back into the limelight at any expense). They are the initiators of lies and the main driving force of all the trashing. Nothing will stop them as they have no trace of conscience left.
Aaron Carter and Thorson are different. These may be more of victims than the culprits. I am not sure that what was reported in the press was actually what they said. With Thorson the situation is a little more clear than with Aaron Carter. I’ve made several posts about Carter and scrutinized each of his words. The end conclusion I came to was that he was used by Daphne Barak and the majority of what was attributed to him was actually her invention.
Why didn’t Aaron come out and say pointblank that she lied about his words? I think that he is afraid and is being blackmailed by her. What exactly does she have against him? Some family secrets. Aaron doesn’t want them to be made public not to hurt anyone more than they were already hurt.
Here is the post about Aaron Carter: https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/daphne-barak-vs-aaron-carter-a-beastly-game-around-michael-jacksons-name/
And here is the secret. Please pay attention to the way they wear their trousers :
[Backstreet boys plan a comeback tour in 2011]
LikeLike
“It’s all a show, filled with entertaining lies, cause that will draw in more viewers. The more viewers, the more successful it will be, and the longer it will go.’
Rodrigo, at a certain point in time people should start suspecting that they are being lied to. All people cannot be that foolish. But if they indeed see through the lies, why do they go on listening to this crap? If a certain source was found lying it is already compromised and people should avoid it like the plague – unless they like being lied to. However this is the impression I get – people seem to like being lied to because lies are “entertaining” and truth is simple and boring. The majority says in a very light-hearted manner, “Tabloids lie but we like reading them”.
For me it is different – if Diane Dimond or Victor Gutierrez were found to be liars on several occasions, nothing, and I mean it – nothing will make me listen to what they say. The same goes for other liars. Moreover, their lies have taught me to believe exactly the opposite of what they are saying – if they say that A is black, this means that A is white and vice versa. This is one of the foolproof ways to find out the truth by the way.
Think of Michael’s life as that show. His life deliberately torn apart, twisted and then cemented, for the entertainment of millions, resulting in the success for the network, in which cause is the media.
Michael Jackson’s life WAS a show. I even wrote a post about it called “The Truman show for Michael Jackson” https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2011/01/16/the-truman-show-for-michael-jackson-will-they-notice-that-everyone-is-acting-their-part/
There was a movie with that title and I compared Michael Jackson with the main character of the movie (Truman) not knowing that Michael was INDEED a prototype for him. The scriptwriter wrote the script having Michael Jackson in mind. The movie is about Truman’s life as a worldwide reality show which began when the baby was born. The TV audience followed his every step until he grew up and started asking questions. Truman didn’t know that everyone was watching him, even in the bedroom, even in the bathroom. He eventually broke free, though initially the script had a tragic end.
Of course Truman’s life was used as a background for selling products because everything he wore, used or ate was immediately advertised and turned into a popular commodity. I nearly fell of the chair when the scriptwriter and director of the movie said that Truman was modeled after Michael Jackson!
LikeLike
Helena. That last part.
If Michael had been found guilty, those parties involved, Dimond, Sneddon and the Arvizo’s would have all made money out of it?
That’s very interesting. Just imagine if Michael had of been found guilty? Sure, the Arvizo’s weren’t trying to extort him like Chandler (EVEN THOUGH THEY TRIED AND THEN FOUND OUT THEY COULDN’T), just imagine the fortune they could have made AFTERWARDS! Not many people think of that do they?
With Michael in jail, they could have gone over and beyond! Which they’re now doing with some little extent, because of his death.
Nothing to stop those parties going with anything their evil imaginations dreamt up, if he HAD been found guilty.
The stakes in the guilty verdict were tremendously high for those involved. Too bad for some that the truth prevailed! 😀
LikeLike
These scoundrels and liars will keep coming on. Just think that Fiddles managed to impregnate Michaels wife Debby bY holding Michaels umbrella.!It migt be profitable to publish “LIAR´S BOOK”.To tell about the near magical things that happened around Michael.And still he had the time to make music .,tour and entertain several families.
And have a “close” relationship with Scott Thorson, who was both Bi-polar and a drugaddict. Obviously his Bi-polar was untreated and acc, to antidepressant meds alone treated wrong.
LikeLike
You’re welcome, Helena. I just wanted to show how things are done in their world. Though there are a few good and honest journalists out there.
As you can see, journalists are more than willing to cut other peoples throats, if it sells the story. If it’s possible, they can and will make anything up.
They can easily influence and manipulate whoever they are interviewing with promises of fame and wealth. So even the interviewee’s are not be trusted.
It’s all a show, filled with entertaining lies, cause that will draw in more viewers. The more viewers, the more successful it will be, and the longer it will go.
Think of Michael’s life as that show. His life deliberately torn apart, twisted and then cemented, for the entertainment of millions, resulting in the success for the network, in which cause is the media.
So they will continue to create lies and draw in others one by one, especially those who are desperate for the cash, and to keep their names in the limelight. And we’ve seen plenty of them of late, Aaron Carter, Gene Simmons, Fiddes and now Thorson. Selling their souls.
And I agree. The public actually WANT that, a part of them does. They see celebrities, and HAVE to tear into them, like bullies, just to make themselves feel better about their lives and themselves. Ever been on the Daily Mail website? plenty of spiteful people on there!
As long as the public love a good scandal, big or small, there will always be people willing to give them one, coupled with the art of lies and deceit.
LikeLike
Rodrigo, thank you for the unique insight into the way the media does its business. It is indeed big business which has nothing to do with the truth. And each one involved in this business is selling something – one sells another human being with lies about him, another sells products with the help of these lies, and all of them are jointly selling their souls to the devil.
What I cannot help wondering about is why people would want to drink the dirty water of media lies absolutely willingly? They could drink the clean water of truth if they supported honest journalists but they nevertheless prefer to be “entertained” by this mud! Because the truth is more boring? Or because people have reached a stage when they are totally unable to tell the truth from lies?
When and how did it happen that people started valuing lies much more than the truth? When boredom came into their life together with comfort and satiation? Or vice versa, when they saw a lot of madness around them and found relief in the media telling them that their situation was not that bad as there are much crazier things taking place in life? And they exclaim: “Look what is going on in the world! In comparison with this our situation is not that bad!” Or, after reading Maureen Orth’s lies about Michael Jackson: “We should be happy that we have not sunk that low – we are no angels of course, but at least we don’t take “blood baths” like this monster does”…
This “everything-is-on-sale” approach made me recall one thing which I once read in a Spanish forum about MJ (in a Google translation). At the time the article looked like something totally incredible, however now I don’t know. Of course the story might look like another of the media inventions, but to me it does not look that way at all. It explains too many crazy things happening around the 2005 trial and the behavior of too many people involved in the process.
For example, it explains why Thomas Mesereau was so insistent while cross-examining Larry Feldman on questions about the civil suit which was to follow after the criminal case. At first Mesereau’s questions looked a little too far-fetched to me or at least “asked too soon” if I may put it that way, but now I don’t know.
It explains Larry Feldman’s strange involvement in the 2003 case when he was the first to rush to Tom Sneddon to personally report on Jackson though he himself did not believe a fraction of what Janet Arvizo said (he admitted it to Larry King but King was not allowed to testify about it, even though he arrived in court).
Among many other things it also explains Jason Francia’s participation in the trial, his strange advice to Michael at the very end of his testimony: “He needs to move away” and even Tom Sneddon’s response to it:
Here is the information from the Spanish forum (sorry for the automatic translation from Spanish). If anyone has the original English version of it please provide!
