Skip to content

JOLIE LEVINE ABOUT MICHAEL JACKSON according to Christopher Andersen’s “Unauthorized” book

August 21, 2015

Jolie Levine was mentioned in James Safechuck’s lawsuit as Michael Jackson’s employee at the time he befriended Michael and this is reason enough to find out more about this woman and what she has to say about her former employer.

Michael’s haters value Jolie Levine so much that they made a special video about her, trying to create an impression that she is a supporter of Safechuck’s lies. But after looking into each of their claims I am absolutely not sure that she is. The video is made in the usual haters’ style of mixing half-truths with half-lies and discarding everything that doesn’t fit their pattern, however when you look at the whole story the impression is different.

While researching the subject a lot of small but interesting other details came my way too, so this post will not be only about Jolie Levine but will cover a wider field of truth about some moments in Michael Jackson’s life. 


First of all, let’s make it clear that Jolie Levine is not Quincy Jones’ daughter. The girl who worked for Michael is of Asian descent and is a different Jolie Levine. She coordinated production of the Bad album in 1987 and was Michael Jackson’s personal assistant for two years.

jolie Levine in the prime of her career

Jolie Levine in the prime of her career

Rumor has it that she might be the secretary mentioned by an anonymous but knowledgeable insider who once posted a message on the National Enquirer board (see this post for details please) and commented on Michael Jackson’s affairs with women.

The insider said that before June Chandler (what a surprise) Michael was also involved with a groupie/secretary.

The insider was naturally bombarded with questions from curious fans who were dying to know who the secretary was and the insider only added that the secretary was of Asian descent leaving the rest of the job to the fans.

Well, with Jolie Levine the timing, profession and even the Asian descent fit the description, however since this is all we know about her possible affair with MJ we will leave it at that, and proceed to her professional career.

After Michael Jackson Jolie Levine worked in the music industry as a freelancer production coordinator for 30 years and helped a great number of performers to create their albums. Her work experience is indeed impressive and the list of her many projects places the time when she worked for Michael Jackson at the beginning of her career:

Year Album Artist  
2011 1986-1991: The Warner Years Miles Davis Production Coordination
2011 A Very Special Christmas, Vols. 1-2 Production Coordination
2011 The Lost Notebooks of Hank Williams Project Coordinator
2011 Ximena Sariñana Ximena Sariñana Contractor, Production Coordination
2010 Christmas in Harmony Wilson Phillips Production Coordination
2010 Come and Get It! Eli “Paperboy” Reed Production Coordination
2010 Nightmare Avenged Sevenfold Contractor, Production Coordination
2010 We Are Born Sia Contracting, Production Coordination
2009 Hello Hurricane Switchfoot Project Coordinator
2009 Holy Smoke Gin Wigmore Contractor, Project Coordinator
2009 Holy Smoke Gin Contractor, Project Coordinator
2009 Kris Allen Kris Allen Project Coordinator
2009 Mi Navidad Andrea Bocelli Coordinating Producer
2009 My Christmas Andrea Bocelli Contractor, Production Arrangement
2007 Beowulf [Music from the Motion Picture] Alan Silvestri Contractor
2006 B’day Beyoncé Music Contractor
2006 Charlotte’s Web [Music from the Motion Picture] Danny Elfman Production Coordination
2006 Dreamgirls [Music from the Motion Picture] Contractor
2006 James Taylor at Christmas James Taylor Contractor
1993 Miles & Quincy Live at Montreux Quincy Jones Production Coordination
1993 Tim Burton’s The Nightmare Before Christmas [Original Motion Picture Soundtrack] Danny Elfman Project Coordinator
1987 Bad Michael Jackson Contractor, Production Coordination
1985 The Color Purple [Original Motion Picture Soundtrack] Coordination
Different Ximena Sariñana Production Coordination
The Tale of Despereaux [Original Motion Picture Soundtrack] Contractor


So what does this woman have to say about Michael Jackson?

The answer depends on who you listen to. Almost all sources are indirect, so what you hear is mostly the interpretation of her words and not what Jolie Levine really said.

The worst of haters’ versions comes from a book called ‘Michael Jackson: Unauthorized’. It was written by a certain Christopher Andersen (not to be confused with Christopher Anderson, founder of the Male survivors website) and is a sort of a bible for Michael’s haters – it is the first source they rush to in case they need a quote to “prove” the dirt they are throwing at Michael.


The book was supposed to be Michael Jackson’s biography and was published in November 1994. Just two months prior to that a year-long investigation of the Chandler case had been closed without bringing any charges against Jackson.

Considering its content and time of release the book seems to be a retaliatory blow to Michael for the prosecution being unable to do away with their enemy and for so long a time too. Its obvious goal was to show to the public that the two grand juries who looked into the “evidence” contained in the book must have been complete imbeciles if they looked and looked at this sea of mud but still found nothing to indict Michael for.

Christopher Andersen

Christopher Andersen

Indeed,  Christopher Andersen collected every drop of filth ever told about MJ and presented it in a concentrated form.

The result was a book “hating Michael with a passion” as was noted by one of its readers.

What’s especially interesting is that besides everything gossip and tabloids could offer at the time, the book also included observations about Michael “relieving himself in his pants” and “molesting Bubbles”, which immediately gave away Victor Gutierrez as the author’s inspiration – the only good thing about Gutierrez is that his style is easily recognizable in everything he puts his hand to.

And this means that Christopher Andersen was also making use of VG’s “findings”, either directly or via Diane Dimond who was their primary collector, only he did it two years before Gutierrez released a book of his own (in 1996).

So what you hear from Gutierrez you also read in Christopher Andersen’s book, with the big difference though that Gutierrez has the reputation of a liar and a “sleazebag”, and is suspected of being a pedophile himself, while Christopher Anderson is a journalist of some repute who worked for the Time and People Magazine.

Disreputable lies retold by a seemingly reputable source is actually a very effective means of their promotion. This method took Gutierrez’s tales to a new level and now allows Michael’s haters to repeat them without having to disclose the shameful source they originally came from.

Readers were very much impressed by Andersen’s writings (the quotes are from the Amazon site):

  • The made up stuff is some of the craziest I have ever read… Michael relieves himself in his pants… and then someone is quoted saying he may have molested bubbles?! ARE YOU KIDDING ME.. Dont waste your money on this book…
  • He obviously hates MJ with such passion, I could feel it in the way the book was written. Completely Filthy!
  • The author’s attitude is: No matter what MJ do, he writes something bad. I hope this is out of the personal hatred of the author rather than pleasing the mood of general readers in US at that time. If MJ did not cry when he presented a gift to the sick, he was heartless. If MJ stayed in his limo parked near the grave of his grandmother, MJ is said to want to enjoy A/C instead of joining the funeral.  His implication that MJ’s using of others’ melody for his songs is also a serious one. Garbage!

Crystal Cartler wanted ALL profits from MJ’s Dangerous album (22 million pounds) claiming that the melody for the Dangerous song was hers. The case was thrown out of court but Andersen presents is as a serious claim.

A note on the stealing-the-melody issue – the woman called Crystal Cartier sued Michael Jackson for all profits from his Dangerous album (22 million pounds) accusing him of using her melody for the Dangerous song.

Michael was deposed and sang a bit of it in court explaining how he composed his music and thus turned it into a separate hit.  MJ was producing melodies in a fountain and never heard Crystal Cartier’s version before he recorded his. “Never in my life. I’m more than positive. It’s the honest truth”, Michael testified.

The case was thrown out of court but for the author of “Unauthorized” it doesn’t matter, of course.

