Michael Jackson’s strip search depicted by Gutierrez, Dimond and Taraborrelli. WHO IS THE WORST LIAR?

Here we are again discussing the old lie about Michael Jackson which his foes seem to be totally incapable of leaving alone.

It has been 23 years since Jordan Chandler gave a wrong description of Michael Jackson’s genitalia, but they are still trying to prove the impossible and claim all sorts of things – first it was a ‘match’, then the boy ‘didn’t say’ it and now ‘the poor boy made a mistake because it just appeared that way to him’.

So, hateful as the subject is, we still need to review it again, this time drawing information from such unusual sources as Diane Dimond and Victor Gutierrez. 

CIRCUMCISION AGAIN

The initial Jordan Chandler’s statement is known almost to everyone. It prevailed for decades since the time the lie started and continued until Michael’s death. According to that version Jordan allegedly saw Michael’s genitalia, described him as circumcised and the police photos allegedly showed that this was “correct”.

The USA Today and a few honest media outlets reported that there was no match between Jordan’s statement and the photos, but Michael’s haters and the public who took the story at its face value preferred to side with Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon who was claiming the opposite.

When Michael Jackson died this lie was fully disproved as the doctor who made the autopsy noted in his report that the decedent was not circumcised.

This was a major setback for Michael’s adversaries, but they quickly regrouped their forces and changed their theory into the opposite one. Now they claimed that ‘Jordie never said Jackson was circumcised’ and demanded documentary proof of Jordan’s words.

The insolence of this new approach took everyone by surprise as millions of people still remembered what they heard from the media for years when Michael was alive.

As to the documentary proof, Jordan’s description was contained in the 1993 report of the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department Deputy Deborah Linden. The report was never released to the public, but was detailed in some haters’ books published at the time (for example, the one by Gutierrez) as well as some media – for example, the January 6^th, 2005 issue of the Smoking Gun, which claimed that they had viewed the Deborah Linden affidavit, and reproduced it on their website.

Their description is almost the exact replica of what Jordan Chandler said to Deborah Linden:

“With Los Angeles Police Department detectives weighing his claims, Chandler gave them a roadmap to Jackson’s below-the-waist geography, which, he said, includes distinctive “splotches” on his buttocks and one on his penis, “which is a light color similar to the color of his face.”

The boy’s information was so precise, he even pinpointed where the splotch fell while Jackson’s penis was erect, the length of the performer’s pubic hair, and that he was circumcised.”

However the above was not convincing enough to Michael’s haters and as regards the Smoking Gun they suddenly became too choosy and disregarded this source of information with a scorn, uncharacteristic of them before.

This pulling-the-rope game (“Jordan said it”- “No, he didn’t”) continued approximately until the time when Michael’s supporters received help from totally unexpected quarters.

Obviously unaware of the latest trends in their hate movement against Jackson their front person, Ms. Diane Dimond suddenly confirmed that Jordan was indeed mistaken on the circumcision issue. In the discussion that followed her 2009 article about Jackson she said that Jordan was really confused on this point, though the rest of his description was, in her opinion, ‘exactly right’.

The additional bonus of Diane Dimond’s comment was that she repeated the gist of what Jordan Chandler said to the police, so we didn’t have to look for any other source in our effort to explain to Michael’s haters what Jordan Chandler actually said about Jackson (a ridiculous situation).

Here is Ms. Dimond’s exchange with Michael Jackson’s critic which appeared after the autopsy report was published, in November 2009, when Michael’s supporters naturally started asking questions why they had been told a lie about that circumcision issue for so long.

Eilowny November 18, 2009 at 1:54 am
Ms. Dimond, Please help…, The Michael Jacksons Freaks make me worry <> I saw this quote on YouTube, “The boy said MJ was circumcized, but he was not. ” I don’t remember the circumcision thing in your book. Is this another lie? I used to think that rational people can just look at the facts and believe the victimized child, but the disinformation is all around. Please, if you choose comment on this.

Diane Dimond is detailing Jordan Chandler’s description [November 2009]

Diane Dimond November 28, 2009 at 10:47 pm
Eilowny- Jordie Chandler was apparently confused about whether Jackson was circumcised. However, what he described about discolorations on Jackson’s penis was proven to be correct. In the opening chapter of my book I describe the day police went to serve a “body search warrant” on Mr. Jackson. They were looking to see if the boy’s description of Jackson’s ERECT penis as having pinkish splotches on it were correct. This was important to prove or disprove and they took along a police photographer to take pictures. Jackson’s attorneys had said that since Jordie and Jackson had gone swimming together (and changed clothes in front of each other) there could have been a perfectly innocent explanation as to how the boy could have seen and then described Jackson’s genitalia. However, Jordie was claiming to have seen the splotches on the side of Jackson’s penis that was exposed only when he was in a sexually aroused state. The photographs taken that day remain under lock and key in a bank safety deposit box in Santa Barbara, California. The Police and the District Attorney representatives there the day the search warrant photos were taken say Jordie’s description was exactly right.http://dianedimond.net/the-enigma-that-was-michael-jackson/#comments

Never mind the rest of Diane Dimond’s arguments (we will get to that later) – at the moment the only thing we are interested in is her confirmation that Jordan was ‘confused about circumcision’. So Jordan did call Michael circumcised, and the autopsy proved that he wasn’t, and this was the last nail driven into the coffin of new haters’ lies about the same old story.

But even that setback did not make them accept the plain fact that Jordan was a liar. Instead they thought of another way to explain Jordan’s mistake. Some scraps of it have reached me before, but their complete theory was recently presented to us in this very blog in a comment by someone who worded it in the form of an innocent question (a note for MJ’s fans – please never, ever be fooled by the “innocence” of their questions).

The comment was long and detailed and showed that they are working really hard on vilifying Jackson against all odds and this time their effort took them to the forum where males discuss the length of their foreskin. Here is the first part of that comment with the respective links deleted from it:

“I have found the guts to research this circumcision issue some more, and I’ve stumbled on some forum and a website dealing with it which might be of interest. (Warning: This might get disgusting; it certainly was to me.)