LikeLike
Or Tohme could have a good deal of assorted papers from Michael with his signatures and could easily make some compilations out of them.
MOA, an excellent observation! The articles you provided indeed make one recoil with distaste at the way Barrack and Tohme regarded Michael as a thing, commodity or “investment”. They don’t even understand how insulting and dehumanizing all of it sounds. It makes me remember Michael saying to Murray when he returned from the rehearsal on the night he died: “They think I am a machine”.
LikeLike
@kaarin22 Barrack had an agreement with Michael in 2008 which is confidential. It seems that after this Tohme came in more and more. Probably TT forced MJ sign more “agreements” or he forged MJ’s signature on some of them as a habit. He took over MJ’s life because MJ had become their “intellectual property”. This was the way Barrack looked at MJ. It’s a form of slavery or “investment”.
Probably TT was and is around because of these “agreements”.
As we know AEG /AEG Live were unsuccessfully after Mike when he returned to the States.
What Barrack and TT did, was to trade their “property” with the more powerful AEG and to gain entry into other business.
Obviously to all of them, Mike as a person and as an artist was nothing. They wanted his assets of course.What we saw as AEG Live “contract” was part of Mike’s slavery. Their problem began when Mike got angry and wanted to take care of his life and business.
LikeLike
Oh, and one more detail.
Apparently. Other tabloid parties are fine with lies too! When she was approached by another journalist, he told her to get her story straight with other guy, THEN to come to him so they could sort their own thing out! But when he found out what approach she was ultimately going for, he declined the offer. Because there was no way he could spin out an interesting story from what was going to be used, the ‘tragic and romantic’ version! It was basically a dead end to him.
LikeLike
Helena
To further demonstrate how devious and manipulating they are, I present these facts.
My cousin had several conversations by email and phonecalls with a journalist who she befriended, the same one who ran with the story which she changed her mind about.
She told everyone, which was the truth, that the footballer decided he didn’t want a relationship.
After this, she got in contact with the papers, and eventually got through with that guy in particular.
Because her story wasn’t interesting or hot enough for them, this journalist had the brilliant scheme of ‘sensationally’ modifying her tale. It was planned so that she would be the face of a company, thanks to her story, all set up by him. It would have gained interest and money for the 3 parties involved.
It was all tailored by him, and giving the go ahead by her (at the time). She tried backing out because things were becoming too overwhelming for her, and I know what she’s like, that’s true.
Here’s his email, basically 90% of this is his lies [again, I’ll withhold the names]
¨To give you the lowdown. Basically the story will follow the outline of the two stories submitted which detailed how you met – two lost souls in London – and how ******* managed to stay off the alcohol when he was with you.
Then your despair when he fell off the wagon and the text messages and phone calls he made to you which were basically a cry for help.
Then as we discussed together, I’m going to detail the problems you had with alcoholics in the past, how they destroyed your self-esteem and confidence, how they left you suicidal. But you were determined not to let this happen again.
You were determined to help him. But ******* couldn’t deal with his demons and after a series of drunken and threatening text messages and phone calls you decided enough was enough and finished it.
In between this I’ll mention the one time you slept with him and how he was a kind, caring and considerate lover, and your despair that if this side came out without drink he would be the perfect man.
The story will end with you moving on. How you have become the face of Skin Health Spa, are having a boob job and lots of other cosmetic treatments in a bid to make it big in the world of modelling.
****, it will be a really, really nice story.¨
Essentially, everything after the first 2 paragraphs are the tales they made together. None of that is true.
Other things he told her was to refrain from talking to other papers until they had their story sorted out. Then about contracts signed up, having to stick to what’s printed.
That story changed several times. First it was going to be sleazy and explosive, then it was going to be tragic and romantic. Then she dropped out because it. The deals were broken, and a watered down version of the tale was printed. She got no money from it.
Then a more sleazy story a few years later, without any consent at all. But because of her scheming those years ago, it came back and bit her!
I found out earlier that all though things never went further regarding legal issues, the story was pulled from the sites databanks.
So you can see just a taste of what the media and tabloids are really like! MAD AS HELL! 😀
LikeLike
Was Thome the respected accountant who was fired? I thought his past was checkered to
say the least.He is still asking for his 100.000$ per month.
LikeLike
I agree, Helena. You have to be on the frontlines to see firsthand how they work. Luckily for me I’m related to someone who’s been there! 😀
To go further into that story. My cousin actually dropped out of the deal with the paper. However they ran with the story anyway!
Then a few years later, they ran with another story about her and the footballer. They took a photo she had made and used it with their story in the paper. She wasn’t happy.
Here’s the email she made to them regarding the matter.
See what they’re truly like?
They never bothered getting back in touch with her, so the matter was dropped.
LikeLike
MOA, I read those articles. It states Thome-Thome was Michaels business advisor. He must have been that for some time apparently.Somewhere I got the impression that he was still working for Tom Barrack when Tom Barrack became involved with Michael Jackson. Regarding Barrack the article takes note of his thoughtprocesses:” He has the thoughprocesses of a vulture investor to popculture”. So Thome Thome was to take care of Michaels interests.That is difficult to discern when you read the contract,Thome also
lulled Mkichael: I will take care of all that(contract) and you the artisic side.Michael at some point got dead scared of Thome and fired him, From my understanding the contract was worked out between Thome and Randy Phillips.Once fired Thome did continue as before and is there even after Michael died.Frank Dileo got called in late, he was also on vacation.
The only date I have seen on any contract page has been Jan.26 2009.
Hmm– the fox guarding the hen s,or however you express that in English.The contract has no interests for Michael. Even Thome said he didn´t think michael would do even 1 concert.
LikeLike
Shelly, I’ve also read the interview and had the impression that Thorson was telling the truth here. This is why I thought that he moved into Liberace’s home when he was much younger than 19.
LikeLike
Rodrigo, the email is an absolute marvel. “Even though you two didn’t sleep together, we’ll just say that you did“. It should be used as an epigraph to each of our posts about the media.
LikeLike
He also said that
“THORSON: My mother was — my mother, Ann (ph) Thorson, she was bipolar for many years and went on — I mean, we had a horrible life as children. And because of the genes are passed down, they discovered that I was bipolar. The minute they put me on the drugs, I stopped.
KING: The drugs to treat…
THORSON: Yes. They put me on the antidepressants.
KING: Zoloft or…
THORSON: I’m on Ramron (ph), and I was on, what is it, the big guy… KING: Prozac.
THORSON: Prozac. And so I was suffering from mental illness, too.
KING: But taking those drugs stopped you from… “
LikeLike
@Kaarin22 check these 2 articles
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/31/entertainment/et-michael-jackson31
http://nymag.com/news/business/69782
LikeLike
@vindicate,
I don’t have documents about what he said during his lawsuit, I just read it on blogs. He said exactly the same thing during the Larry King interview.
“THORSON: Basically, what happened was is I went up to Las Vegas and we saw a show. I was introduced to Lee. We went to his house the following day. And Liberace loved
animals, dogs, and I was working for a veterinarian at that time — I was a licensed health technician for — and I was thinking about becoming a veterinarian. And what happened was that one of Lee’s dogs had an infection in their eye, and I think Lee just saw the way I responded toward animals, and from there on.
KING: But didn’t you have to go back? Where was home?
THORSON: Home was Los Angeles.
KING: Didn’t you have to go back home? You have to go to school?
THORSON: Yes, I did. Yes. Matter of fact, I was living with my foster parents, Rose (ph) and Joe Carahappa (ph).
KING: He kept in touch with you?
THORSON: He kept in touch with me. I actually did not move in with him until I was 17. I’m 41 now.