Readers continue with Andersen’t book:

  • No valid sources at all, its all lies. The pictures are good but he tries to turn them into something they aren’t. ALSO, he took the smooth criminal music video and the Thriller music video and tried to convince the readers that Michael Jackson has an obsession with “The mafia and the occult”. I mean what the –c-?! He also tries to convince you that Michael Jackson was the cause of Benny Hills death, but gives no explanation at all!!! I am utterly disgusted at the perversion that this man sustains. Some of the “sources” that are the people he asked ARENT EVEN REAL PEOPLE. Don’t waste your time effort or money on this world’s longest tabloid article. It’s garbage, and so is the author that wrote this.

Sorry for the interruption again, but the Benny Hill story needs a comment too. Some screenshots from London newspapers saved for us by the Michael Jackson Archives show that Michael and Brett Barnes indeed visited Benny Hill in hospital in February 1992 where Benny was recovering from a heart attack, only the outcome of the visit was exactly the opposite of the one described by Andersen.

Benny Hill and MJ - It's great to meet you at last, Benny

Michael brought Benny Hill flowers, embraced him and said: “Great to see you at long last”. He asked him about the way he made his comedy sketches and was so “mesmerized” by Benny that he kept repeating to him “You’re my hero”.

Michael wondered if he would be in a video with him (Benny agreed) and invited Benny to stay with him in Neverland next time he came to Los Angeles. Michael also told him that he watched his shows every day and had hundreds of his videos. And he asked for Benny’s photos which would have place of pride in his home.

When Michael left Benny said that Michael was “one of the most genuine people you could wish to meet”. His friend revealed: “Benny is much happier now. He’s had a great night’s sleep and is back to his joker self. Michael’s visit was the tonic he needed”.

Benny Hill's angel.

Benny Hill’s angel. “Michael’s visit was the tonic he needed”

One of the articles called Michael “Benny’s Angel”. This angel came right at the time when Benny Hill needed him most – his program on TV had been axed and this is when he really began to die, as his friends said.

Two months later, in April 1992 Benny Hill died of kidney failure, however his last days were surely much brighter due to Michael’s visit and his genuine appreciation of Benny Hill’s talent.

So Michael absolutely wasn’t “the cause of his death” as Andersen claims it – in fact he helped Benny to live a few more happy days or probably weeks.

Isn’t it amazing that we and Andersen use the same sources, but come to opposite conclusions? Oh my God, and what if Andersen always turns facts into their opposite?

Readers of Andersen’s book continue with their comments on the author’s views about MJ:

  • In between all this drama, he’s got his hands down (or over – depending on the price) some kid’s pants with nary a care if DeBarge (Janet’s drunken, drug addled husband), his momma, LaToya (now there’s a reliable source), or any of the maids, butlers, bodyguards, drivers, secretaries, managers, business partners saw him. So besides all of the above, he was apparently an exhibitionist, too. It’s a wonder Michael feeling up some kid wasn’t broadcast on the 6 o’clock news every night. 
  • If half of this stuff was true, then Michael hired a bunch of amoral sub-humans to work at Neverland and they should have all been rounded up en mass and tried and convicted in a court of law for aiding and abetting crimes against children. Whoever they told these stories to should have been dialing 911 instead of paying them cash.

All reviews were helpful but the last one is especially to the point – indeed, if half of Andersen’s stuff were true all those amoral sub-humans around Michael Jackson should have been tried and convicted in a court of law for aiding and abetting crimes against children instead of being rewarded for it by cash and attention.

Or is it probably not too late to do it now?


Finally here is a piece from Andersen about Jolie Levine:

“Jolie Levine had been in the record business for seven years first as an executive at Quest Records, then as a production co-ordinator on the ‘Bad’ album when Michael hired her to be his secretary in mid-1987. For the next two years Levine kept track of his schedule and his appointments, took his phone calls, served as his liaison with accountants, lawyers, managers in short, all the duties of any executive secretary.

Levine was also called upon to run personal errands for Michael to buy him clothes, household items, and, frequently, gifts for his friends. Levine would later recall picking out a present for Elizabeth Taylor, but far more often she was dispatched by Michael to buy toys for the young boys he had befriended. A card was always attached, and no matter whom the gift was for, it was addressed to “Rubba”.

Every two weeks or so, Michael himself would take his special friend on shopping sprees. Typically, they would arrange a visit to Toys ‘R’ Us or other toy shops after hours, then run up and down the aisles, picking out toys and games at whim. The tab during one such outing exceeded $25,000.

As his private secretary, Levine had accompanied Michael on most of the Bad tour. Whatever city they were in around the world, Levine says, she would walk into Michael’s hotel room and find her boss in bed with his young friend. There was always a second bed in the room, and it was, according to Levine and other witnesses, never slept in. When she saw Michael at the end of the day, her pyjama-clad employer would be back in bed in his hotel room again with his young companion.

At Neverland Levine was not surprised to see Michael continue the pattern with a constant stream of special friends. Away from the ranch, Michael’s then-private secretary referred to him as a “chicken hawk” slang for paedophile.”!topic/

Let us not handle the regular haters’ mantras about gifts for “special” friends and the name of Rubba which meant nothing and focus on serious allegations instead. And let us even assume that Jolie Levine really said all of the above. So what will her words convey to us once you brush aside the haters’ innuendoes?

Look at the statement about her walking into Michael’s hotel room and always “finding her boss in bed with his young friend”, for example.

If Jolie Levine could so easily observe the scene in “whatever city they were in” it means that either the door was not locked or Michael freely opened it to everyone knowing that he had nothing to hide. On the other hand, if Michael opened the door he couldn’t be in the bed, could he? So this leaves us with the option that the door was open and anyone of his entourage could enter it at any time. Indeed, Michael must have been an exhibitionist – contrary to everything we’ve ever heard about him.

In short, it is utterly ridiculous even to discuss it. Those who take these stories seriously must be pretending that they don’t know the way of life Michael had when he was on a tour. He was always confined to his hotel room and when his assistant entered he was most probably always sitting on the bed watching TV – alone or with his travel companion.

All of us know that his ventures into the outside world were nothing short of a catastrophe. That 1992 trip to London (when he visited Benny Hill) also had an episode when the crowd knocked Michael to the ground and he pleaded to be left alone “with a look of terror on his face” as the papers said, before his minders ushered him and Brett Barnes to “the sanctuary of the Dorchester [hotel]”.

Michael was mobbed and knocked to the ground when he was in London in 1992

Michael was mobbed and knocked to the ground when he was in London in 1992

The hotel was a sanctuary of course, but it was also a place of Michael’s confinement as he had to stay in his room for all hours of the day except the time of his performances.

And while he was there in complete isolation or in the company of a friend, he was mostly watching TV or playing video games – naturally from the bed as the best vantage point in every hotel room.

These hotel habits were acquired by Michael in early childhood and evidently stayed with him forever, because when he was at home the routine was also the same – all those present would also hang out in his room in Neverland and group together on the bed watching TV from there and sometimes dropping off asleep as Macaulay Culkin described it.

This is the only life-style Michael Jackson knew and who can blame him for never having a chance for knowing anything different?


And what’s so wrong about Jolie Levine entering her employer’s room and seeing him “pyjama-clad” there? It was nothing extraordinary for Michael – he was always pyjama-clad when he was staying in his hotel room.

See, for example, the way he was dressed in a Buenos Aires hotel when Michael was on the Dangerous tour (1993) and was hanging out with the Cascio brothers:

Buenos-Aires 2

Michael Jackson with the Cascio brothers in Buenos Aires (1993)


These photos are my favourites.