Here’s a forum entry of guys discussing their short foreskins, the person making the thread stating: “And a soon as I start to get hard [the foreskin] disappears completely.”

Here’s a website dealing with the lengths of foreskins which also states that uncircumcised men might appear to be circumcised. The question would still be whether it would be possible to mistake someone as circumcised while masturbating him, because – quite obviously – these websites do not deal with mutual masturbation. Another question would be why the coroner would come to the conclusion that Michael’s penis appeared to be uncircumcised if it had been that hard to tell.”

So the essence of their latest theory is that Michael could have a short foreskin and this is why it could be taken by Jordan for circumcision. In this connection a special emphasis is made on the word ‘appear’ in the coroner’s autopsy report which indeed said: “The penis appears to be uncircumcised”.

The train of thought of Michael’s opponents must be that if it ‘appeared’ that way to the coroner, it could very well ‘appear’ the opposite way to Jordan Chandler.

But the word ‘appear’ is not a sign of uncertainty for medical professionals and is often usual by them to describe the different phenomena they observe. In fact, the very same autopsy report has another sample of it – in one sentence it says that the decedent ‘is a 50 year old man’ and in the next sentence the report says that the decedent ‘appears the stated 50 years’.

CIRCUMSTANCES: The decedent is a 50 year old man.

EXTERNAL EXAMINATION:  The body is that of <> an adult Black male who appears the stated age of 50 years.

[excerpt from Michael Jackson’s autopsy report]

As regards the idea about Michael possibly having a short foreskin, it could indeed be short as this condition is typical for approximately 42% of all uncircumcised males. Wiki says about it:

In 1966, Schöberlein researched uncircumcised penises and discovered that in his sample, 50% of young men had full coverage of the glans, 42% had partial coverage of the glans, and 8% of the glans were uncovered.

And the fact that ‘short foreskin disappears from view entirely once a male is erect’ is also true and correct for all uncircumcised males, as the opposite condition, when long foreskin remains overhanging the erect penis (can’t believe I’m discussing it) is actually considered a pathological state and in some cases even requires surgery.

So all of the above simply does not matter while the most crucial factor about the foreskin that really matters is completely ignored by Michael’s haters.

They seem to constantly forget that Jordan Chandler claimed that he ‘masturbated’ Jackson and if that had been true he would have noticed the so-called ‘gliding mechanism’ that accompanies the foreskin. However he didn’t.

You don’t know what ‘the gliding mechanism’ is? Well, Wiki has a whole article about it which explains that the foreskin always glides irrespective of its length and arousal condition.  Medical sources even call this gliding mechanism the “hallmark physical characteristic” of intact, uncircumcised male genitalia.

Here are only some examples from Wiki and other scientific sources (warning: adult content).

• “The foreskin is mobile, fairly stretchable.”
• “The term ‘gliding action’ is used to describe the way the foreskin moves during sexual intercourse. This mechanism was described by Lakshamanan & Prakash (1980), stating that “the outer layer of the prepuce in common with the skin of the shaft of the penis glides freely in a to and fro fashion…” Indian Journal of Surgery. 44: 134–137
• “During intercourse, the natural penis shaft actually glides within its own shaft skin covering.” O’Hara K (2002). 
• “During intercourse the loose skin of the intact penis slides up and down the shaft of the penis. This is known as the `gliding mechanism,’ <> [ slick ‘sheath within a sheath.’” 
• The penile skin (including the foreskin) is free to move over the penile shaft because the double-sided nature of the foreskin makes the penile skin system considerably longer than the penile shaft and also because the penile skin is only connected to the underlying structures at the pelvis and at the base of the glans (at the sulcus). This ability to move is the hallmark physical characteristic of the penile skin system (see this animated diagram). 

Anyone who wants to verify the above can watch the animated diagram, but for us it is crystal clear that whether long, medium or short the foreskin is a natural part of the gliding process and this gliding phenomenon cannot escape the attention of anyone who masturbates or is involved in masturbating another person.

However Jordan claimed that he had been involved in this process and by making this false claim made a fatal mistake in his big lie about Jackson.

Here is the reminder of what Jordan Chandler said to Dr. Richard Gardner in his interview in October 1993:

–  “… But he had me masturbate him.”

– “On how many occasions?”

– “About ten.”

The reason for Jordan’s big mistake was that both he and his father Evan were circumcised and never experienced that gliding mechanism themselves, so they had no idea of that small but crucial detail and didn’t expect any complications from this side of their story.

SECOND QUESTION

Now that we’ve answered the first part of our “well-wisher’s” question we can handle the second part of it. It concerns Taraborrelli’s description of Michael’s body search in “The Magic and the Madness” book and was presented to us with the following comment:

Some people believing in Michael’s guilt like bringing up Taraborrelli’s description of the strip search which goes as follows (in the 2004 edition).<>

“Crying softly now, Michael slipped off the boxers and stood, naked, stripped not only of his clothing but of the one illusion he’d always had: that of his invincibiliy. All eyes went straight to his penis, which did not appear to be circumcised.
‘Is the subject circumcised?’ asked the doctor. Everyone stepped in for a closer look.
‘Yes, he is…’
‘No, he’s not…’
‘Yes.’
‘No’
‘Oh my God’ Michael whimpered. He looked dizzy, as if about to faint.
‘You don’t know?’ asked one of the detectives of Michael’s physician.
Michael’s medic became indignant. ‘Sir, I have never seen his penis before now.’
‘Well the subject is clearly NOT circumcised’ decided the other doctor, finally. He made a note of his finding.
Yes, he did have patchy coloured skin on his buttocks, as Jordie described.
Yes, he had short pubic hair.
Yes, his testicles were marked pink and brown.
However, no matter how many ways they looked at it, all seemed to agree that his penis was uncircumcised. But, did that matter? In fact, an uncircumcised penis can look circumcised when aroused. If Michael had been sexually excited when seen by Jordie, would anyone, let alone a thirteen-year-old boy know if he was circumcised or not? But there was now doubt about the identity in question.”