KING: Did you quit high school?
THORSON: I graduated high school.
KING: And then moved to Las Vegas and moved in with him.
THORSON: Moved.
KING: With the idea of being what?
THORSON: Well, I’m not sure. You know, I was so young, Larry, and, you know, he always told me, he says, “I’ve always wanted a son.” He was going to adopt me. That was all in the works, the whole thing.
KING: Nothing physical implied at that point? THORSON: No. No”
LikeLike
Tom Barrack ownes Colony Capital.Thome Thome worked for Colony Capital (for years?)
Tom Barrack also enlisted Randy Phillips and Phillip Anschutz of AEG to work with the 02 concerts,Colony Capital was everywhere with regard to Michael Jackson´s business partners,Who worked for Michael on Jan 26 2009?
LikeLike
Exactly, kaarin22.
It is literally, ‘just business’. Millions of people sadly don’t realize how corrupt the entire system really is. The media, the tabloids, and the people that get involved with them.
It’s all done for fame, which leads to the money.
My own cousin, a sweet and innocent girl once upon a time, turns into a schemer and liar as soon as she steps foot in the big bad world of entertainment and the media.
LikeLike
It is just as you say Rodrigo, Ang BIG-money intends to Make Big money off Michael for eternity.See my other posts,
LikeLike
Oh my God, LOL!
The use of LIES, the misuse of MYTHS, the guy’s just asking for trouble!
Why do they do it, why make up lies?
Well I know for a FACT, that it’s the tabloids who deliberately egg on who they are interviewing.
I’ll withhold the names, but my cousin once dated a high profile footballer very briefly a few years ago. After they stopped seeing eachother, she tried selling her story to the tabloids.
The emails demonstrated things like the tabloids saying,
¨Even though you two didn’t sleep together, we’ll just say that you did, because it’ll generate more interest, which is what we want. We have the photos of you two going back to the hotel, so we can say you had sex there. Giving the nature of who this footballer is and the lack of resourceful witnesses, it would be perfectly fine for us to add the eccentricity of your night of passion. It would be your word against his, and we can back you up. All of this practice may seem unorthodox to you, but it’s how this business works, you understand? But at least you make money and can step back once it’s all over and do your own thing¨
They were reassuring her of all these promises of money and limelight. Because she was a model, so naturally, she accepted.
But we know for a fact, it was in fact her plan from the beginning to date the footballer to further her career. When that ended quicker than she thought, she felt nothing about bashing the footballer with lies, aided by the tabloids. This was to get her 15 minutes of fame, that would get her the interest and money. The 2 parties making up lies, tailored strategically, to fit the people involved and the situation.
That’s what goes on, because I’ve seen it.
LikeLike
Everybody wants to make money,There are big players with more money than you can think of in this game, Michael Jackson:Elements of truth about “Dr, Thome”
,There may be much more real big money than you can think of. This BIG -money intends to make it off MJJ for eternity.
Check up:WIKILEAKS:Heavens task force:Tamoil.:Michael Jackson:Elements of truth about ” Dr, “Thome”
LikeLike
That guy Fiddes! Tito said that Fiddes threatened that he would get even with the Jackson family. My question is what did Michael have to do with it that he drags hims into it all the time? Nothing he’s just using his name as an attention getter. And then look at the newest recycle of every lie that Gutierrez sold them (The Sun/ Splash News? Kevin Smith and Gary Morton) in 1993. I swear Gutierrez sticks to the bottom of the shoe like dog doodoo. Some bodyguard! If all I would have to do was tout an umbrella I could have been a body guard for MJ.
LikeLike
more rubbish from a so called bodyguard of MJ:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/4299928/Michael-Jackson-ordered-minders-to-kill-his-brother-Randy.html
LikeLike
Skinny, of course, we cannot be sure that it is genuine. I also had a question about that picture – did Michael have an Afro haircut in 1981 when the track was made? The next year, when they were making the video Michael’s hair looked totally different.
However I’ve found this picture showing that Michael probably had an Afro at around that time:
In 1983 Michael looked like this:
And this picture is attributed to 1985:
LikeLike
“Dont you think it weird that ET person says I am just going to flat out ask you this question about MJ , and just leaves it out there like that..This entire thing seemed very intentional.”
Of course it is intentional. No doubt about it.
LikeLike
“I know what he said during the King interview but it’s not what he testified during his lawsuit against Liberace. I believe he likes to be dramatic. He was born in 1958, there are articles available which said they met in 1974.”
Shelly, if you know what Thorson testified to in his lawsuit against Liberace please tell us here. We need to know the truth to understand what kind of a person Thorson is, so if you can elaborate on that you are more than welcome. Or please provide a link for us to see what he said under oath.
LikeLike
“It’s time for the Estate to step up to the plate and sue Thorson on this one right after they name Paramount and Entertainment Tonight. Just like he did with Victor Gutierrez. Enough is Enough!”
Yes, enough is enough. And the Estate should have their say for sure. But I need to make one point. What we see here is not so much Thorson’s doing – what we see here is the media using Thorson for its own goals. If you analyze what Thorson said and what is said by all these Etonline and other sources, you will see that the media’s part is much heavier than Thorson’s.
It is the media people who add all those “embellishments” to his story which make it look like something terribly “intimate”.
Thorson is no angel either, for sure. But the real monster is the media which gives the necessary coloring to his story by saying things like “tumulous relationship”, “intimate friendship”, “shocking revelations”, “he claims he had an affair”, etc.
This is the usual thing they do when it comes to Michael Jackson. Someone just opens his mouth to hint at something and all the rest is done by the media. One “source” starts, the rest follow suit and the end result is totally incomparable with what the person initially said.
Now I am not sure at all that back in 2004 Thorson said all those salacious things to the National Enquirer either. They could have very well invented them themselves. I think I’ll write about it as I have one interesting piece on it.
LikeLike
“if Thorson was 19 when he met Liberace how could he have been 16 when he met Michael and Michael would have been improper with someone his own age. I think Helena made that point in her post.”
Lynande, I’ve changed the post as it is indeed not clear when the whole thing between Thorson and Liberace started and whether it was true at all. I focused on MJ’s part and didn’t check up Liberace’s. I was angry and anger is not the best advisor.
However what is absolutely clear to me is that no one would be interested in this Thorson/Liberace story if it were not for Michael Jackson whom they also threw into the picture. There is no doubt that they are meddling with his name deliberately. They mix it with lies (?) about Liberace. They even replace Liberace’s name with Michael’s and finally present it in a totally monstrous manner – now it is not Liberace, but Michael whom Thorson met “when he was 16”, and now the book he wrote about Liberace turns out to be about his “relationship with Michael”!
Look at the devilish way the media is doing it. Etonline says:
So they call the relations “tumultuous” (“turbulent, greatly agitated, confused, disturbed”). Immediately before that they said that the “relationship blossomed into more” implying something salacious, and then they say that Thorson details his “tumultuous” relationship with MJ in a book he wrote in 1998 (!).
The book was written in 1988 and was written about Liberace and not Michael Jackson! Michael was mentioned there, but only as Thorson’s friend as the author of the book made it absolutely clear when she spoke to Roger Friedman!
However to confuse the public even more the Huffington Post repeats the innuendoes of Etonline in a much more definite way:
“Intimate” friendship “revealed” in the book written about whom? About Jackson??? And what “intimate” friendship did it detail? All it had was a story about them being friends. Whatever intimate it had was about Liberace!
Even the “unintentional” mistake of Etonline over the year of publishing the book is not a chance one. The confused public is led to believe that Thorson first experienced something “tumultuous” with MJ and then wrote a book at the end of the 90s (when Michael’s name was already tarnished with the 1993 scandal).