The pyjama-clad Michael is crawling out into the balcony with two boys around him playing with paper aeroplanes – oh, the scene has indeed all the makings of another media “freak” story about MJ.

However what it really tells us is how terribly unfree Michael was and how little we know of his isolated and forced lifestyle.

Imagine yourself not being able to come out into the balcony and having to crawl there so that paparazzi don’t see you.

And all of it still being in vain as they are taking pictures of you anyway – from the building opposite the hotel room (or otherwise we wouldn’t be looking at these photos now).

As to pyjama it was indeed Michael’s favourite home wear. It was so habitual for him that he sometimes even rehearsed in this attire as his “This is it” footage showed it.

And the pyjama episode in court also happened only due to the fact that Michael was wearing his home clothes when he was taken to hospital but had to be quickly rushed to the courtroom and had no opportunity to change – if he was 5 minutes late the judge was going to send him to jail.

Actually the things we have to discuss here are so small and petty that they wouldn’t be even worthy of attention if it were not for haters’ constant insinuations about everything Michael ever did and said.

Even if we consider the pyjama matter closed haters will still not let us go and will demand an answer why Michael travelled “only” with teenagers. After all Jolie Levine saw no other but Jimmy Safechuck in Michael’s room, so why didn’t Michael choose someone of his own age as his travel companion?

But who said that he didn’t? Michael often had older people as his companions on the tour, only no one is telling us about it as it doesn’t fit their story.

I myself learned about it quite by chance.


Prior to Safechuck, for example, Michael travelled with the grown-up Jimmy Osmond.  The photo of young Jimmy Osmond was published in the papers covering Michael’s Japan/Australia leg of the Bad tour and accompanying it was a note that Jimmy Osmond was Michael Jackson’s “new pal”.

Osmond was actually working as Michael’s agent on the tour but the papers implied something different of course. To make their stories about “boys” consistent with their understanding of Jackson they even reduced Osmond’s age by five years and said that he was nineteen though according to my calculations he was already twenty four in 1987  (Jimmy Osmond was born in 1963). Michael was just five years older than him.

It is also interesting to note that though Jimmy Osmond accompanied Michael for several months during the Bad tour Jolie Levine is quoted speaking only about Safechuck and never saying a word about Michael’s earlier travel companion on the same tour.

New pal. “Michael flew in [to Japan] with his new friend Jimmy Osmond, now 19, the youngest of the Mormon singing clan”

New pal. “Michael flew in [to Japan] with his new friend Jimmy Osmond, now 19, the youngest of the Mormon singing clan”

When you look at the suppressed facts at one end of the story and the exaggerated information at the other end of it, any normal person will realize that the distortion of the picture is an intentional one, and that even the mistake about Jimmy Osmond’s age was not a chance one – when Michael was travelling with older companions the media deliberately reduced their age to squeeze them into the group of under-age youngsters.

The same was done with Deepak Chopra’s son Gotham who travelled with Michael on the Dangerous tour in 1992. Chopra was seventeen at the time, however some media shamelessly reported that he was thirteen:

“His son Gotham Chopra had traveled at the age of 13 with Jackson as a roadie on his Dangerous tour.”

Gotham Chopra said about it:

“When I was about 17, Michael invited me on the road with him – he was heading out to Europe on the biggest rock concert at the time (Dangerous tour) and wanted company. People would ask me if I had endured anything strange or awkward with him. I’d answer truthfully that in all of my years with him, in every single moment, Michael was nothing but dignified and appropriate, never once doing anything that would be deemed scandalous with me. It was really that simple.”

It seems that for the media all boys travelling with Jackson have to be “thirteen” as otherwise the lie they are building around Michael will be falling apart.

And no matter who Michael travelled with his behaviour was always impeccable – with Gotham Chopra,  Jimmy Osmond, Brett Barnes, the Cascio brothers and Safechuck who is actually the only one out of these people who is now telling horrible tales about his old friend.

For those who know only the standard media story about MJ’s companions here is short memo on who travelled when with Michael Jackson (the list will be supplemented if we learn more):

  • On the first leg of Bad tour in Japan and Australia (autumn 1987) Michael travelled with James Osmond. On the second leg of the tour he travelled with  Jimmy Safechuck and his parents (in summer of 1988 and then at Christmas time with several months back to school in between). Jolie Levine must have worked for Michael on both legs of the tour, but Christopher Andersen’s fantastic book quotes her solely on Safechuck.
  • Four years later, on the first leg of the Dangerous tour Michael Jackson travelled with Gotham Chopra (in summer of 1992) , and in autumn the same year with Brett Barnes and his family. On the second leg of the Dangerous tour (in autumn 1993 when the Chandler scandal was in full swing) Michael was accompanied by the Cascio brothers whose presence helped him to survive through those horrible times.

None of these other people who travelled with Michael ever said a bad word about him, however haters remember only Safechuck. Is it what they call the whole truth?

Now that we know that Michael had travel companions of all ages haters will grab us by our lapels again and demand why Michael invited teenagers on his tours at all (not always, but at least on some occasions). Wasn’t it more suitable for him to have a companion of approximately the same age rather than a teenage boy?


It seems that the answer to the question is provided by Gotham Chopra. Initially he was absolutely thrilled by a chance of travelling together with Michael, but soon enough he got bored and even claustrophobic sitting with him in a hotel room day after day.

Seventeen-year olds want to see the world and seek adventures and entertainment, and this is what happened to Gotham Chopra at some point – he began to grow envious of Michael’s crew who were free to go wherever and whenever they wanted to and spend their time at night clubs bragging about their escapades the next day.

You won’t believe it but Gotham Chopra was actually so tired of the simple pleasures of TV and videos Michael himself was confined to that he even offered himsef to do some work on the tour.

Michael didn’t object to his travel companion running away from him and was an avid listener to the stories of his adventures, however the end result of Gotham Chopra’s flight was that while all of them were thoroughly enjoying themselves he had to stay in his room all alone.

Children are a different kind in this respect.

Michael Jackson in Buenos Aires with the Frank and Eddie Cascio on the Dangerous tour

Michael Jackson in Buenos Aires with the Frank and Eddie Cascio on the Dangerous tour

They don’t go to night clubs and are perfectly okay with watching movies, playing video games or engaging in pillow fights all day long.

They are not even that much interested in sight-seeing and certainly won’t choose work over flying paper aeroplanes from the balcony.

They also prefer to hang out and have fun throwing pillows to the crowd.

And since Michael was a big kid himself and their lifestyles coincided so much, children surely made a better company for him than the bored adults.

When you read Gotham Chopra’s description of Michael’s usual tour routine try to imagine yourselves in his shoes (seriously) and only then decide whether you as an adult would choose to live the way Michael had to live for months:

“During the show itself, sometimes I’d hang around just off the stage watching Michael kill it. The man knew how to perform and it was like a meditation to just to witness it. At other times, I’d hang in his dressing room, outfitted to the nines with candy, orange juice, and video games.

After the show, Michael would retreat back to the dressing room too and then be forced to stand around awkwardly and greet VIPs, celebrity guests, sponsors and others who’d earned backstage privileges. It was easy to see that he was far more comfortable singing and dancing in front of a 100,000 strong than socializing with a dozen.

After those formalities, he and I would retreat back to his hotel, usually the biggest and best suite in the whole city. Michael almost always had the place stocked with old movies, more candy, and more orange juice. Even as thousands of adoring fans chanted his name from the streets below, we’d chat about music, movies, video games, girls, and occasionally the meaning of life.