To be frank, seven years ago I was also taken by Taraborrelli’s description of that horrible scene and was so shocked by Michael’s torture that fully believed this account not paying attention to its details, and it is only now that I notice how false and damaging to the truth these details are.

Their falsity becomes obvious when you compare the description of the same scene with the other sources available to us now. And though the books in question were written by Michael’s worst haters it is thanks to them that we will be able to finally establish the truth.

Yes, this is the strange and winding road the truth sometimes takes.

TWO OTHER BOOKS

The books to compare Toraborrelli with will be a boylover’s novel authored by Victor Gutierrez and published in 1996 as a certain “Jordan Chandler’s diary” (which he never kept according to Jordan’s family), and a more serious book by Diane Dimond “Be careful who you love” published almost ten years later, in 2005.

The latter book is indeed more serious because Ms. Dimond clearly used some of the documents provided to her by Santa Barbara District Attorney Tom Sneddon.

In fact on one of the opening pages of her book she expresses a deep gratitude to her anonymous source for his ‘information, guidance and trust’ and speaks of this person with nothing short of reverence. This type of glowing praise in combination with secrecy can refer only to Tom Sneddon:

“You know who you are and that I cannot name you. You must also know I am profoundly grateful for your information, your guidance, and your trust”

You will be amazed, but Diane Dimond’s book has an acknowledgment to Victor Gutierrez too.

‘Ms. Dimond’s Experience With Victor Gutierrez as a Reliable Source of Information Regarding Mr. Jackson” [Excerpt from the court documents, click to enlarge]

Despite or thanks to the fact that he is a self-admitted NAMBLA conference attendee (“North American Man Boy Love Association”) Gutierrez was one of Ms. Dimond’s best sources.

This is what she herself said about him when Michael Jackson sued both of them for a lie about a non-existent video tape and she hid behind the Shield law shifting all the blame onto Gutierrez and simultaneously calling him her best and most reliable source.

By the way Tom Sneddon helped her out then by making a statement in her support to the judge, so Diane Dimond really has a lot to thank Sneddon for.

Ms. Dimond’s other source was a practising pedophile Rodney Allen from Canada who first tried to frame up Michael Jackson with another of those ‘child abuse’ scams, but was seized by the Canadian police in the middle of the process and was later sent to prison on pedophilia charges.

So it is to sources like these that Ms. Dimond gives her acknowledgment for helping her to “understand the nuances” and “being her navigators over difficult waters”.

“To all my sources over the years: You helped me understand the nuances. I couldn’t have asked for better navigators over difficult waters. A reporter’s work is only as good as her sources. Most of you were seeking truth, as was I”.

Diane Dimond’s acknowledgments to her anonymous sources

Considering that we know who these sources were, her note about her work being ‘only as good as her sources’ is an extremely pertinent one. And the fact that she teamed up with two boy lovers in her campaign against an innocent person puts the final and especially dirty touch to her story and, hopefully, reputation.

Well, now that we are aware of Ms. Dimond’s close ties with her ‘navigators’ it is no longer a surprise that the description of Michael Jackson’s awful body search in her and Gutierrez’s book is nearly identical – the two were working in really close cooperation with each other.

Let us see what they say.

THE NIGHTMARE SCENE

GUTIERREZ  (1996):

“On December 20, authorities from Santa Barbara and Los Angeles Counties went to Jackson’s ranch to conduct the examination of the singer’s body and photograph and videotape it. From Santa Barbara, there was District Attorney Thomas Sneddon, Detective Russ Birchim, and photographer Gary Spiegel. From Los Angeles, there was Detective Sicard.

The gate of the ranch opened at 4 p.m. to admit the authorities, but four of Jackson’s guards demanded that before entering they say the password which Jackson’s lawyers had given to the Santa Barbara D.A. Jackson’s two lawyers, Johnnie Cochran and Howard Weitzman, who had arrived by helicopter. They told the detectives that another helicopter had followed them. Upon hearing this, the detectives noticed that the ranch was surrounded by three helicopters.”

DIMOND (2005):

“As agreed upon, the investigative team had arrived at Neverland at 4:45 P.M. Among them were Santa Barbara district Attorney Tom Sneddon, Santa Barbara police detective Russ Birchim, Santa Barbara sheriff’s office photographer Gary Spiegel, LAPD detective Frederico Sicard, and Dr. Richard Strick, a dermatologist.<>

A prearranged password was provided to security members manning the gates before the team was granted entry to the property. Once inside, the officials were directed to a parking area adjacent to one of the estate’s main buildings, where Jackson’s criminal defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran and Howard Weitzman, stood waiting.

The two attorneys had just flown in via helicopter from Los Angeles. As they stood speaking with officials on the driveway, three helicopters hovered far overhead. From their markings it was clear they were from the news media.

Pulling the district attorney aside, Cochran quietly explained that his client was “apprehensive” and “reluctant” about the pending body search. The lawyer asked for patience and then left the group in the driveway while he went back inside the expansive Tudor-style mansion to try to convince Jackson to allow the lawmen to carry out what they came to do.<>

One hour passed before the second Jackson attorney, Howard Weitzman, finally rapped on the vehicle’s window to inform the team of a further delay. The lawyer appeared helpless to change the situation but suggested that the district attorney set a deadline he could take back to his client.

Tom Sneddon, who is not known as a man who likes to be kept waiting, said simply, “Ten minutes.”

Clearly, Jackson took the deadline seriously because in exactly ten minutes his attorney was back to report that his client was finally ready.”