And not a word is said about the fact that Scott and Michael were actually the same age and were just friends at some point in time – and even this ended rather quickly after Scott began “making passes” at MJ.
And this is what they call “providing information” to readers? Wouldn’t a better word be “misinformation”?
What do we have the media for? To tell us lies or inform us of the truth? If what they do is misinformation only, why do we need them at all?
Another revolting thing in this whole situation is that now they are going to make a movie on the basis of this terrible mixture of lies, gossip and innuendoes.
Do they themselves know what or whom they are going to make a movie about?
LikeLike
“You know, when Lee and I met I was 16-1/2 years old, Larry, 16- 1/2. I was just a child.”
I know what he said during the King interview but it’s not what he testified during his lawsuit against Liberace. I believe he likes to be dramatic. He was born in 1958, there are articles available which said they met in 1974.
LikeLike
“Never knew Liberace was a pedophile until I read this.”
Hilary, after the criticism of my bias towards Liberace and not enough study of Liberace’s case (which I fully admit) I have removed the word ped-lia from the text of the post. It is indeed not clear at what age Thorson moved in to live with Liberace – at 16 or 19 – so let us give Liberace the benefit of the doubt. I am sorry for being too reckless in associating him with this word.
LikeLike
“A personal e-mail to you.,check it out.”
Kaarin, I’ve received your email but to be able to understand what you are talking of I need a direct link to that source. Please provide. I’ve sent you a reply but it doesn’t seem to be working again.
LikeLike
“The text to this photo says “Lord Montagu, Liberace, Scott Thorson and Michael Jackson, at Beaulieu in 1981″, Beaulieu Motor Museum (UK)”
Sure, There are many manufactures designed to craft such pic. these days.
I learn about it while watching JFK, Oliver Stones’s film
LikeLike
“I do recall, though, that he was troubled — at about the age of 18 — by stories that he was about to have a sex change operation.
It was the first time, to my memory, that rumours of his sexuality began to run rampant.
Suddenly, everyone wanted to know if he was gay. So, one day at his Encino home, as the brothers played basketball and Michael and I stood on the sidelines and watched — since neither of us was very athletic — I casually asked him if he was gay.
He looked embarrassed. ‘No,’ was his response. ‘I think it’s a shame that people have to jump to conclusions about me. I wonder if there will always be rumours like that about me? I hope not.’ […]
I’m a man of honour,’ he told me. ‘If you believe anything about me, believe that.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1196188/Michael-Jacksons-life-long-confidante-J-Randy-Taraborrelli-I-saw-eyes-dying.html#ixzz1u3gHaS1y
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1196188/Michael-Jacksons-life-long-confidante-J-Randy-Taraborrelli-I-saw-eyes-dying.html#ixzz1u3eBCotq
LikeLike
“No, they started their relationship in 1977, Scott was 19. We should be careful about what we are saying about other people.”
Hmm, Scott was on Larry king in 2002 and said this:
“You know, when Lee and I met I was 16-1/2 years old, Larry, 16- 1/2. I was just a child.”
And then, “I actually did not move in with him until I was 17.”
And something else he said: “Lee didn’t associate with anybody in show business. The only close people in show business were actually my friends, which was Michael Jackson, Tony Orlando and Charo.”
So Michael is now his “friend”, and earlier in that interview he said he did not have other gay relationships…
LikeLike
lynande51
that is why I wonder if this is some kind of business sabotage going on as well..like corporations fighting with one another.
the estate should step in and do something, especially if they are making a movie out of it.
Dont you think it weird that ET person says I am just going to flat out ask you this question about MJ , and just leaves it out there like that..This entire thing seemed very intentional..
TMZ didnt run this supposed bombshell that this man is claiming.
They seemed to know better
LikeLike
Let’s not forget that the show itself is evidence of their intent. Through innuendo they return to the allegations when Scott Thorson says that he saw magazines with young boys.
LikeLike
Shelly, That’s a good point if Thorson was 19 when he met Liberace how could he have been 16 when he met Michael and Michael would have been improper with someone his own age. I think Helena made that point in her post.
I just got an email from MJ Truth Now. In it they are mentioning just exactly what I said before. It is amazing to me that when Michael’s image is going to be placed on 1 billion Pepsi cans out comes more gossip in an attempt to overshadow any kind of positive news there is about Michael. Then of course some publications have to get involved and of course bring up the allegations and how Pepsi made a mistake when they made this deal. Media sabotage is what it is.
I think they should reread the defamation law regarding defamation of the dead. Because in truth Michael is still earning money after his death and his image is still earning money after he is dead. That means that he is exempt from that part of the law that says you can’t defame the dead because he is now a product with a huge earning capacity. It’s time for the Estate to step up to the plate and sue Thorson on this one right after they name Paramount and Entertainment Tonight. Just like he did with Victor Gutierrez. Enough is Enough!
Let’s start with a little thing called trade libel in California and see if that works. I think people are forgetting that Michael was/is a product. His image and his voice are marketable commodities.When they committ a libel that reduces the value of the product and they are doing it by claiming that the product Michael Jackson is a ped-le that may reduce the product Michael Jacksons earning capacity.That shows intent to do the damage so they are now acting with malice. The proof that what they say is wrong? The 14 not guilty verdicts just won my case. That works just like a guilty one would have if he had been found guilty and the Arvizo’s wanted to sue. Take it into court and present the evidence that he is not and was not guilty of the allegations.
http://jessie-vanwinkle.suite101.com/trade-libel-in-california-a149727
LikeLike
“It was Liberace, aged 44 who could be improper with Scott when Scott was 16.”
No, they started their relationship in 1977, Scott was 19. We should be careful about what we are saying about other people.
LikeLike
@nannoris “I remember someone saying his outfits were like Liberace going to war.”
FYI, that was Michael Bush/Dennis Tompkins (can’t tell who is who) that described Michael’s style as “Liberace gone to war.” Never knew Liberace was a pedophile until I read this. And yet MICHAEL is the “wacko”?
I know this has nothing to do with this post, but since this is the most recent post, I thought I’d include it here in case you guys want to do a post about MTV and Michael’s relationship. Last year, MTV had a little segment on their site about thier 30th anniversary and artists who had MTV “to thank” for their careers, and they listed BILLIE JEAN on it. Are you kidding me? The world knew Michael was the shit before Billie Jean. The guy was touring Japan ten years BEFORE the Thriiller album came out; it’s Michael that MADE MTV. The tween music/entertanment site, Tommy2.net was the one to point this out:
————————————————————
“I guess someone still thinks they’re still relevant? On Monday, I happened to see a tweet about a feature at The Hollywood Reporter to promote MTV celebrating their 30th Birthday. It was titled MTV: 30 Years of Music Videos, and the byline read “The famed music network just celebrated its third decade. See which artists have MTV to thank for their song’s successes in the channel’s early years.” I clicked through the slide show and my jaw dropped when I saw Billie Jean by Michael Jackson in the list. If anyone should be thanking anyone, it should be MTV thanking Michael for putting them on the map, not the other way around. Not only had he achieved multiple #1 singles as part of the Jackson Five, but had four top 10 hits on his debut, Off The Wall. An album that reached #3 on Billboard and scored Michael three American Music Awards. Michael was a household name and selling millions of albums long before the Billie Jean music video hit MTV.