But then something unexpected happened. The awesomeness wore off for me. Believe it or not, I started to get bored of just sitting up in that suite wiitting up in that suith MJ. And then I started to feel claustrophobic. I was seventeen years old, in freaking Europe, surrounded by a rock band, sexy dancers who could bend in all sorts of ways and backup singers who hit octaves I fantasized about. They liked to rage every night after the show and openly talked about their exploits the following day. Soon enough, I gained the courage to ask Michael if he minded if I slipped out with some of the others after his shows.

Not only did he say it was okay, he encouraged me. Outfitted with his fedora, sunglasses, and tour jackets, getting the best table at the best restaurants, into the VIP sections of the hottest clubs, and the adulation of all the local girls was easier than could be imagined. Often when I got back from a night on the town, Michael would call me in my hotel room and summon me. I’d head up to his suite and proceed to narrate my night’s misadventures to him and debrief him on all the latest gossip surrounding his band. I didn’t really need to dramatize my exploits, but I did anyway because I knew that he was living vicariously through me and I was happy for it.

For years, I wore the badge of that summer and my many exploits over it boldly and boastfully. Then of course, as time passed and Michael became embroiled in scandals involving teen boys, all of a sudden my summer as his teen sidekick didn’t have the same glamour to it. Now it was a stigma, something I treasured but certainly did not tout.

The above provides a lot of food for thought, but what struck me most is that people got restless, bored and even ill if they tasted just a bit of Michael Jackson’s life. And I don’t even know who of Michael’s adult friends would agree to drop everything and share his hotel confinement for several months in a row.

In another interview Gotham Chopra said that though the public was having a great time Michael had to live in a bubble and suffered from incredible and extreme isolation:

GOTHAM CHOPRA: On one hand as a 17-year-old kid, being with Michael Jackson on this rock tour, it was amazing, but gradually as time went by, I started to realize that, you know, all these millions of people and these hundreds of people on the tour, they`re having a great time, but he is in a bubble. He`s extremely isolated after the shows in front of hundreds of thousands of people.

He would retreat up to his penthouse hotel, and he would essentially be by himself, watching movies, drinking orange juice. There would be people, literally, hundreds of people downstairs, chanting his name all night. He would occasionally sort of stick his hand out or peek outside and wave at them. They would go crazy, but that was his existence. It was incredibly isolating.

PINSKY: And you were up there some of the time with him watching movies, hanging out?

CHOPRA: At first I was, because he had asked me to there, and it was cool to have that sort of access. Gradually, it was kind of boring, to be honest.


CHOPRA: And so, I asked out of that. I started working on the tour and hanging more with the dancers and the band and all of that.

PINSKY: So, you`re 17. How old was Michael?

CHOPRA: I think he was in his early 30s at that time.

PINSKY: Did that seem peculiar to you that a 30-year-old wanted to hang out with a 17-year-old?

CHOPRA: You know, not on the face of it. And I mean, I had — you know, not the way I knew Michael which is while he may have been 30s, I related to him, he related to me. We talked about the same things. We talked about sports. We talked about movies. We talked about women, those sorts of things, and it just seemed sort of normal. My parents were comfortable with it, and so, I never had any reason to question it. And by the way, it was well before all of the scandals and all of that. <> In my presence, I mean, he was impeccable with his behavior, and thats all I have to really go by.

“Impeccable behaviour”, “chatting about women”, “extreme isolation after the shows”, “living vicariously through others”, “talking about the meaning of life” – how different is all of it from anything we hear about MJ from the media and his haters! I sometimes wonder if they know at all the unique human being they are trying so horribly to describe.

You will agree that all above innuendoes were sheer nonsense which under normal circumstances would not have required any attention at all. However Jolie Levine’s story contains one episode which is supposed to be a killer and is meant to totally demoralize anyone who speaks in support of Michael Jackson. In Christopher Andersen’s interpretation the episode is as follows:

 “Away from the ranch, Michael’s then-private secretary referred to him as a “chicken hawk” slang for paedophile.”

Oh, that was indeed a strong statement. Did Jolie Levine really say it?


If we are to believe a LA Times article the word “chicken hawk” was indeed pronounced by Jolie Levine. However stopping at that would be telling half the truth only.

Firstly, Andersen is trying to create the impression that Michael’s secretary always called Michael that way while in reality Jolie Levine pronounced the word just once. And secondly, she later disavowed it and explained how it happened.

The LA Times article mentioning this episode was published on January 11, 1994 and was actually devoted to Larry Feldman who submitted to court the new Chandler’s declaration and some excerpts from depositions including Jolie Levine’s (this was done for publicity sake though officially it was in support of his motion to seek Michael’s financial records).

In her deposition Levine said that she used that word when the police were interviewing her and explained that she was caught off guard, angry and surprised. And though she used the word she didn’t really mean it.

Also please note that according to Michael Jackson’s defense the papers filed by Larry Feldman misrepresented the sworn statements, so what Jolie Levine really said and in was situation it happened remain unknown to us.

The article said:

Lawyer Seeks Jackson Financial Records : Investigation: Attorney for the boy allegedly molested by the singer files partial transcripts of depositions telling of bedroom activity and photos. Jackson’s counsel says the papers misrepresent sworn statements.


…Among other edited depositions filed Monday in connection with the lawsuit is one taken from Jolie Levine, who worked as Jackson’s secretary for two years starting in 1987. Levine told the lawyers that she called Jackson a “chicken hawk,” a slang term for a pedophile, when police interviewed her about the allegations against her former boss.

“And when you told that to the detectives or the police, you meant by that that Michael Jackson was a pedophile, correct?” asked Robert Turner, an associate of Feldman who also is representing the boy.

“I was caught off guard, angry, surprised,” Levine said. “I didn’t really mean saying that.”

Full story:

Michael’s haters are laughing at Jolie Levine’s explanations, but in their place I wouldn’t be so quick in disregarding them – especially considering Safechuck’s current story that the employees of Michael Jackson’s companies “knew of the abuse”.

First ask yourself in what situation you would be “caught off guard, angry and surprised”. The answer is:

  • You would be caught off guard if you faced something totally unexpected and new to you, something you never knew or thought of before.
  • You would be surprised if you didn’t believe what you were told.
  • You would be angry if you were accused of turning a blind eye on what happened and were considered an enabler in these activities. And you would be even angrier with your employer because it is due to him that you got into so unpleasant a situation and at the beginning of your career too.

And please note that we know absolutely nothing about the context of Jolie Levine’s words. The defense lawyers did say that Larry Feldman misrepresented the sworn statements, so for all we know the context of her statement could be even as follows: “If he turns out to be a chicken hawk, it has nothing to do with me. I had no clue”.  And you will agree that if she said it that way the same word would acquire a totally different colouring.

Was all of it possible? Absolutely.

But even no matter what Jolie Levine initially said (and disavowed later) and in what context it happened the crucial point in the story is that she reacted to police questions with surprise.

The surprise is very important here as it is overturning everything Christopher Andersen and other MJ haters previously said about her.

The surprise means that Jolie Levine found nothing extraordinary about Michael’s behaviour when she entered his room and saw whatever she had to see there. The surprise means that she did not think a single bad thought about Michael  and this is why the police accusations took her so much off her guard. The surprise means that Jolie Levine never noticed anything suspicious and therefore could not know of the “abuse” Safechuck is now claiming in his lawsuit.

Safechuck and Robson can say whatever they like about everyone in MJ’s company “knowing” of their alleged abuse, however Jolie Levine’s reaction shows that the allegations were an unexpected shock to her.