GUTIERREZ:

“Cochran explained to District Attorney Sneddon that Jackson did not feel like cooperating, and asked Sneddon to have patience. According to Cochran, this was not easy for the singer. Fifteen minutes later, Jackson’s other lawyer, Weitzman, asked them to continue waiting. Sneddon replied that they had already waited almost an hour. Weitzman told Sneddon that he needed some more time to prepare his client. Sneddon gave them 10 minutes. Finally, the attorneys notified the authorities that Jackson was ready. It was agreed that they would examine the singer first before taking photographs, and that Jackson’s attorneys and Sneddon would wait outside the room.

When the doctors and others authorities entered the room, Jackson was sitting on the sofa wearing a brown seethrough robe.  Detective Russ Birchim presented himself and said that he knew this procedure was going to be uncomfortable for him and that he appreciated his cooperation. Jackson thanked him and they shook hands.

Not more than two minutes had passed when Jackson pointed at Detective Birchim and asked him, “Who are you?” They had just met and shaken hands, but Jackson had already forgotten. Jackson asked Dr. Forcast if Birchim would be present during the examination, to which the doctor said “yes.” Jackson suddenly became angry and stared at the detective, shouting, “I don’t want you here! Get out of here! Get out of here! I told you to go! Go!”

Then Jackson asked Detective Sicard who he was and if he was going to be present as well. The detective identified himself as a Los Angeles police officer, but didn’t have the chance to respond in greater detail before Jackson shouted, “You get out of here, too!” Jackson got up from the sofa and his doctor grabbed him to hold him back, when Jackson hit him to break free.”

DIMOND:

The security office was a few meters away from the main residence

“The team was escorted to a building away from the main house to what appeared to be the ranch’s security office, where they were introduced to Jackson’s two personal physicians – Dr. David Forecast, an MD from London, England, and Dr. Arnold Klein, a Beverly Hills dermatologist who has often been cited as the doctor who provides Michael Jackson with the skin-bleaching cream he uses daily. <>

Jackson’s chief of security, Bill Bray, and a personal Jackson photographer named Louis Swayne were also in the office when the team arrived.

The security office building and its garage. Right behind this building is the main residence

After some time, the sheriff’s photographer and the two detectives, Birchim and Sicard, were led upstairs to a compact room just to the right of the second-floor landing. The officers immediately noticed Michael Jackson, who was seated on a small couch and wearing only a beige bathrobe. At his side was Dr. Forecast, the attending physician who had reportedly squired Jackson through his drug rehab program just weeks prior.

Jackson appeared uneasy as the group filed in. The close quarters suddenly felt even more cramped with Detectives Birchim and Sicard, Doctors Strick, Klien, and Forecast, and Jackson’s photographer, Louis Swaye, all but hovering over the pop star.

To ease the strain, Detective Birchim reached out his hand to make an introduction. “I am Detective Russ Birchim of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office. I realize this procedure is unpleasant for you, and we appreciate your cooperation,” he told the entertainer.

Detective Sicard politely introduced himself as well.

“Thank you,” Jackson replied in a soft voice.

The atmosphere in the small room remained tense as Jackson’s attorney Howard Weitzman accepted the official copy of the search warrant from Birchim.

“I’d like to see the search warrant affidavit also,” Weitzman said, referring to the victim statement that often accompanies a request for a warrant.

Up until this point, Jackson’s attorneys were completely in the dark as to what exactly the boy had told authorities. They had no idea what it was that police were looking for on Michael Jackson’s body.

“I don’t think so,” Detective Birchim shot back.

Weitzman laughed and said, “It never hurts to try.” He then left the room and closed the door behind him.

Police photographer Gary Spiegel was readying his equipment outside the door when suddenly he heard Michael Jackson explode in a rage.

“Who are you?” Jackson shouted, pointing a finger at Detective Birchim.

“Detective Birchim from the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department,” the officer replied, puzzled at Jackson’s question. It had not been two minutes since their formal introduction.

“Is he going to be here, too?” Jackson asked as he turned to face Dr. Forecast who sat next to him on the couch.

“Yes,” Jackson’s physician replied.

“I don’t want you here. Get out!” Jackson shouted at Detective Birchim, directing the officer toward the door. “Get out! I said to leave; you get out!”

The now-enraged Jackson pointed to Detective Sicard next. “Is he going to be here, too? Who is he?”

“I’m Detective Sicard from LAPD,” Sicard spoke up.

“Get out of here. You get out of here, too,” Jackson ranted. The star struggled to rise from the couch as Dr. Forecast worked to restrain him. As the tirade continued, Jackson reached over and slapped his physician in an attempt to break free. <>

Noting that the sparsely attired singer was both “hysterical” and “completely uncontrollable,” Birchim stepped in and attempted to calm him down. He asked Jackson if his attorneys had explained the search warrant procedure, including the requirement that law enforcement officials observe the warrant service. Seemingly oblivious, Jackson continued to scream and struggle as Dr. Forecast fought to control him.”

GUTIERREZ:

“According to Detective Birchim, “Jackson was hysterical and totally uncontrollable. I tried to calm him, and asked him if his lawyers had explained the procedure to him, which included agents of the police being present.” But Jackson paid no attention to the detective’s words and he continued shouting and trying to break away from his doctor.

“I didn’t know why Jackson wanted to get away from his doctor. I didn’t know if he wanted to attack me or go to his room,” the detective wondered. Once again, Detective Birchim told Jackson to speak to his lawyers and have them explain the law to him. When the detectives left the room, Jackson shouted “sons of bitches!”

DIMOND:

“It was unclear why Jackson was trying so violently to leave the couch, and for a moment, Birchim was unsure if his intention was to attack him or to flee the room.

“Mr. Jackson, I am going to ask your attorneys to confer with you to explain – “ Birchim began.

“You assholes!” Jackson screamed as the detective stepped out into the hallway to consult with Howard Weitzman.

Telling the criminal attorney that his client was “out of control,” Birchim explained that police would be unable to perform the search given Jackson’s present state of hysteria.<>

“Can you go downstairs and summon Johnnie Cochran to the room?” Weitzman asked Birchim. “Tell him he is needed immediately.”