Despite the fact I’m not a fan of Wikipedia, at least they get it right on their page about Michael Jackson. It goes as far as to say “The music videos for his songs, including those of “Beat It”, “Billie Jean”, and “Thriller”, were credited with transforming the medium into an art form and a promotional tool, and the popularity of these videos helped to bring the relatively new television channel MTV to fame.” Touche’ – Lauren Schutte and David Simpson, it’s time to treat the King of Pop with a little more respect.”
—————————
BTW, I’m starting to think the people on Topix that are bashing this blog are the Arvizos and their friends/family because this site is using nothing but FACTS and transcripts to prove they are all liars in a very detailed manner.
LikeLike
The more info from here and there convinces me that the p-flia gruop are launching an oraganized attack via Michael to get themselved legalized.Why now that Michael has been dead for soon 3 years? But that will never happen. I have worked with hundreds of victims of child- molestation and know the damage it brings.:the medialoid stuff has now saturated the market and can be found in “better” publications.Still they do not clearly state sources and it maybe even difficult as it has become so pervasive. What if your 8yo daughter announces she is dating an adult?
I know in some cultures children are married at 2-3 years.This is usually an arragnment by the parents and the parties do not start to cohabite until they are at least pubertal. Not a good practice either..-In psychiatry one has to make a difference between mental illness and disorder. That can and often does coexist, take Evan Chandler. I will not go into that now.
LikeLike
VMJ, an organized p-flia group it seems. You may not know how close they follow footsteps,.
A personal e-mail to you.,check it out.
LikeLike
Who is this Scott Thorson? I mean before he became Liberace´s boytoy at age 16. His lifestory reads as what at times in US is called white trash. Ready to betray anybody for anything and esp.for lies. He was a drugabuser,it´s said that was the reason Liberace kicked him out. In the pic. of the 4 in the car Michael seems to distance himself from Scott as much as possible. Enough of drugs and you can pass lietests for sure and psychopaths even without. I fear there will be more worms coming out of the woodwork now that Michael is dead.
And,yes VMJ,p-lia ,organized such, and the V.G. howers over all this.
LikeLike
“A liar is a liar, no matter whom or what he talks about. Just because he claimed that he did something with Michael in Montague’s house that doesn’t mean there was ANY basis to this lie: I’m certain that never happened but I don’t need to speculate and project the story onto Montague doing something with Thorson. Thorson is just a liar. Period.”
Suzy, I agree that your approach to the matter is more consistent than mine. I evidently don’t like the expression on Liberace’s face and must be biased towards him.
LikeLike
“It is starting to look intentional and I can tell you why. Soon there will be a new diagnostic text for determining psychiatric disorders and pedophiles want their term dropped as a mental illness like homosexuality was in the late 1970′s. If they were to achieve that they could then declare that it is an alternative lifestyle like homosexuality and bi sexuality. From there they could have laws changed to make it legal to have what would then be called “consensual sex” with a child.”
Lynande, so it will be soon? Then ped-les will fight for their “rights” tooth and nail. They will start with borderline cases like the 16-year old Scott Thorson and argue that he was quite mature to take his own decisions. They will say that what is a sex crime in one country is allowed in another. They will refer to Ancient Greece and Rome and say that their democracies blossomed due to ped-lia (as those university professors assured us). They will pull all the ropes to pass new laws. And they do have connections in the establishment of most countries because many of them are the abusers themselves.
Scott Thorson’s story is the best illustration what will happen if ped-les achieve their goal and become a reality. In their lust for the young these older people will corrupt whole generations of young boys and girls and offer them sex, pleasure seeking and indulgence instead of studying, developing interests, pursuing careers, forming normal relations with their peers and building their own families.They will stop the normal development of these young people by interfering into their lives and even changing their sexuality. Since those who corrupt the young are corrupt themselves drug-taking will be introduced and encouraged as the young will increasingly reflect why they are living such a strange way of life and will try to forget themselves.
If we are to believe Thorson his drug habit formed when a Beverly Hills doctor made plastic surgery on his face and treated him to a cocktail of drugs to make him lose weight – and all of it on the insistence of Liverace (?). If over here Thorson is telling the truth what is the use for those older “mentors” to complain that their young companions became drug addicts if they themselves introduced them to this lifestyle?
And I am not even talking of the fact that the young lose their innocence. Not even in the physical meaning of the word, because they can also lose innocence with their equally inexperienced young partners – this may not be good either but is still different. Having sex at 60 with someone who is only 16 is a highly cynical thing to do. It is the extreme abuse of power by the adult. The young are helpless though they boast they are not. They have not seen things in life and some are curious to try everything.
What you will offer them at this dangerous stage of their life so their life will develop further. You show them beautiful things and they turn into great people. You show them pleasure seeking and lust – and nothing good will ever come of them. It is no accident that all those who were corrupted in their young age become drug-addicts and good-for-nothing people – they have turned into a deadend street without even starting on the road of life.
Ped-les use the body and kill the soul of the young. They take advantage of them and forcibly change their lives – even if the 16 year old “gave his consent”. Does he know what he is giving his consent to??? I doubt it very much. What does he know of life to give his “consent” to the full corruption of his body and soul? Would he give his consent if he knew that at this particular moment he is changing the whole course of his life and there will be no return back? Does he think of it? No, he thinks it is just a new thrilling adventure and he is free as a bird to end it at any moment in time – while he is absolutely not. His life has taken a diffent course and the only future he is facing now is going downhill – from one partner to several, from several to living in the street and begging for a dose of a drug.
There is a problem that most people on this blog and on forums don’t seem to grasp and that is that children that are molested are not all 13 years old and above. Most victims are much younger and have been molested multiple times by the perpetrator for years by the time it is discovered. The youngest that I know of was a nine month old girl. That is what pedophiles are really like and someone please tell me how a nine month old infant could consent to such a thing.
I CANNOT EVEN THINK OF IT. However if ped-lia is allowed (I keep my fingers crossed that it should not!) the lowering of the age of consent will inevitably come to things you are describing here. A child will consent to anything you teach him or her.
I am very sorry I have to mention this but the amazing thing I have learned is that Talmud seems to allow marriages for girls from the age of three. Sorry if this is a mistake and I will be only happy if someone corrects me, but this source says it point-blank:
My only hope is that such marriages were not consummated and were formal. I really hope they were.
LikeLike
This entire thing is so disgusting..If you look at MJ in the car, he couldnt get himself any farther away from that guy..He is scrunched away from him ,…
You never know what is coming with this stuff..
I really thought it was out of character for ET to run that spot..
If it is to push a movie, who is their target audience..Who goes to see a movie about Liberace other then manybe some gay men or middle aged women and I am not seeing it , since he said that crap about MJ..
The only thing Mj was interested in with Liberace was his showmanship..People thought MJ borrowed ideas for some of his costumes from him..I remember someone saying his outfits were like Liberace going to war.
As far as why they are spreading this manure when the 25 year BAD anniversary and the Pepsi endorsements is coming up ..you never know if it has something to do with something between the marketing campaign and networks that are trying to get the advertising.., either.
Remember when Bashir came out with the trash and MJ did a rebuttal..The networks were bidding on it and NBC threatened to do a negative special on MJ if they didnt get it his rebuttal on thier network, and sure enough , they didnt get it and they put on something that trashed MJ..
It could be media people maneuvering something, using thier leverage for some kind of business deal…, with Pepsi and the estate too.
Maybe they brought this guy out of the closet to put a damper on the Pepsi deal, because I cant see anything that guy said helping to promote the movie..
LikeLike
@ Helena
“Suzy, I am afraid it has to do something with Lord Montagu because this is what Scott Thorson said to the National Enquirer in 2004”
So are we now gonna take Scott’s word for it? Just because this guy lies something about Montagu’s house we have to deal with Montagu’s sex life?