So even a person who had a close and daily contact with Michael never saw anything which Christopher Andersen and other haters (who were never there) are so gloriously describing…

(to be continued)

34 Comments leave one →
  1. March 6, 2020 5:10 pm

    “Helena you really have to update these articles when you get the chance. Joline did NOT call Michael a chicken hawk.” – joy was a groupie

    Yes, I know of the latest tweets by mjjrepository and if there is a need to update the post I will. But in any case my conclusion in 2015 was that Jolie Levine never said anything bad about MJ and that the words attributed to her were a lie. And now we have proof of it.

    Here are just some tweets from TSCM (@mjjrepository):

    Finaldi then reads from excerpts from her original Feldman deposition of 1994, which was based on a police summary.
    Levine explained “they twisted this all around. I’d like to clarify this.”
    She then reiterated “No. I did not tell the police that Michael was a chicken hawk.”

    Levine explained it was the police who asked her if she thought MJ was a pedo, to which she angrily responded: “do you mean, do I think he’s a chicken hawk?”
    Levine was in shock after they interviewed son w/out her knowledge & showed up nearly midnight w/ fake story of nude pic.


  2. joy was a groupie permalink
    March 5, 2020 9:24 pm

    Helena you really have to update these articles when you get the chance.

    Joline did NOT call Michael a chicken hawk.

    @mjjrepository on twitter posted excerpts from her deposition and the she denied ever saying that. Levine explained it was the police who asked her if she thought MJ was a pedo, to which she angrily responded: “do you mean, do I think he’s a chicken hawk?”

    Levine was in shock after they interviewed son w/out her knowledge & showed up nearly midnight w/ fake story of nude pic.

    The tweet with the transcript is from February 5 2020


  3. May 28, 2016 6:11 pm

    “I will leave you with the last word, unless you have any questions for me.” – C.Reynolds

    I will probably indeed have questions to you once I read all the comments and see what we are talking about at all. At the moment I have no idea.


  4. Billiejeanlover permalink
    May 28, 2016 1:37 pm

    Another indication that MJ was straight!
    Ex-lover comes out with tell-all book.
    Finally some decent press about MJ.
    Miracles happen.
    Than you Ms. Mangatal.


  5. Billiejeanlover permalink
    May 28, 2016 1:29 pm

    Thank you susannerb for your response. I honestly didn’t think that what I wrote in response to Mr. Reynolds was anything offensive. I have no idea why they reacted like that. What kind of answer did he want?
    Just a simple yes.
    No elaboration. I was just trying to explain the philosophy behind the site. And he just took a completely wacky spin on what I wrote.
    Thank you for the support.


  6. Billiejeanlover permalink
    May 28, 2016 1:20 pm

    I never said anything about your opinion. I think I claimed that if you do objective research then I am confident you will come to the conclusion that Michael Jackson is innocent.
    This is a public forum and anyone can answer anything.
    You seem to think I was attacking you in some way, but after reading what I said I don’t think I did any such thing.
    It is empirically impossible to be a 100 percent sure that MJ was not a child molester. We believe he is innocent and we make the case for it. And in our opinion, we make a great case for MJ’s innocence.
    I was also suggesting that what is most impressive about this site is its insight into MJs frame of mind and personality.
    Not everything is about the trials and we also focus on other parts of his life.
    And I am NOT Helena.
    I just am a fan of MJ and I love the fact that the crew here and in other sites defend him thoroughly and completely.


  7. susannerb permalink
    May 28, 2016 4:11 am

    @C. Reynolds: What difference does it make whether you ask vindicatemj such a question or any of us supporting this blog? Why the need to ask Helena “directly, no one else”? We are a group, an international community, and we would all give the same answer because we all can take the responsibility to answer your question in good faith. So your second comment doesn’t make any sense other than wanting to provoke and annoy Helena.
    Billy Jean Lover gave you a reasonable answer which in summary means the same: We have no doubt that MJ is 100% innocent! He/she has the right to do so – and you answer to him/her in a spiteful way. With this answer you unmask yourself, it shows your whole attitude! I ask you to let your third comment be the last one!


  8. C. Reynolds permalink
    May 27, 2016 6:08 pm

    Not a remote chance of him being 100% innocent? or you changing your name to Billie Jean lover vindicatemj (Helena)? Thank you for responding my dear. I will leave you with the last word, unless you have any questions for me.


  9. May 27, 2016 5:46 pm

    “Did vindicatemj(Helena) change her name to Billie Jean lover? I will wait for her yes or no response.” – C.Reynolds

    The answer is NO. I have never changed my name to “Billie Jean lover” or anything else.
    Let it be my first answer out of the many I owe to people who have asked me questions for the past few months.
    Sorry for the big delay!


  10. C. Reynolds permalink
    May 26, 2016 4:58 pm

    Did vindicatemj(Helena) change her name to Billie Jean lover? My simple YES or NO question was addressed to her directly-no one else, and thank you BJl for asking what my own opinion is after reading a bit of your silly book report. Furthermore, I didn’t ask anyone what they believe, I simply wanted a Yes or No answer to my question, and I was asking vindicatemj(Helena), unless she changed her name. I will wait for her yes or no response. Clear what my opinion is you say? I have yet to address it.


  11. Billie Jean lover permalink
    May 23, 2016 9:02 pm

    “Is it remotely possible, that you could be wrong about him being 100% innocent of inappropriate touching of any of those boys?”

    Yes, it is remotely possible. But we believe that MJ is completely innocent based on evidence and the analysis of court documents (nobody just runs their mouths). Vindicatemj and its crew do research, don’t distort information unlike some unnamed website, and we believe that MJ is completely innocent of the accusations during his lifetime. It is not just us, there are researchers and insiders like Ian Halperin, Geraldine Hughes, Aphrodite Jones, Lisa Campbell, Randall Sullivan and many others who believe that the accusations against MJ are false.
    Can we be a 100% sure? Guess what? No one can. But we are sure as to bet our lives on it that MJ is innocent. To me, the most valuable information on Vindicatemj and other “mjfan sites” is not its coverage of false molestation accusations, but its insights into Michael’s frame of mind, character, and soul. We detail every quote, every sliver on Michael’s personality and spiritual being through his own words and those closest to him.
    We believe we know the true essence of Michael Jackson, as a person, humanitarian, and creative soul.
    We have denounced bullshit media coverage of MJ, and done our own independent analysis and gained a deep understanding of MJ, collecting info about him through years of research.
    Michael once said that nobody should judge another person unless they have spoken to that person one-on-one, regardless of what the story is.
    While, I and I think the whole Vindicatemj crew have not met and spoken with Michael, because of our extensive research we feel that we have done spiritual justice to Michael and his true self.
    If there is, tomorrow, overwhelming and irrefutable evidence that MJ molested a child, then we will be the first to admit it.

    If you have your doubts, its okay. Any normal person would. But if you are objective and see through what the media has falsely portrayed about Michael and MANY OTHER CELEBRITIES, mind you, then I am absolutely confident that you will see what kind of person Michael truly was.


  12. May 22, 2016 6:30 pm

    Is it remotely possible, that you could be wrong about him being 100% innocent of inappropriate touching of any of those boys?


  13. September 28, 2015 4:11 pm

    “Just found this video with comments of Jimmy Osmond about Michael and would like to add it at this place:” – Susannerb

    Thank you, Susannerb. I also wanted to post it, only just left it until another time. But with all my present gardening it really takes too long.