The detective found Cochran downstairs speaking with the district attorney. Explaining that the lawyer was needed immediately, Birchim trailed the lawyer as he raced up the stairs. Once in the room with Jackson, Cochran took over, attempting to soothe the star and the examination back on track. Birchim returned downstairs to speak with the district attorney.

Minutes later, Johnnie Cochran rejoined the officials downstairs. Jackson, he explained, was refusing to have the procedure commence with the two officers in the room. He asked the district attorney if it would be possible to have the genital examination and photos done without the detectives present. Cochran said it was the only way to accomplish the examination.

It was agreed that Drs. Strick and Klein, as well as photographers Spiegel and Swayne, would initiate the procedure on their own. The two detectives, Sneddon agreed, would leave the room.

At 6:04 P.M., according to Birchim’s sworn declaration, the examination finally began behind closed doors as the rest of the group waited in the hall. Even Dr. Forecast had been asked to leave.”

GUTIERREZ:

“The lawyers agreed with D.A. that the examination would be done with only two photographers and two doctors. The two detectives and Jackson’s doctor, Dr. Forcast, would have to leave the room.

The D.A.’s photographer, Gary Spiegel, prepared his equipment to take the photos of Jackson’s genitals in full detail. “I took two photographs of the singer seated on the sofa,” the photographer recalled. “At the same time that I was taking my pictures, Jackson’s photographer began to do the same.

Jackson’s dermatologist told Jackson that we wanted to photograph his genitals, and asked him to take off his robe. Jackson protested, saying ‘Why do I have to do that! Why are you doing this to me?’ But Jackson took off his robe and also took off his gray bathing suit.

Then Jackson’s dermatologist said for the rest of us to turn around and not look. This seemed strange to me since there were only two doctors and two photographers. I didn’t know who he was referring to. The doctor then said that he would not look, since he had never seen the singer’s genitals, and he wasn’t going to do it now.”

DIMOND:

“Spiegel wrote in a declaration to the court: I entered the room. In the room, I saw Mr. Jackson sitting on a sofa against the far wall. <> I took two photographs of Jackson sitting on the sofa. Mr. Swayer was to my right and when I began to take photographs so did he. Dr. Klein made a statement that we were interested in photographing Jackson’s genital area and directed Jackson to stand and remove the robe he had on.

Jackson protested, saying things like “What do I have to do that for?” and “Why are they doing this?” In my opinion, Jackson’s demeanour was a combination of hostility and anger.  Jackson complied with Dr. Klein’s request to remove the robe and to lower the pair of gray swimming trunks he was wearing. As Mr. Jackson was complying with Dr. Klein’s request, Dr. Klein made the statement that others in the room should turn their heads so as not to view Jackson’s genital area.

At the time, I found this peculiar because the only persons in the room at the time were Mr. Jackson, the two doctors, me, and the other photographer. Dr. Klein also made a statement that he was not going to look. He said he had never seen Mr. Jackson’s genital area and he was not going to do so at this time.

As Mr. Jackson lowered his trunks, he said something to the effect of, “I don’t know why they are making me do this” or “Why are they making me do this?” Mr. Jackson’s attitude was, in my opinion, still one of hostility and anger.

I took several photographs of Jackson’s genitals from his right side first and moved to his left side. The other photographer switched positions from Mr. Jackson’s right side to his left side as I shifted positions.

While I was on Mr. Jackson’s left side, Dr. Strick asked Mr. Jackson to lift his penis. Mr. Jackson questioned why he had to do that, but he did comply with the request. When Mr. Jackson complied with Dr. Strick’s request to lift his penis, I observed a dark spot on the lower left side of Mr. Jackson’s penis.<>

GUTIERREZ:

“I took several photographs of Jackson’s genitals. First the right side, then the left side. When I was photographing Jackson’s left side, the D.A.’s doctor asked Jackson to lift up his penis. Jackson asked why he had to do that, but he did it. When Jackson lifted his penis, I noticed a dark stain below the left side. Jackson began to move quickly towards my side of the room. I wasn’t sure if he was coming towards me or in the direction of the door, which was behind me. He made me move to the side and he went through the door, and his dermatologist followed after him.”

DIMOND:

“Mr. Jackson [then] started moving quickly in my direction. I was not sure if he was coming after me or headed to the door, which was directly behind me, but as he came at me I took a step to the side and out of his path, if he was headed to the door. He went past me toward the closed door with Dr. Klein right behind him. When he got to the door he apparently opened it and yelled at someone on the other side of the door that he wanted “pictures of them too”. I did not see who he was pointing to, but it seemed obvious to me at the time that it must have been Detectives Birchim and Sicard.

At Dr. Klein’s insistence Mr. Jackson returned to the position he had been at by the sofa, prior to going to the door. As he did, he pointed at me and told me he wanted pictures of me too. <>”

GUTIERREZ:

“Jackson’s dermatologist convinced him to return to the room. When Jackson was returning to the room he saw the two detectives and shouted, “I want photographs of you two afterwards!”

The photographer continued. “Jackson turned his back to us and dropped his bathing suit so that we could take photographs of his behind. I took two photographs of his behind. Then the dermatologist told him to take off his shirt and let us see his chest, back and legs. Each time I took some photos, Jackson and his dermatologist asked me, ‘Are you done?’ ‘Don’t you have enough?’ ‘How many more?’ “

DIMOND:

“… at Dr. Klein’s request Mr. Jackson turned his back to us [the photographers] and lowered his trunks so we could see and photograph his buttocks area. In my opinion Mr. Jackson’s attitude had changed from one of hostility and anger to one of rage. Dr. Klein directed Mr. Jackson to remove his shirt and show us his chest area, his back area, and his legs. During the session and after or during every couple of photographs M. Jackson and Dr. Klein would keep asking, “Are you done?” “Don’t you have enough?” “How many more?” and other statements and questions of this nature.