And it was Thorson claimed he got involved with Liberace at the age of 16. But if we are not willing to take his words about Michael why do we suddenly trust him when he’s talking about someone else? As it turns out in his lawsuit in the 80s he said he met Liberace in 1977. That means he was 19, not 16.
A liar is a liar, no matter whom or what he talks about. Just because he claimed that he did something with Michael in Montague’s house that doesn’t mean there was ANY basis to this lie: I’m certain that never happened but I don’t need to speculate and project the story onto Montague doing something with Thorson. Thorson is just a liar. Period.
LikeLike
“In the trailer for that interview, Thorson said that MJ was improper with when he, Scott, was 16.”
It was Liberace, aged 44 who could be improper with Scott when Scott was 16. Michael was also 16 at the time and he hadn’t even met Thorson yet – they met only in 1979 when each of them was 21.
However “they” are quietly and stealthily replacing Liberace with Michael Jackson in the public minds!
LikeLike
“It has nothing to do with Montagu with whom Michael perhaps met that one time ever, so I’m not sure why to make him so important in this story?”
Suzy, I am afraid it has to do something with Lord Montagu because this is what Scott Thorson said to the National Enquirer in 2004:
LikeLike
In the trailer for that interview, Thorson said that MJ was improper with when he, Scott, was 16.
LikeLike
@ Lynette
I think at least since we know about Victor Gutierrez’s background many of us here realize the agenda behind painting Michael a p-le. That it’s more than journalistic sensationalism and scandal-mongering. I also agree with you that the media is so desperate to paint Michael gay because they think there is a connection between the two and people will easier believe Michael was a p-le if they believe he was gay. But that is the ultimate homophobia and it seems like noone notices! Gay people should really protest when the media is trying to make that connection. Both the NE in 2004 and ET now obviously tried to make that connection.
@ Helena
I don’t know anything about that case with the 14 year old and Montagu, but the Wiki article says he was not convicted for that charge, so who knows if it was true or not. What he was convicted for was consensual homosexual acts with adults which were a crime back then but aren’t any more. Like Lynette said earlier homosexuality is not p-ia and p-ia is not homosexualiy.
But to be honest I’m not interested in Lord Montague’s sexuality. That has nothing to do with Michael and Thorson’s claims. Thorson makes these claims because he wants money. It has nothing to do with Montague with whom Michael perhaps met that one time ever, so I’m not sure why to make him so important in this story?
LikeLike
“Scott Thorson obviously involved Montague and his house in his story because this is one of the few pics he has with Michael, so he needed to relate the story to that somehow.”
I’m inclined to think that Scott Thorson involved Lord Montague because it was him who could “motion” Scott with a hand to come over to his persona (and get into his bed). He and Liberace could have easily stayed in his mansion when they were in the UK, while Michael was staying in McCartney’s house and came on a chance visit. From the look on his face compared with all three other enthusiastic guys Michael did not enjoy his excurison to the museum at all. And I doubt very much that he would have stayed there for long…
So what Scott was describing could easily take place, only not with Michael the Jehovah Witness, but with Lord Montague. It is mere speculation on my part of course but it wasn’t me who charged this Lord with taking sexual advantage of a 14-year old boy.
LikeLike
Scott Thorson maybe just a money hungry fool but some one in the media keeps wanting to connect Michael to homosexuality and pedophilia (remember that part of Thorson’s story was that he saw photos of young boys) and it no longer seems like it is just for ratings. It is starting to look intentional and I can tell you why. Soon there will be a new diagnostic text for determining psychiatric disorders and pedophiles want their term dropped as a mental illness like homosexuality was in the late 1970’s. If they were to achieve that they could then declare that it is an alternative lifestyle like homosexuality and bi sexuality. From there they could have laws changed to make it legal to have what would then be called “consensual sex” with a child.
There is a problem that most people on this blog and on forums don’t seem to grasp and that is that children that are molested are not all 13 years old and above. As a matter of fact they would be the lowest number of victims because of their age and their ability and their sense of self that would not allow it. Most victims are much younger and have been molested multiple times by the perpetrator for years by the time it is discovered. The youngest that I know of was a nine month old girl. That is what pedophiles are really like and someone please tell me how a nine month old infant could consent to such a thing.
Once again the gossip media have made Michael a victim of false accusations. Because the story was not just about him and this Thorson guy it included kids. Now tell me that someone doesn’t want to help make that connection because both the accusations came out of the same mouth.
As for the diagnostic text changing anytime soon: I seriously doubt that because I actually get to have some input into that one. It will be much more precise and more people will be able to be accurately diagnosed.
LikeLike
“The bottom line is that Michael repeatedly said he was not gay!”
Michael not only repeatedly say that he was not gay, but he also reiterated it when he was interrogated by his friend Uri Geller under hypnosis and by Evan Chandler when he gave him an injection of some sedative. In both cases Michael was half-conscious but nevertheless asserted that he was not gay and loved women.
To Evan Chandler he said: “Not me”.
LikeLike
Maybe there is a large pedophilia lobby that is behind some of this stuff about Michael? I thought we were all crazy but then again maybe not! In that larger photo does it look like Michael is enjoying himself to you?
Lynande, I was also in some disbelief at my own suppositions, but it seems that we are not crazy to think that it is them who is standing behind all that.
And Michael is absolutely not happy about the “excursion” they arranged for him. They could have easily lured Michael into the museum by promising to show him a “national” collection of old cars, Rolls Royces, etc. as Lord Beaulieu founded a National motor museum in the UK.
The picture of Lord Montague surpassed all my expectations:
Here is information from Wiki about him:
The text speaks only about his homosexuality, however isn’t taking sexual advantage of a 14-year old boy called a different word?
LikeLike
I don’t think we need to drag Lord Montague and his sexuality into this. He was not the one making claims about Michael. Scott Thorson obviously involved Montague and his house in his story because this is one of the few pics he has with Michael, so he needed to relate the story to that somehow.
LikeLike
Then of course there is this information on Lord Montague of Beaulieau.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Douglas-Scott-Montagu,_3rd_Baron_Montagu_of_Beaulieu
Maybe there is a large pedophilia lobby that is behind some of this stuff about Michael? I thought we were all crazy but then again maybe not!
In that larger photo does it look like Michael is enjoying himself to you?
The bottom line is that Michael repeatedly said he was not gay! He even said that in a sworn deposition which the haters like to use so much. Don’t the haters see that they are doing what has been happening for years and that they are helping to make a connection between homosexuality and pedophilia when ever they are talking about Michael being gay and therefore a pedophile. Homosexuals are not pedophiles and pedophiles are not homosexual they are two entirely different things,and the homosexuals in this world do not want anything to do with the pedophiles. The homosexuals of this world know that the pedophiles are criminal. They prey on children because of their weakness not out of some misunderstood type of love and the pedophiles know that, they just don’t say that. When you help the pedophile lobby to make that connection you are helping them champion a cause to reduce their criminality which is a ridiculous contradiction to what they say, because if they didn’t think it was a crime why would they need to further a cause? They say what they say to misinform the public on what they are actually feeling. They have been practicing this for years so they know what to say. They know exactly what they do to children that is why they pick them! What’s next is it going to be okay to steal and kill? What if all the murderers and thieves get together and create a lobby to make stealing and murder okay would they help them along with that too?
LikeLike
The text to this photo says “Lord Montagu, Liberace, Scott Thorson and Michael Jackson, at Beaulieu in 1981”, Beaulieu Motor Museum (UK)
So what? So what that they went to a motor museum and are driving an old car from the museum’s collection?