  14. susannerb permalink
    September 22, 2015 8:08 am

    Just found this video with comments of Jimmy Osmond about Michael and would like to add it at this place:


  15. susannerb permalink
    August 29, 2015 9:11 am

    Thank you, D.Koutris, I join you in your birthday wishes and wish Michael to be in a better place and have a great time. And I promise the fight for truth will go on.
    Hope everybody has a good time today in the memory of Michael Jackson!


  16. D.Koutris permalink
    August 29, 2015 5:44 am

    Don’t take rumor at its face value.Treat it like a check be sure it is genuine before you endorse it.A careless word may kindle strife A cruel word may wreck a life.A bitter word may hate instill;A brutal word may smite and kill.A gracious word may smooth the way;A joyous word may light the day.A timely word may lessen stress;A loving word may heal and bless.HAPPY BIRTHDAY MICHAEL wherever you are we will love you and believe in you.And for the people who don’t want to know you.By swallowing evil words unsaid no one has ever yet harmed his stomach.


  17. vulcan permalink
    August 28, 2015 10:41 pm

    Karlee Barnes testified in 2005 that Brett and his family were with MJ during the Dangerous tour in Europe which was between late June and early Oct 1992 and then in South America.

    If that’s true MJ was with the Barnes AND Chopra in Europe and the Barnes and the Cascio boys in South America. But I never saw an actual photo showing MJ with the Barnes in South America.

    And this pretty much kills the 365 days nonsense since MJ was clearly not alone with Brett in South America and the European leg didn’t last for 5 month but only three.

    Karlee simply had a faulty memory and the press run with it without checking whether it was even possible what he she said.


  18. August 24, 2015 3:01 am

    “What a shame you used so money tabloid sources Helena” – GlendaW

    I always use tabloid sources – in order to discredit them, GlendaW. By the way I’m happy that you are calling Christopher Andersen and his “Unauthorized” a tabloid source. Michael’s haters think otherwise and are nearly praying to him as god.

    “Would it be better to find more reputable sources?”

    It would, only please give me links to reputable sources which would tell the truth about Safechuck and Robson. Where are they?

    “For instance there are articles that explain Mike had security outside his hotel door and nobody was allowed to walk in unannounced or without permission from Mike himself.”

    I’m aware that Michael had security. Well, this makes all that noise about Jolie Levine entering the room, etc. etc. all the more ridiculous, doesn’t it?


  19. GlendaW permalink
    August 23, 2015 7:00 pm

    What a shame you used so money tabloid sources Helena, it could have been a credible article otherwise. Would it be better to find more reputable sources? For instance there are articles that explain Mike had security outside his hotel door and nobody was allowed to walk in unannounced or without permission from Mike himself.


  20. August 23, 2015 5:28 pm

    “My heart bleeds for his children they no old enough to cope with all these nonsense.” -D.Koutris

    My heart bleeds for them too. It is a huge trauma for them. All those who make money on smearing their father’s name are horrible child abusers themselves – and not only Robson and Safechuck proper, but also their lawyers who trash Michael in the press though they should be the first to know that everyone is innocent until PROVEN guilty. And journalists who irresponsibly repeat these lies instead of just leaving the matter to the judge. And Michael’s haters who pretend that they are supporters of child abuse victims in general, but in reality don’t give a damn – it is only Michael Jackson who they are after.

    As to Robson and Safechuck, I’m surprised they don’t understand that so horrible a crime they are committing against Michael’s children will one day rebuff on their own kids. Though the mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small.


  21. August 23, 2015 4:52 pm

    Either Michael had an open door policy which means everyone could enter the room because he had nothing to hide (and she found them in a completely innocent situation), or MJ had something to hide in which case the door would have been locked and she wouldn’t have seen them.” – Susannerb

    Susannerb, you worded it so well that it sounds like a quotation from the classics.

    “It reminds me of Gutierrez’ lie about a video in which Michael allegedly abused his nephew, Jermaine’s son. He had claimed the video was filmed by MJ’s own cameras at NL. Does anyone really believe MJ would knowingly have his own cameras run during an abuse and then wouldn’t care what happens with the videotape? It’s so obvious all of it is fiction.”

    You know, I’ve never thought of it but now that you said it – yes, it is indeed obvious. Michael’s haters so often drag us into the discussion of some speck of dust they want to discuss, that the simple truth of most obvious things escapes our attention.

    “I wonder what Jolie Levine thinks today about Safechuck’s claim and her being a defendant now. Her response would be very interesting.”

    Yes, her response would be interesting, but partially we already know it. Robson/Safechuck’s gang is trying to present Jolie Levine as someone who supports their case, but she does not. I hope to write a continuation of this post and tell more about Jolie, the lies attributed to her and what she really thinks about MJ.


  22. D.Koutris permalink
    August 23, 2015 8:53 am

    i am a 61 years old lady with children and grandchildren.I lost my father i lost my mother and i lost my husband and we lost Michael Jackson it has been 6 years and it still hurts like hell mot because it died we all going to die one day its our loss that hes gone its what we did to him and still do.When i first so him about 35 years a go here in Australia on the television he was singing she is out of my life and i made a comment there he his a black Angel and that was it for me and my family we have fallen in love.His ayes were pure and honest and warm and we have these losers saying that an Angel molested them.This angel call MICHAEL JACKSON his heart wasn’t were there mind is Michael was talking and acting with his heart and not with is private parts.I will let my children and my grandchildren share is bed any time but not with the accusers and that’s what these mothers and fathers did they new that nothing suspicious happening and they let their children sleep in his bed.If a parent is suspicious about something he or she no way will allow their children to sleep in any ones bed now they have no control over their kits actions they kits sold the souls to the devil.But God or life for people who don”t believe in God has his mysterious ways of getting back to people.My heart bleeds for his children they no old enough to cope with all these nonsense.None of my family and my friends and every one i know believe anything about all these accusations we all believe its all about money.We will always love Michael Jackson even my grandchildren they only little they know who Michael Jackson is and dance to his music i wish i had the power to make all the people who have hate for any body not just Michael disappear from the planet the world will be so much better plays to live.


  23. susannerb permalink
    August 23, 2015 8:35 am

    What an interesting post, Helena, about another scumbag that we have to count among those involved in the witch hunt against MJ. Unbelievable how many evil tabloid writers the US media produced and how they played a part in ruining Michael. They created a completely different person that has nothing to do with Michael Jackson, and they make their living solely by inventing lies about celebrities. What a shame!

    This crazy story about Levine going into MJ’s hotel room and finding him in bed with a boy is really something just for those who lost the ability to think for themselves. If some people believe this it shows that they lost their brain by following the media like a flock of sheep without thinking. It’s simply something that could never happen, as you explain it. Either Michael had an open door policy which means everyone could enter the room because he had nothing to hide (and she found them in a completely innocent situation), or MJ had something to hide in which case the door would have been locked and she wouldn’t have seen them.
    It reminds me of Gutierrez’ lie about a video in which Michael allegedly abused his nephew, Jermaine’s son. He had claimed the video was filmed by MJ’s own cameras at NL. Does anyone really believe MJ would knowingly have his own cameras run during an abuse and then wouldn’t care what happens with the videotape? It’s so obvious all of it is fiction.

    Also, it’s almost surprising to read in all the reports about Safechuck that his parents or his mother were with him all the time when he accompanied Michael. Do they really think this makes sense? Wouldn’t Michael have tried to prevent their/her presence if he had had sinister plans? When his mother was with him on all these trips, why didn’t she realize any signs of abuse? Wouldn’t the boy have been changed in a way? Wouldn’t she have asked him questions? And wouldn’t she have asked him questions in 1993, when the Jordan Chandler allegations became public and when he was questioned by police? Wouldn’t a mother insist on learning the truth? And JS wants us to believe they only talked about it in 2005, shortly – in one sentence?