At one point Mr. Jackson asked me directly, “Who are you?” I ignored the question and kept photographing. Mr. Jackson then asked Dr. Klein, “Who is he?” and either Dr, Klein or Dr. Strick told him I was just a photographer doing my job. I was under the distinct impression that if Mr. Jackson knew I was a law enforcement officer the session would have ended. <>

After I exposed twenty-three frames of film Dr. Klein asked me in a strong tone of voice if I was done. I was asked in such a manner that it was more like a demand than a question. I told Dr. Klein that I was not done yet and that I wanted to talk to the lawyers before proceeding.”

At this point the first variations between the two stories appear. Gutierrez closes the scene with details which are hardly believable, however he wouldn’t be Gutierrez if he didn’t add his own embellishments to any subject he describes.

GUTIERREZ:

“I explained to the D. A. that it was difficult for me to work under these conditions, and that I needed 12 photos of Jackson’s completely naked body and 4 of his genitals with a ruler.” D.A. Sneddon spoke to Jackson’s lawyers and they agreed that the photographing would end with the nude photos and the photos with the ruler. So the police photographer put a new roll of film in his camera and gave the other roll to Detective Birchim , who put it in an evidence bag with the date and the hour and secured it in his briefcase. But Jackson refused to cooperate and said that if they wanted more photographs, they would have to do it another time. After discussing it with his lawyers, the singer persisted in his refusal to continue with the session.

The D.A. and Jackson’s lawyers agreed that the rest of the photos would be taken in Dr. Klein’s office, where Dr. Klein would examine Jackson in the presence of the D.A.’s doctor. Also, the photographs would be taken by the singer’s photographer, who would provide copies to the D.A. With the agreement made, the authorities finished the session and left the ranch.

The copies of the photographs from this entire process were kept by the D.A. in a safe-box at a bank in Santa Barbara, which safe deposit box requires two people to open it.”

Diane Dimond’s version depicts a different way the body search terminated and considering all circumstances it looks more credible to me.

DIMOND:

“Sergeant Spiegel left the room to confer with the district attorney, who in turn tried to negotiate again with Jackson’s attorney Howard Weitzman for more time to shoot the pictures. But it was already too late. Unbeknownst to Spiegel and Sneddon, Jackson had already departed through another door. It was Detective Birchim, outside for a smoke, who suddenly spotted the star leaving from the second-floor stairway. Birchim recalled in this declaration:

He was fully dressed, including a black fedora hat and red jacket. Jackson walked from the stairway, turned right, and entered an open doorway leading to a large open-air ground-floor parking structure.

I contacted Mr. Cochran and advised him his client had just exited the building. Cochran joined Mr. Jackson in the parking area and put his hands on Jackson’s shoulders. Several seconds later Jackson reappeared in the doorway and with great gusto, slammed the door leading into the parking area. At approximately 19:00 hours we departed Neverland Ranch and returned to Santa Barbara.”

The first floor of the security office building where Michael Jackson’s strip search took place

The room on the second floor of the security office building where Michael Jackson’s body search most probably took place [Floor plan from the original Neverland brochure]

We see that both accounts are based mostly on the affidavit of the police photographer Gary Spiegel, which is a document we don’t dare dispute.

And now that we’ve learned of the way it really was from the sergeant who was the direct and main participant in that horrible body search let us compare it with what our friend Randy Taraborrelli has to say about the same event.

TARABORRELLI (2003):

“The photo session, set for 20 December, promised to be as torturous as experience as Michael ever had in his life. Present from Santa Barbara would be its District Attorney, Thomas Sneddon, as well as a detective, photographer and a doctor. From Los Angeles, were Michael’s attorneys, Johnnie Cochran and Howard Weitzman, and Dr. David Forecast, one of Michael’s physicians from the United Kingdom, as well as another detective and another photographer (employed by Michael), all of whom had arrived by helicopter.

After everyone arrived at Neverland, it took Johnnie Cochran and Howard Weitzman an hour to get Michael to leave his bedroom and go into the parlour, where the photos were to be taken. Finally, Michael came into the room, wearing a brown robe. It was agreed that his attorneys and Sneddon would leave the room and not be present for the photos. Bodyguard Bill Bray was allowed to remain, as would the two detectives and two photographers and two doctors.

As everyone was getting settled, Michael took a look at one of the detectives and, for no reason anyone could think of (except that he may have mistaken him for someone he knew), began shouting at him. ‘You! Get out! I don’t want you here for this. Get out!” Michael then tried to storm from the room. However, one of the doctors grabbed him. “Hold on, Michael,’ he said, ‘hold on.’

Johnnie and Howard, upon hearing the ruckus, came back into the room. ‘Get these sons of bitches out of here,’ Michael screamed at them, now referring to everyone in the room. He was agitated beyond all measure and actually seemed high, though everyone present hoped that was not the case.

The District Attorney’s photographer, Gary Spiegel, began taking photographs of Michael while he was still seated on the couch. Michael blocked his face with his hands, as if thwarting a paparazzo.

Finally, an anguished Michael was told to stand on a platform in the middle of the room as if about to have his pants hemmed by a tailor. He was still wearing a bathrobe. ‘Please don’t make me do this,’ he said, his doe-like eyes watery. ‘This is terrible. Don’t make me.’

‘Sir, we have no choice,’ said one of the detectives.

Then, while standing on that platform and staring at a picture of Elizabeth Taylor on the wall, Michael took off the bathrobe. Under it, he wore a bathing suit.

‘You’ll have to take it off, sir,’ said the detective.

Still staring at the photograph of Elizabeth, Michael slipped off the bathing suit . . . under which he was wearing boxers.

‘Sir, please.’

Crying softly now, Michael slipped off the boxers and stood, naked, stripped not only of his clothing but of the one illusion he’d always had: that of his invincibility.

All eyes went straight to his penis, which did not appear to be circumcised.
‘Is the subject circumcised?’ asked the doctor. Everyone stepped in for a closer look.
‘Yes, he is…’
‘No, he’s not…’
‘Yes.’
‘No’
‘Oh my God’ Michael whimpered. He looked dizzy, as if about to faint.
‘You don’t know?’ asked one of the detectives of Michael’s physician.
Michael’s medic became indignant. ‘Sir, I have never seen his penis before now.’
‘Well the subject is clearly NOT circumcised’ decided the other doctor, finally. He made a note of his finding.
Yes, he did have patchy colored skin on his buttocks, as Jordie described.
Yes, he had short pubic hair.
Yes, his testicles were marked, pink and brown.
However, no matter how many ways they looked at it, all seemed to agree that his penis was uncircumcised. But, did that matter? In fact, an uncircumcised penis can look circumcised when aroused. If Michael had been sexually excited when seen by Jordie, would anyone, let alone a thirteen-year-old know if he was circumcised or not? But there was now doubt about the identity of the person in question.”

I then took several photographs of Jackson’s penis,’ said Gary Spiegel. ‘First the right side, then the left. When I was photographing the left side, the D.A.’s doctor told Michael Jackson to lift up his penis. He didn’t want to, so there was a lot of discussion about that. Finally he did it. Then, he angrily jumped off the platform. “That’s it,’ Jackson said. “That’s enough.’ He put on his robe and ran out of the room.’

The detectives looked at each other, one of them moved towards the room in which Michael’s attorneys had been waiting. Then as the detective headed back into the living room, Michael’s lawyers stomped down the hall to get their client back before the waiting cameras. The copes were uncomfortable as they listened to what most would have guessed to be a rebellious teenager arguing loudly with strict, disappointed parents. Then, after fifteen minutes of cries, shrieks and pleas – silence. A moment later, the sound of one loud plaintive wail resonated through the house. Michael had been broken. He pounded his bare feet hard against the wood floor, moving towards the room he had worked so hard to make perfect for waiting guests.  

‘When this whole thing is done, I want pictures of you,’ Michael said, pointing angrily at one of the photographers, ‘and you, too,’ he said, jabbing his finger at the other one.

Again, Michael stood naked. More pictures. Then videotape.

‘Please,’ Michael said, his tone now pleading. ‘Can we stop now?’

One of the doctors produced a ruler.

‘That’s it,’ said Michael’s physician. ‘Mike, get dressed. This is a joke. I can’t believe it myself. ’

Michael quickly put on his robe. “Don’t you ever, ever, ever let that happen again, he said, unleashing his anger on poor Bill Bray, who just sat in the corner the whole time looking mortified.

‘But I didn’t do nothing’, Mike,’ Bill said. ‘Why you hollerin’ at me?’

Ignoring Bill’s questions, Michael stepped off the platform and ran from the living room. ‘How could this happen to me?’ he screamed on his way out. He was shaking. Observers said it looked as if he was about to have a melt-down. ‘How could this happen to me?’ he kept repeating.

Now that we can fact-check Taraborrelli’s account by the numerous details drawn from the police photographer’s affidavit we see that his narrative is simply a piece of fiction. To a very slight extent it is sympathetic to Michael Jackson, but at the same time extremely damaging to the truth about him.

WHO IS THE WORST LIAR?

Interesting, but from the point of view of facts (not their interpretation) the most accurate description is that of Ms. Dimond. It is clear that she received exclusive information about Michael’s strip search from her anonymous friend Tom Sneddon or her other contacts with the police, so when it comes to things like “who stood where” and “what they discussed” her story seems the most reliable of all.

It is also a big surprise that Gutierrez’s account of the scene is almost devoid of his usual embellishments. This is probably because this time he was drawing inspiration not from his pedophilia fantasies, but from real information provided by someone who was in contact with the police, possibly even Ms. Diamond, who could very well share with her associate the text of Sergeant Spiegel’s statement which is laying the basis for that scene in both of their books.

And where did Taraborrelli draw his inspiration? I’m afraid that besides his own fantasies his information came mostly from Gutierrez’s love story. The only other source about the Chandlers and Michael Jackson was Ray Chandler’s book which was also released in 2003, but it didn’t contain a single word about the strip search, and this leaves Gutierrez as the most probable source. Gutierrez’s novel came out in 1996, six or seven years before Taraborrelli’s updated version of Michael’s biography and during those years Taraborrelli had ample opportunity to study and use Gutierrez which he actually did – and this post is another proof that this was not the first time he used Gutierrez’s opus.

But instead of fact-checking Gutierrez as a proper researcher would, Taraborrelli took his largely false narrative as a basis for his own story and added to it a more sympathetic interpretation of the events that would befit the stance of a ‘friend of Michael Jackson of 40 years’ he positioned himself in.

However a combination of someone else’s lies with a little bit of sympathy from a ‘friend’ is no less damaging to Michael than the outright hate from his most vicious chroniclers like Gutierrez or Stacy Brown, for example.

You wonder what Taraborrelli’s own embellishments to this particular scene were?

To begin with, there were no detectives during that strip search. The only people allowed were the two doctors and two photographers. The photographers were taking pictures only and there was absolutely no videotape and not even a possibility for it.

There was no ‘platform’ either as Michael was photographed standing beside the sofa. There were no “shrieks”, “pleas”, “whimpering” and “wails” as Michael’s prevailing attitude was that of stoic anger, which was sometimes broken by his fits of rage when he shouted at them or banged the door.

And he was not “high” – both Michael and even Dr. Klein were so stressed out that both immediately forgot what happened just a couple of minutes before that, so Michael constantly asked “Who are you?” and Klein asked everyone to turn their backs when Michael had to lower his trunks though there was nobody in that room except the four of them.

And there were no anecdotal details like additional boxers under Michael’s bathing trunks. And he was not looking at the photo of Elizabeth Taylor on the wall either – it was the security office, and the security office was no place for keeping the photos of Michael’s friends there.

And Bill Bray was not present during the body search – he was in another room, though of course he was mortified and this is probably the only point where Taraborrelli is factually correct.

And there was no argument between the detectives and doctors for the simple reason that the detectives didn’t take part. And the doctors didn’t discuss any circumcision either because Michael and Dr. Klein didn’t know what the police were looking for and Dr. Strick, who was the only doctor who knew, wouldn’t tell them. Same as the police photographer he was afraid that Michael would end his cooperation at any moment, so all those present tried not to add to the overall tension and kept silence instead. The strained silence was broken only by Michael’s questions Why? and Dr. Klein’s occasional questions whether it was enough for the police.

The only meaningful conversation took place when Dr. Strick asked Michael to lift his penis and Michael asked why, but still complied. And it was then that Gary Speigel, who was photographing it from below, saw a dark spot.

Dr. Strick said that he was ‘told’ that it was a match

Dr. Strick could not see it as he was standing and not lying on the floor and this answers another of our well-wisher’s questions why Dr. Strick couldn’t compare what he saw with Jordan’s description then and there, and why he later said that he was only ‘told’ that it was a match.

So Dr. Strick didn’t see that dark spot, but it doesn’t matter anyway.

It doesn’t matter because it was a dark spot while Jordan Chandler said there was a light one.

If we recall Jordan’s statement to the police the splotch he allegedly saw on Jackson’s genitalia was “a light color similar to the color of his face”. And Ms. Diane Dimond was kind enough to confirm this fact in her 2009 comment, because among the other things she said was the following one:

 “…the police were looking to see if the boy’s description of Jackson’s erect penis as having pinkish splotches on it were correct.”

Pinkish, not dark.

But this is what she said in 2009, and when her book was released right after the 2005 trial, she was saying the opposite – that the boy described a certain dark patch. This statement was a lie, but it was told in support of the declaration of her benefactor Tom Sneddon who referred to what Jordan allegedly said and the affidavit of Sergeant Spiegel who described what he actually saw.

Here is a quote from Diane Dimond’s book where she repeats Sneddon’s lie about Jordan:

It’s unclear whether Sergeant Spiegel actually had time to snap a photograph of the mark he saw. But law enforcement sources, as well as Chandler family sources, said that the dark patch on Jackson’s genitals was found exactly where young Jordan Chandler said they could find such a mark. It’s important to note that the dark spot was only visible when the penis was lifted – as during sexual arousal.

And now Ms. Dimond is reverting to the original story – the one where Jordan was talking  of a ‘pinkish’ spot and not a dark one.

But at this point you will probably ask why Jordan thought that Michael had a pinkish splotch on his penis at all?

Evan Chandler gave Michael an injection of Toradol into his gluteus [excerpt from Ray Chandler’s book]

He thought so because he and his father saw Michael’s buttocks when Evan Chandler gave Michael an injection of Toradol (see Ray Chandler’s book for it ) and his buttocks were evidently spotted with some pinkish splotches, so hence the supposition that the penis would have at least one too.

And when Taraborrelli was writing his umpteenth version of his so-called biography of Michael Jackson he could have at least taken the trouble to check up Ray Chandler’s book and find the correct explanation why Jordan knew the real color of Michael’s buttocks, instead of propagating his own ideas about it which did Michael absolutely no good.

As to the ‘exact’ place of that dark\pink spot Sneddon’s declaration said that it was found

“…on the right side of Defendant’s penis at about the same relative location as the dark blemish located by Jordan Chandler”.

However Sergeant Spiegel clearly says that he saw a spot on Michael’s left side:

“While I was on Mr. Jackson’s left side, Dr. Strick asked Mr. Jackson to lift his penis. When Mr. Jackson complied <> I observed a dark spot on the lower left side of Mr. Jackson’s penis”.

So rounding up this indecent discussion we have to conclude that the match was indeed a ‘perfect’ one. Everything fitted in, with the only exception that Jordan spoke of a light spot and Sergeant Spiegel saw a dark one, Jordan allegedly saw it on the right side and Spiegel saw it on the left, and Jordan called Michael circumcised and the autopsy report said that he was not. As to the rest of it the description was correct – Michael was a male and had buttocks and a penis.

Well, the end result is indeed impressive – with the exception of Sergeant Spiegel’s true account we have a varied collection of false statements which are all different from each other, but are still in direct opposition to fact. Each player is telling his own story and out of this multitude of variants you can’t choose a single true one because none of them are true.

ALL of them lied about Jackson, beginning with Jordan in the first place. Only each of them lied in his own special way – even our friend Taraborrelli whose books about Michael Jackson are kept in the home of almost every fan and whose quotes are spread all over Wiki and the internet.

And which of them is the worst liar I will leave it for you to decide.

As to Michael Jackson here is his own description of the strip search he had to endure. In a televised statement broadcast live from Neverland on December 22, 1993 he said (excerpt):

“It was a nightmare. A horrifying nightmare.”   [Michael Jackson’s televised statement live from Neverland on December 22, 1993]

“I had no right to refuse examination or photographs, and if I failed to cooperate with them, they would introduce that refusal at any trial as an indication of my guilt.

It was the most humiliating ordeal of my life, one that no person should ever have to suffer.  And even after experiencing the indignity of this search, the parties involved were still not satisfied and wanted to take even more pictures.

It was a nightmare. A horrifying nightmare. But if this is what I have to endure to prove my innocence, my complete innocence, so be it.”

 

 

 

 

* * *

For anyone interested in Diane Dimond’s ties with Gutierrez and Rodney Allen and how Tom Sneddon comes into the picture let me recommend a very well documented article by blogger Paula who did her own independent research of this case.

Not only did Paula put a lot of time, effort and money into tracking down the documents for her blog, but she also had interviews with the people cited there, including Rodney Allen whom she contacted in prison and who answered some of her questions in the correspondence that followed.

The article is called THREE STOOGES (DIMOND, GUTIERREZ, AND ALLEN) and here is the link:  https://turningthetableonthechandlerallegations.wordpress.com/2014/04/24/three-stooges-dimond-gutierrez-and-allen/