For 20 years Thorson was saying that Michael was just his friend, and it was only when he became a hopeless drug addict who would shoplift groceries and would be in terrible need of money that he decided to sell his friend for some cash. And the National Enquirer was more than ready to oblige him!
Now Thorson has just been released from prison and is in dire straits again. Hence his story with Entertainment Tonight – only in a much more cautious manner now. No details, no nothing – just irresponsible innuendoes and throwing a shadow on his former friend. What a shame.
LikeLike
Shelly can you leave a different link to that photo it doesn’t work when I go to that link. I think I have to be a member or something before I can see it.
LikeLike
Lynande, that’s the very point of it. No one is interested in Liberace, but Liberace is being used as a pretext for talking about Michael and again in the same old ugly context.
Another big reason why they want to make a movie is start a discussion in the society which will go along these lines: “Can someone have a live-in 16 year old friend in his house? He can’t? But what if they are just friends? And even if they are not friends but lovers, what do you have against it if gay relationship is okay – so what’s the problem? Oh, you think it is ped-lia? Because he was not yet of age at the time? But he gave his consent, and that’s the only thing that matters, doesn’t it? And isn’t it time for lowering the age of consent anyway?”, etc.
In short it is starting a debate on the issue which they have been trying to push to the screens and the centre of public opinion for a very long time. Who “they”? The ped-lia lobby of course!
Liberace was probably also slandered (I don’t know) and they may be using him just as a convenient pretext for starting this debate in the society. And Michael Jackson is just an added bonus to the whole thing – a kind of an attractive poster boy whom they always wanted to have in their ranks. He vehemently fought the very idea of it, but what do these people care? They are still using his name for their goals!
The idea of making a film is disgusting. With all those kisses between a boy and a 44 year old man it will be sheer propaganda of pedophilia.
This is how they want to bring down the barrier which is still standing in the way to accepting it as a “norm”. They want people to get used to the sight of these kisses, and slowly adjust to the idea that it is okay.
No, it is not okay!
I am absolutely sure that it is a huge pedophilia project, promoted by some of these guys. At the initial stage they will be satisfied if people just talk about the problem (“is it acceptable or not”?) and this nationwide discussion will already be half of their success. This is why they are throwing Michael into this mud again – using his name with or without reason is a sure way to draw attention to this or any other discussion.
The movie should be stopped on ethical grounds – both because we don’t know the final truth about Liberace and also because there should be no propaganda of such things. Even if they don’t show anything, but only imply it, it will still do a lot of damage because it will be the first step to breaking down people’s natural resistance to it.
Isn’t Matt Damon going to play the role of a 16-year old boy? However this is what they are planning to show:
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a310714/douglas-teases-matt-damon-liberace-kiss.html
LikeLike
When Michael Jackson went to the UK to work with Paul MaCartney he had absolutely no chance or wish to waste his time on a good-for-nothing guy like Scott Thorson – even if he was in London with Liberace at that time, who came for a few days to pick up an award, and even if Michael met him there. Michael’s working schedule was too tight to squander his time with Thorson.
In short Michael went to the UK in order to work and not to see this abject and idle creature, Scott Thorson there (whom he could see in the US if he had ever wanted to). They probably met on some social occasion and that’s it.
Ray Coleman recalls Michael’s visits to the UK and his work with Paul McCartney:
LikeLike
And you know, I’m also sad for Liberace (even though I don’t know much about him either as an artist or a person), but it’s ridiculous that Hollywood would make a movie on someone’s life based on the words of a clearly non-reliable drug addict, such as Thorson, with whom he was once in an exchange of lawsuits. Here is something that was posted on a Liberace fan blog in 2010:
“Buzz abounds that Steven Soderbergh will start filming of a bio-pic based on the life of Liberace. While it may be campy to have Matt Damon play Scott Thorson, there are many matters in Mr. Thorson’s publicly published history that should lead us all to view his version of events with suspicion.
As Mr. Thorson has sued in the past for defamation I leave to the readers to follow the links to these public published reports and decide if these are the eyes through which an icon should be immortalized.
Scott Thorson – Google Article Timeline details how many articles by year and activities
Connection to the Wonderland Murders
2002 Larry King Interview Transcript
Liberace’s Ex-Lover Claims Gay Affair With Jackson
VERY interesting that the co-author for the book written by Thorson says that he never mentioned anything about Michael Jackson until he was done with witness protection program and looking for notoriety.
Appears in documentary in 2005 Michael Jacksons Boys to disparage Michael Jackson.
National Enquirer’s Story of Meth Bush in Palm Springs
Liberace left behind many whom can tell the truth about his life unclouded by drug addiction, greed, and revenge. I hope the film producers consider the source when painting the picture of a legend through someone who clearly seeks attention through involvement with celebrities.
It would be a terrible shame to see someone who has had obvious drug problems financially benefit from royalties on a film when many explain that what had happened with Liberace in life was his sincere desire not to have his fortune fuel drug abuse.
Steven Soderbergh is so vastly talented I believe that he can deliver a better biographical account of Liberace’s life than this schmaltzy made for TV movie.”
LikeLike
Does someone has the video of the Michael Jackson’s Boys documentary where he appeared?
LikeLike
“So what if Michael met Scott Thorson?”
Exactly. He did meet him, but it means nothing.
“To me the whole story is simply too ridiculous”
The story is absolutely ridiculous, but the media is making too much of it. This seems to be another of those orchestrated campaigns organized prior to each anniversary of Michael Jackson’s death.
LikeLike
So what if Michael met Scott Thorson? That doesn’t mean they had sex or anything besides meeting. To me the whole story is simply too ridiculous. It keeps changing every time Scott tells it, not to mention when to Larry King he told Liberace was his only gay relationship. This guy is a drug addict desperate for money. IMO that’s all we need to know about him and his credibility.
LikeLike
I’ve checked it up and one thing has become clear. Michael did go to the UK to record Say Say Say. McCartney says about it:
And here is Liberace’s schedule (and consequently Scott Thorson’s if he was following him) in the years 1980-1983. Liberace didn’t give any concerts in London, so all these visits are attendances of various ceremonies:
LikeLike
I found this picture
http://mjphotoscollectors.com/gallery/image/65974-lord-montagu-liberace-scott-thorson-and-michael-jackson-at-beaulieu-in-1981/
LikeLike
“there is a problem with Michael and The Jackson’s being on a little thing called The Triumph Tour from June until September of 1981 and it was stateside only it was not international.”
Lynette, this is very interesting! The site is a marvel http://mjjtimeline.blogspot.com/2009/08/1981.html and I forgot to check it up (relied too much on the Wiki). The timeline indeed says that most of the time Michael was on a tour with the other Jacksons. Here it is:
The information that the track (not the video) Say Say Say was recorded in London between May and September 1981 comes from Wiki (and Taraborrelli as the source). Taraborrelli may be having some proof of it as he stated it in his book. As a possibility Michael could have been to London on a short visit only to sing his part and the rest of the track could be mixed in his absence. The period for such a visit could be May or latest June 1981 as afterwards Michael went on a tour.
McCartney does say that Michael stayed in his house when they were recording the track (this is when he told Michael about publishing rights, etc.), however he doesn’t say that it was in London (so this should be checked):
Now comes the side of Scott Thorson. Liberace was in London (in the early 80s) only in 1981, so this was the only opportunity when Thorson could lie about seeing Michael there. If it turns out that Michael never went to London at all in 1981, it will automatically mean that Thorson invented the whole thing from beginning to end.
Even now the chances of Scott ever seeing Michael in London are diminishing almost to a zero (not to mention that Lord Montague crazy story). If you come to think of it, what Scott Thorson said to the author of his book Alex Thorliefson about Michael recording in London and them seeing each other there (as friends only) could also be invented.
Everything could be invented. Scott may indeed be a pathological liar, and this could be the reason why he could pass any test he liked. Pathological personalities believe what they are saying – they create their own reality and live in it.
Let us go on with the research. If any of the readers finds any information about Michael recording Say Say Say in London please provide it here. Any information is welcome because whatever it is it will take us to the truth!
LikeLike
One more thing about Moonwalker, about three homeless beautiful children Sean, Zeke, Katie. I don’tlike a story about Michael’s Katy is kidnapped by the dr. Big. I pray it will never happened.
LikeLike
Does the wonderland drug den are depicted in the 1988 film Moonwalker, starring dr.Big a drug dealing warlord with a disciplined private army of killers at his command, who likes “to eat nuts”, who calls his operation “bugs” and drugs, who orders his “henchmen” to track Michael Jackson down with “dogs” because Mr. Big discovers Michael is a witness on his operation? Does anybody noticed a sign “dead end” on the wall what is eventually cornered in an alley, right before Michael is ready to turn into a sportscar.? Michael’s Moonwalker The “bugs” signify the spread of his proposed control of the world via drug dealing. Michael is a witness that the “bugs” signify the spread control of the world via drug dealing. Evidently MJ does not like spiders and does not eats nuts. MJ is a master transformer, he is a Genius.
LikeLike
Then there is a problem with the timeline again. As far as meeting Michael in London while he was working with Paul on a song I am going to have to correct him with that. Paul McCartney and Linda Eastman McCartney lived in Tucson Arizona in the USA and a home in London. It was recoded in London was it written in London. The video for Say, Say, Say, was shot at a Ranch in Los Olivos in Santa Barbara County California called The Sycamore Valley Ranch. That ranch would later become known as Neverland. That was when Michael saw it and told Paul that someday he was going to buy that ranch too. That’s another interesting part about that song.The producer of the record said that Michael wrote that song overnight the night before it was recorded.
Then of course there is a problem with Michael and The Jackson’s being on a little thing called The Triumph Tour from June until September of 1981 and it was stateside only it was not international. Michael was at several awards ceremonies with dates like Brooke Sheilds and Diana Ross and performed at a couple of things with Diana. So much for the being in London with Paul at Lord Montagues story.When you Google Lord Montague all you get is the character from Romeo and Juliet I know I tried it.
My question is why would Scott say that he wasn’t going to say anymore because Michael isn’t here to defend himself? Why would Michael have to defend himself if Thorson is telling the truth? He is hoping to create a reaction in the fan community and publicity for a movie about that book about Liberace he wrote. Does Steve Soderberg honestly think anyone is interested in Liberace anymore that they are going to go see it no matter who plays Liberace and who plays Thorson? Does he know that the most movie tickets are sold to the teens and tweens.What appeal is this going to have I wonder for that crowd?
http://mjjtimeline.blogspot.com/2009/08/1981.html
LikeLike
Yes, I know about that woman, I noticed that 2 days ago.
LikeLike
Oh and then I forgot to tell you to go to the name of the producer of Eonline and take a look. It is none other than Victor Gutierrez’s friend with an honorable mention in the Authors Note along with NAMBLA, Ms. Linda Bell Blue (former producer of Hard Copy). Tabloid Baby sure came in handy. See the pages of the authors notes in my last post. That shows credibility just dropped to zero. This whole program is based on gossip with an executive producer whose roots are based in the tabloid world so you know she had to pay Thorson for this interview and with a small mention of MJ his price just went up. I can just hear Thorsons’ money going kaching up his nose right now.In short order he will be back in jail for shoplifting groceries because he spent all of his money on his former product.
LikeLike
Benzodiazepines would let you sail right through one. The polygraph is based on stress responses like rises in Blood Pressure, Respiration rate and heart rate. It also measures the sweat. If a person takes a benzo like Ativan or Klonopin it would reduce their believed stress response to lying that they base the readings on. Then of course there are a lot of people that can lie without breaking a sweat so that also can be taken into account. Of course my first question is can I see the polygraph please?Then can I see the questions that were asked and the responses please? How does the public believe this if they have never seen it? Are we suddenly taking the word of the National Enquirer? I know I’m not! How do we even know if he was asked any questions about Michael when he was taking their polygraph. That is an oldie but I guess a goodie for people that read tabloids and listen to people like Scott Thorson.
LikeLike
What is the credibility of a polygraph test when you are under drugs?
LikeLike
Shelly. It says that he died of pulmonary complications related to smoking. In an article from the LA Times his friend said that the smoking started in 1998. It would be very rare for pulmonary complications to arise in a person his age even in a smoker in 11 years unless their immune system was somehow compromised. Not that I am a proponent of smoking but that would indicate that his immune system was compromised to me. Then there is the fact that a person can test negative for HIV several times and over a long period of time before testing positive.It depends on the strain of the HIV virus because there is more than one. There is a type of pneumonia related to HIV/AIDS called PCP or pnemocystic jirovec (carnii).It is the most serious complication of AIDS.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/05/local/la-me-marc-christian5-2009dec05
LikeLike
Rock Hudson’s lover didn’t die of AIDS.
LikeLike
And also lets just find out a little bit about ” Lord Montague”. He is or was in fact the Duke of Manchester. He was Australian born. His parents were Australian. Then there is Alexander Montague Manchester and his story to tell the court in the 2003 trial.
His story was going to be that Michael used to call his son and cry over the phone. The problem with that story was that his son was four years old when Michael met him and their entire meeting was video taped. The thing is that the gossip columns and the people like Scott and other seem to be pulling names of people that did not testify in 2005 and are using them to rehash non evidence. Like I said before the prosecution did want to prove that Michael was interested in males that is why they wanted to introduce that nonsensical evidence of underwear instead of the “evidence” rom the bed. That being the case I guess we know why they didn’t call Thorson to testify.
http://www.enotes.com/topic/Alexander_Montagu,_13th_Duke_of_Manchester
http://www.contactmusic.com/news-article/british-aristocrat-receives-death-threats-over-jackson-trial
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016558/Duke-Manchesters-children-CAN-inherit-fortune-despite-bigamous-marriage.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
Click to access 042005pltmotmanchester.pdf
Click to access 042205mjoppmanchester.pdf
LikeLike
No he isn’t still alive and he died a slow and agonizing death just like he won money for in his lawsuit.
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/12/rock-hudsons-lover-marc-christian-has-died
LikeLike
Rock Hudson had a lover and the guy is still alive.
LikeLike
Oh there is a very big problem with the whole Scott Thorson story! Liberace died in 1987 of AIDS!I’m calling bullsit on this one! If he had been with Liberace he would have died of AIDS before Gary. Then if he would have been with Michael, Michael would have died of AIDS long ago. This whole story including what he says about Liberace is nothing short of Bullshit.
The first confirmed case of what was called GRID (Gay Related Immune Disease) was in 1981. If you get infected with the HIV virus that if left untreated takes years to become AIDS and then a few more years to die from that. That whole timeline from beginning to end makes no sense. You have to know that public knowledge about prevention of infection was not available in the 1980’s.They would not have protected themselves against something that was not known to the public yet. Liberace could not have been this mans lover let alone Michael! If Scott had he would be dead or at least in the late stages of AIDS if that miracle were possible. Scott Thorson would not have been alive to write that book.The public has to get more education on HIV/AIDS and it’s timeline of treatement if they believe this bunch of crap.
LikeLike