    I wonder what Jolie Levine thinks today about Safechuck’s claim and her being a defendant now. Her response would be very interesting.


  24. August 23, 2015 6:11 am

    Andersen follows Gutierrez’s steps when he is falling over himself to prove that Michael “didn’t like women”. Those who read his so-called biography of MJ noted that “Jackson’s distaste for and fear of the opposite sex is evident throughout the book”. Today this statement is hilarious, but Michael’s haters still want to bring public opinion back to that earlier notion (see Safechuck’s lawsuit for that).

    The reviews that came out immediately after release say that “his revelations about Jackson would be almost impossible to digest”:

    Posted November 4 1994 — 12:00 AM EST
    Upon waking in the master bedroom, adjacent to the Shirley Temple Room, the king seldom varied in his routine. First he applied the false eyelashes. Then he completed his face with a cornucopia of cosmetics — Fashion Fair Honey Glo, and Lancome eye shadow, mascara, and eyeliner. At times he conversed with the mannequin in his room that he had dressed up as Princess Diana — gown, tiara, blond wig, and all. As befits royalty, he never went to the door to greet his frequent, prepubescent male houseguests. Instead he waited while their parents left them at the front gate and they rode grandly to the main house in a carriage pulled by a Clydesdale. After lunching on Goofy Salads, Minnie Mouse Milkshakes, and Pluto Pies, the king and his ”special friend” of the moment usually retired to the bedroom, a place where the king sometimes performed his ”special” dance in his ”special” underwear.

    Poor Christopher Andersen. With this kind of killer material just five years ago, the author of the new Michael Jackson: Unauthorized (Simon & Schuster, $23) probably could have retired from the celebrity-bio grind for good. As it happens, Andersen’s relentless evisceration of the King of Pop’s saintly megastar image comes when the fallen-idol field is pretty crowded. When bulimic, suicidal princesses, sitcom stars with multiple personalities, vengeful ice-skating champions, and show-tune-trilling footballers-turned- murder suspects are your competition, even a riveting investigation into Jackson’s creepy double life may not hold the nation’s attention much past the next Hard Copy.

    Still, Andersen soldiers on gamely in this strange hybrid of a biography. It is part hard-hitting original reporting. (Andersen is a former contributing editor of Time and former senior editor at People, and he gained access to unreleased depositions and other court documents in the sex-abuse case against Jackson.) It is also part warmed-over clip job. Andersen cites dozens of magazines in his footnotes, and sometimes relies on National Enquirerese when using sources like the handy but always anonymous ”longtime friend.”

    Even for a jaded populace, many of the details about Jackson’s relationships with boys, some provided by on-the-record sources, are shocking. It’s hard to figure out which stuff you already read about in the Star and which stuff is new. But Andersen paints a horrifying portrait: He cites such reports as Jackson groping Macaulay Culkin. Jackson kissing and cuddling Emmanuel Lewis. Jackson showering with one of the boys Andersen says were called his ”special friends.” Jackson naked in a Jacuzzi with a special friend. Jackson in a sleeping bag with a special friend. Jackson sleeping with his eventual accuser nearly every night for three months. The saddest note? His accuser drawing an image of himself committing suicide by jumping off a building.

    At the time Andersen wrote it he said that he had access to unreleased depositions, and this sounded formidable enough for the general public, but now we know who his sources are – all of them were discredited during the 2005 trial.

    For example, the traces of “groping Macaulay Culkin” lead us to LeMarque who for $100,000 said that the hand was outside the pants and for $500,000 that it was inside.

    And it was Blanca Francia who said that she saw Michael in a shower, however she never saw anyone else there (contrary to Hard Copy’s version promoted by Diane Dimond) and only assumed that there was a boy in the shower too because Michael was laughing.

    And she did once see her son Jason and MJ lying on the sleeping bag on the floor watching TV. Initially it was “on” but by the end of the interview it turned into “in” as her English was so poor that she didn’t see the difference. However we know that it was ON the sleeping bag because she herself said it was a standard sleeping bag which could accommodate only ONE person.

    And look at the “saddest note” in Andersen’s account – Jordan Chandler’s so-called suicide note. This is definitely coming from Gutierrez as the note was published only by him. And it wasn’t Jordan’s suicide note – Evan was either threatening his son of committing suicide in case he didn’t support his story or was threatening to throw Michael Jackson from the top of the world.

    In short when hatred is a preconception everything is turning into its opposite, and this is what “Unauthorized” is all about.


  25. August 23, 2015 5:56 am

    And as regards Michael Jackson Andersen was spreading lies that Michael’s marriage to LMP was to be annulled five months after they married:

    Thursday, Dec. 01, 1994
    Follow @TIME
    Publicists representing Michael Jackson and Lisa-Marie Presley spent the day denying reports in The New York Daily News and in London that their five-month-old marriage certificate was headed for the shredder. Sources to the contrary are third-hand, but legion: “I had heard their lawyers were actually talking annulment,” said Christopher Andersen, author of “Michael Jackson Unauthorized.”
    Another Jacksonphile, author J. Randy Taraborrelli, claims Lisa-Marie wouldn’t leave Hollywood with Michael for his Trump Tower apartment in New York City.,8599,2465,00.html

    Actually the divorce took place only in 1996 and the relationship lasted for another four years according to LMP.


  26. August 23, 2015 3:38 am

    “Evidently MJ isnt the only victim of this guys innuendo.” – Nannoris

    Of course not. When someone is rotten he leaves the smell on everything he touches upon. For example, this is the kind of “news” Christopher Andersen was spreading about Princess Diana:

    Wednesday, Jun. 06, 2007
    American writer CHRISTOPHER ANDERSEN in his new book about Princess Diana, supporting the long-dismissed claim that Prince Harry’s father was actually Diana’s riding instructor, James Hewitt.
    “It’s not just the physical resemblance — and I can pick out dozens of photos that show this — it’s the peculiar expressions, the walk, the mannerisms.”,26174,1629800,00.html


  27. nannorris permalink
    August 22, 2015 11:44 pm

    btw, I dont know much about this book by Christopher Anderson, but he seems to have a lot of creditably issues with other books he has written and being biased ;;, if it is the same guy, which I think it is, he has lots of negative books about people
    Just a couple to reference
    Here is a review of Jagger Unauthorized ‘

    Here is an excerpt regarding a book about Hillary Clinton he called “American Evita”

    Andersen’s track record belies his claims of objectivity. His previous book about the Clintons, Bill and Hillary: The Marriage, published in 1999, presented an assortment of unverified allegations from anonymous sources (purportedly friends of the couple and White House staff) as well as from discredited sources. As Jake Tapper noted in his review of the book, Andersen included apparently fabricated details about scenarios involving no witnesses who would have talked to Andersen. He “dishes like a catty high school girl holding forth in the lunchroom, with little corroborating evidence for his claims, implied or otherwise,” wrote Tapper.

    Andersen’s latest effort is no different, trading in unsourced speculation and assertions presented as fact that, like his prior book on the Clintons, are devoid of supporting evidence. The endnotes section of the book could be a parody, resembling a computer-generated list of names and publications in monolithic blocks of text with no reference to particular information Andersen is purporting to substantiate. In the introduction to the notes section, Andersen acknowledges sources “who wish to remain anonymous,” including “friends, schoolmates, neighbors, colleagues, advisers”; absent is any indication of whose friends, schoolmates, etc., they are.

    In another review , it was called a love story for people who hate Hillary Clinton
    Evidently MJ isnt the only victim of this guys innuendo.


  28. nannorris permalink
    August 22, 2015 11:10 pm

    Yes I saw Jesus picture hanging over his bed too, and the entire scenario ,when I saw the video, just made me shake my head, because here is Oprah , behind the scenes ,seeing that painting over his bed too, seeing first hand how many people are free to hang on his bed roam in and out ..her entire crew of strangers are all over the place .
    Standing next to Elizabeth Taylor , who didnt think anything of it either
    AND this is 1993 , and Oprah looks perfectly at ease in that situation,
    Oprah KNEW about his skin condition, because after his death , she mentioned he showed it to her., that day , off camera , during that interview , even though, she never seemed to put forth this information, to clear matters up on her show.
    She had that info since 1993.
    She knew his bedroom, was more of a common room,….. that many people felt comfortable hanging around in , because she saw it first hand , and yet she did everything she could with her power in media to paint him as if that was an odd , nefarious thing to do ..because imo , she was envious of him , and it boosted her ratings ..
    And then he dies and she basically has a negative show about the allegations , all the while plotting ways to have the scoop of having his children on her show .
    She is a vulture
    All the people who wrote to her show to have Tom Mesereau on ,since she loves using MJ for ratings …. who, besides defending MJ , does a huge amount of pro bono work down South for many poor black men, and does a ton of work with the women of Watts group, trying to keep young people from joining gangs , and free legal clinics etc , for people of limited means , like Oprah is supposed to have come from, and that is completely ignored by her ..
    I just have nothing but contempt for her ..


  29. August 22, 2015 5:52 am

    “You can see Debbie Rowe and Dr Klien hanging around on MJ bed in the behind the scenes clip from the Oprah show .Oprah and her entire staff were in his bedroom , watching the television. Nobody in that clip seems to feel it is odd , two people are chilling on a bed , with all these people around.” – Nannoris

    Nannoris, the video is fantastic! Never saw it – thank you so much for it. It is worth a post, but besides what you already said – about the whole staff in his bedroom and three people on the bed all at once watching TV, and no one thinking it being “odd” – what they never told us is that Michael had the image of Jesus Christ over his bed!

    They speak for decades about every scrap of paper and every book stored in his closed boxes in some attic (which Michael probably never even opened) but they NEVER tell us about the big image of Jesus Christ on the wall? And they are telling us that Michael would do something inappropriate right under this picture?

    Sorry, by all these people are simply sick bastards!

    The video:

    Some screenshots: Debbie Rowe and Arnold Klein are watching TV from Michael’s bed

    Michael had an image of Jesus Christ over his bed:

    Michael Jackson had a picture of Jesus Christ over his bed


  30. August 22, 2015 4:25 am

    “I cant understand why it is supposed to be “odd” that MJ would hang around in pajamas. The fact that the media could spin this into something sinister, just is so ridiculous to me”- nannoris

    The more time passes from the years when the media spinned every little detail about MJ into something sinister the more obvious it becomes how ridiculous it was. It is just important not to forget and remind them time and again how they made mountains out of molehills. This was the way they created a myth about Michael’s “weirdness”.

    Now all those tales about Michael are actually a monument to their own madness. It’s even hilarious to read their idiotic stories today.


  31. nannorris permalink
    August 21, 2015 11:21 pm

    I cant understand why it is supposed to be “odd” that MJ would hang around in pajamas..Most people do in the privacy of their own home , after they are done working and want to relax.was he supposed to always wear street clothes because he had a staff of people around him ?
    Is being seen in your pajamas suppose to be evidence of criminal activity,? Mark Geragos speaks of meeting MJ for the first time, when representing him for actual criminal case, in his pjs, along with his nanny and his kids and others , in a bedroom, in a hotel.Obviously none of these people thought anything of it
    All this stuff about who was sleeping or laying on his bed, as something horrible seems to be a stretch also ,
    MJ had snakes , chimps, rats , movie stars, doctors , lawyers and accountants all hanging on his bed, as well as kids and their mothers
    You can see Debbie Rowe and Dr Klien hanging around on MJ bed in the behind the scenes clip from the Oprah show .Oprah and her entire staff were in his bedroom , watching the television.
    Nobody in that clip seems to feel it is odd , two people are chilling on a bed , with all these people around .
    .No one seems to think it was strange that he would view the television , in his own room, In all the clips I have seen, I havent noticed a room in his house that would be considered an informal living room, with televisions .Seems his bedroom suite is where he actually lived ..
    The fact that the media could spin this into something sinister , just is so ridiculous to me


  32. August 21, 2015 7:39 pm

    No, no… Helena… I was telling about change the age of the guys! That’s very stupid to me!


  33. August 21, 2015 3:14 pm

    “To make their stories about “boys” consistent with their usual pattern they even reduced Osmond’s age by five years ” <— You're kidding me, right?" – Fernanda Camino

    No, I am not kidding. Jimmy Osmond was born in 1963 and the Japan leg of the Bad tour was in 1987, so his age was 24. However the paper clearly said “Michael flew in with his new friend Jimmy Osmond, now 19, the youngest of the Mormon singing clan”. One might think that it was a chance mistake but other lies in the same article do not allow for such a possibility. The article is full of them.

    For example: “Everything has been prepared with military precision. An oxygen tent has been installed because Michael refuses to sleep in anything else. Gallons of Evian mineral water have been reserved for his twice-daily baths – he refuses to wash in the stuff that comes out of tabs. People who meet Michael have to wear face masks because of his germ phobia”.

    By the way, since Michael allegedly slept in an oxygen tent on the Bad tour it means that he didn’t sleep in the bed, and when Safechuck was in his room in the summer of 1988, it was only Safechuck who slept there, correct?


  34. August 21, 2015 1:00 pm

    What pathetic haters can be, damn! One don’t know if laugh or cry before such statements…
    Awww, Bs. As…. It’s my province! I was 10 when he came… I really wanted to go but my parents were scared of death cause people were completely mad at that time!!! At least I can say he was happy in my country, beyond the constant madness around him! You can notice it specially in his visit with our former president and the show of course!!!
    Puff, if you’re in your room… What more comfortable than pajamas? If it was for me, I would be 24hs with mine!!!
    No, but court day was different… He was at hospital on bed and he couldn’t change it… He was in pain! What a sad day to remember in deed! 😦 NOTE ASIDE: That judge is a CRIMINAL!!!
    Haters live to hate… What other thing can they do beyond spread hate and lies?
    I guess Michael had kids around, beyond what we already know about his trust on them, cause it was a little like to be with his brothers again…? Who knows! And I’m sure he felt he could be himself with them more than with adults who used him and judged him so hard!
    But the fact is that he wasn’t just with kids around! It’s stupid to think!
    “To make their stories about “boys” consistent with their usual pattern they even reduced Osmond’s age by five years ” <— You're kidding me, right? Oh God… Give me patience!
    I would be nice remark: "Jimmy Safechuck AND HIS PARENTS…" <—
    Plus, your own life is so stressful itself that you don't need more adult making pressure and demanding things! Right? Kids are more free and don't think in tomorrow but live today…
    Damn, life in tour is a disgrace! No, thanks for me! Poor Michael…
    True, he threw mint candies to the fans in Bs. As!!! They had a towel around to not hurt anybody… So lovely!!!
    Sad… ***Sigh!!!***
    Wow, after read the last part… I can say I feel sicker than usual and leave a lesson: we need to be careful with what we say! Distortion of words is so easy to do and can ruin a life forever!!!


Leave a Reply

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: