Skip to content

What Do We Know About Mariano “Mark” Quindoy? Part 2

November 5, 2019

By September 1993, when Mariano “Mark” and Ofelia “Faye” Quindoy arranged a press conference in Manila, their legal battle with Michael Jackson had been going for three years – since they left Neverland in August 1990. The disputed sum was $283,000 they thought Michael Jackson owed them in unpaid overtime wages.

For a while all seemed quiet, but in late 1991– early 1992 they started seeking contact with the media. We’ve seen their two big TV interviews with Hard Copy (Feb.1992) and Geraldo (July 1992), and an earlier contract with the “Sun” for $25,000 to tell a frank and full story about their work for Michael Jackson – however then they didn’t say a single bad word about their former employer.

The Quindoys and Michael Jackson

But knowing that when doing those interviews the Quindoys were also litigating Michael Jackson, it was easy to assume that their public appearances were actually a warning sent to Michael via TV – if their payment demands were not met, the very same story about him would acquire a different coloring.

Indeed, their earlier interviews had all the makings of future allegations – the comment that Michael used to throw around his clothes and underwear was a signal that it could turn into “boy’s underwear” lying by his bedside, the bed on the second floor of his bedroom where his guests “usually stayed” could turn into a “never slept in” bed, and the innocent fact that for their 6 months there they didn’t see any MJ’s girlfriends would later turn into the idea that he was gay.

The supposition that the interviews were a veiled threat was confirmed by an unexpected source – Victor Gutierrez, who claims that the Quindoys “made demands of” Jackson and threatened him. Gutierrez says that he was also planning to interview them.

We learn about it from Gutierrez’s filthy pro-pedophilia book which describes a sudden visit to him by Anthony Pellicano sometime in July-August 1992. Gutierrez says that two months after he met Joy and Wade Robson (in June 1992) Pellicano appeared on his doorstep and asked Gutierrez why he was spreading rumors about Michael Jackson. Pellicano added: “I know that you work with the Quindoys.”

Of course, Gutierrez is so big a liar that everything he says should be divided by a hundred, and even then it may still be a lie, but as regards Pellicano I don’t see any reason for him lying:

“Joy turned out to be something of an opportunist. She tried to use my interview as a means of making good Jackson’s promise of the “good life.” The next day, Joy called the manager at Neverland Ranch, Norma Staikos. Staikos [ ] turned to Anthony Pellicano. He commenced an investigation into my book. Two months after I had interviewed Joy, he paid me a surprise visit.

Pellicano, together with his assistant, arrived and presented himself as Michael Jackson’s representative and pointed out that he wanted to speak with me regarding conversations I had had with his client’s friends. He asked why I was saying that his client abused minors. [ ] Pellicano then said that “I know that you work with the Quindoys.” The Quindoys were a married Philippine couple that had worked for Jackson at the ranch from May of 1989 to August 1990.[ ] They had left the ranch unexpectedly, and thereafter threatened and made demands of Jackson. “I told Pellicano that I knew little about the Quindoys, but that I was interested in interviewing them. When he mistakenly claimed that I was working with the Quindoys, I questioned his ability as a private investigator.”

So according to Gutierrez since the time the Quindoys left they were threatening Michael Jackson, and Pellicano was aware of those threats, thinking that they worked in cooperation with Gutierrez. The latter claims that this was not the case, but there is no doubt that the first thing he did after Pellicano’s visit was getting in touch with the Quindoys and sharing with them his fantasies about MJ. It is also highly probable that he sold them the idea of a diary – Gutierrez himself was busy writing a diary allegedly kept by Jordan Chandler which in reality never existed.

How did Gutierrez get in touch with the Quindoys? Easily. Pellicano’s visit to VG came soon after their participation in Geraldo’s show in July 1992, so they could still be in the US, or their communication could be by telephone, the way Maureen Orth interviewed Mark Quindoy a year later, in 1993. Orth also says that the Quindoys had several representatives in the US.

From her “Nightmare in Neverland”, Jan. 1994:

I managed to obtain the Quindoys’ Manila phone number without going through their U.S. representative, a woman who works as a private investigator, a tabloid reporter, and their agent on the side.[ ]They did not go to the police, they said, because “we were just witnesses—we were not victims.”

Some will say that the fact that the Quindoys extorted Jackson for money does not make them the respectable people they claimed they were, but may indicate that they had some evidence against him and were selling their silence for a certain sum.

This is a legitimate question, but the answer to it is negative. The sum at stake at that moment was $283,000 – a drop in the bucket for Michael Jackson. If Michael had been in the wrong he could have paid this sum as hush money in no time, without dragging the case for 3 years. But he was innocent and didn’t want to give in to the Quindoys’ threats, knowing that they had nothing against him, and lie they will not – after all Mark Quindoy was an attorney and indeed looked respectable.

But Michael did not yet know the depths of human meanness and simply could not imagine that a year later not only Gutierrez’s “diary” would be read on the radio, by Diane Dimond as far as I remember, but a similar “diary” would appear from thin air in Manila too.

How many grown-up people keeping diaries do you personally know? I know none. And around Michael Jackson almost everyone seemed to be writing a diary. In his “Unauthorized” hatchet job against MJ Christopher Andersen says that both Mark and Faye Quindoy kept diaries:

“… their exhaustive accounts later given to Los Angeles police investigators [were] backed up by prodigiously detailed diaries kept by both himself and his wife.”

In reality the Quindoys could have some notes of what guest was to arrive when and what meals were to be served, as this was their job to meet them and take care of their needs. In fact there was even a log kept at Neverland of who stayed when, so for Quindoys it was no problem to insert the allegations later to fit certain dates. Anyone with a little fantasy and much greed and malice could do the same.


On September 14, 1993, the very same day Evan Chandler filed a lawsuit against Michael Jackson, the Quindoys held a press-conference in Manila for an audience packed with journalists and TV cameras.

What a coincidence considering that the Quindoys made their press-conference arrangements in advance! In fact due to the difference in time zones their press conference came as a kind of an introduction to the news about the Chandlers.

These days there is practically no information about the event, but we can learn at least its date from the AP archive whose cryptic synopsis of the ABC footage from Manila says:


14/09/1993 00:00 AM


Source: ABC News

ABC News


On a side note the ABC report says that the Quindoys mentioned the beginning of their work for MJ as 1989 and this makes it clear that it was Diane Dimond who lied about them speaking at the press conference of four years of work for Michael Jackson.

In fact the Quindoys lied only about two years (the real dates of employment were May 24, 1989 – August 30, 1990). But Diane Dimond turned it into 1987-1991 which was later repeated by almost every author writing about Michael Jackson.

An excerpt from Diane Dimond’s book:

Well, no surprises here. Same as her “best source” Gutierrez, Diane Dimond is also a notorious liar, and it is a real problem that it is this kind of people who formed public opinion about Michael Jackson. By now the amount of fakes about Michael Jackson has reached a point when anything can be said about this man, and it requires much dedication and care to navigate to the truth in this bottomless sea of lies.

To see what happened at the press conference let us resort to Yan Halperin who described it in his book “Unmasked: The Final Years of Michael Jackson”:

Quindoys at a press conference1

(all screenshots from the Frontline documentary “Tabloid Truth: The Michael Jackson Story”

Shortly after Jordan Chandler’s accusations were made public a Filipino man named Mark Quindoy called a press conference in Manila to confirm that he had witnessed Jackson molesting children when he and his wife, Faye, worked as housekeeper and cook, respectively, at Neverland between 1989 and 1991 [correct year is 1990]. The couple had either quit or been fired in a dispute over overtime pay, claiming Jackson owed them almost $280,000. But now Mark Quindoy, who said he was writing a book about the singer, claimed that they had actually quit because they could not stomach what they had witnessed between Michael and the young children that he shepherded through the ranch on a daily basis.

He claimed that seventy-five boys visited the Jackson estate during his two years there and that he had recorded the names and addresses of the visitors. Moreover, he kept a diary of events along with 200 photographs.

75 boys, 200 photographs… I wonder how Mark Quindoy could make those photos – cameras were not allowed at Neverland. And this was 1990 when there were no mobile phones for taking pictures, so if somebody had seen him with a camera he would have been fired then and there. And where are those photos? Can we have a look?

Quindoy at a press conference

“He also indicated that he had made detailed notations of what he saw every day at Neverland. Stars on the pages, he said, meant instances of abuse.”

Stars on pages? But the prosecution 1108 Motion mentions only two abuse instances allegedly witnessed by Mark Quindoy – the scene with James Safechuck at the Jacuzzi that was impossible to see (here is why) and the other case allegedly involving Robson (to be discussed later).

Quindoy at a press conference 3

“Asked why they had kept quiet for so long and hadn’t gone to the authorities to report what they saw, Quindoy claimed he was afraid of “threats of Jackson’s associates.” He added, “Michael is such a big man. I was trying to protect him, but it lingered in my mind that it was a civic duty to tell the truth.”

And Maureen Orth says that they kept silence because “they were witnesses – not victims”, meaning that being only witnesses they didn’t give a damn.

Quindoy at a press conference 1

“Then he dropped the bombshell. Jackson, he declared, was a “gay pedophile.” Elaborating on this accusation, he said that “whatever a gay man does to his partner during sex, Michael does to a child.”

He described a scene he had allegedly witnessed involving Jackson and one of his “special friends” as an example. “I swear I saw Michael Jackson fondling the little kid, his hands traveling on the kid’s thighs, legs, around his body. And during all this, the kid was playing with his toys.”

This vaguely reminds us of James Safechuck and the scene at the Jacuzzi, except the playing with toys part.

Another time, Quindoy recalled, he was driving Michael and a seven-year-old friend to a nearby town when he looked back and discovered the spectacle of Jackson kissing the boy “like a lover.” The boy wasn’t protesting at all, but rather sitting there unmoved. “It was just like a boy kissing a girl in the backseat,” he said. “I was utterly stunned – appalled that he could do that to a seven-year-old boy.”

And this must be about Robson.

Quindoy at a press conference 5

Before long, Quindoy was appearing on the tabloid TV show, A Current Affair, where he took his accusations a step further, saying that he saw Jackson putting his hands down a boy’s underwear.

The above is the Current Affair program part 1 of this post started with.

Two investigators – Detective Fred Sicard of the Los Angeles child abuse unit and Sgt. Deborah Linden of the Santa Barbara Sheriff’s Department – immediately flew to Manila to question Mark Quindoy for three hours. After the session, Quindoy contacted reporters. This was becoming a habit.

“I indicated my intentions to go [to the US] if I was asked,” he said. He was never asked.

It later emerged that the Quindoys had shopped their story around to the highest bidder – a story that changed constantly depending on how much money was an offer. At one point, they were asking $900,000 for the story until Rupert Murdoch’s London-based tabloid, The News of the World, gained the story for free on a previous $25,000 agreement with the couple to provide a full and frank account of life with the Jacksons.”

Bad luck for the Quindoys, but they still hoped for a smashing success of their book they said they were writing.

Now what about the detectives who came to Manila to interview the Quindoys?


The arrangements for the investigators’ arrival were made within a week after the press conference.

Two investigators – Sgt. Deborah Linden, deputy sheriff of the Santa Barbara Sheriffs department and Detective Federico Sicard from the LA police department came on September 20, 1993. They were assisted by the FBI.

The recent Daily Beast article provides some details of it, quoting the FBI files released to the public.


Amy Zimmerman

Updated 03.05.19 

The files indicate that the FBI was involved in multiple investigations into Jackson. A 1993 memorandum reveals that the LAPD’s Child Sexual Abuse Section requested assistance from the FBI “in their investigation of child molestation allegation against entertainer, Michael Jackson.” More specifically, “Inquiring if the FBI would be interested in working a possible federal violation against Jackson concerning the transportation of a minor across state lines for immoral purposes.” At a subsequent meeting, “The United States Attorney’s position of not pursuing a federal investigation was expressed to the group.” However, “[Redacted] offered the assistance of the FBI in covering leads that may develop.”

The documents further detail how the FBI helped to facilitate interviews in the Philippines with two former Neverland ranch employees “concerning their knowledge of accusations against Michael Jackson of sexual abuse of young boys.” Attached newspaper clippings from 1993 cover the interviews, which occurred in the wake of Jordan Chandler’s allegations. “The detectives, one from Los Angeles, the other from Santa Barbara, began meeting Wednesday afternoon with Mariano Quindoy and his wife, Faye,” The Philippine Star reported. “The Philippine couple managed Jackson’s Neverland Valley home from 1988 to 1990.”

The article continued, “Quindoy, a 59-year-old Philippine lawyer who left Jackson’s ranch due to disagreements with other staff and a pay dispute, claimed he saw the singer fondle young boys on at least two occasions…He and his wife said they had ‘reason to believe’ the 13-year-old’s allegations against Jackson.”

The above is another instance of the media never getting their story straight – the correct dates of Quindoys’ employment are 1989-1990!

Just for the record here are the two archived newspaper clips covering the investigators’ visit. In both of them the years of Quindoys’ employment are wrong (as usual) and both speak about two occasions of alleged inappropriate behavior, though the press conference created the impression of it being an almost daily occurrence.

Monday, SEPT. 20, 1993

U.S. police to question Philippine ex-Jackson staff

MANILA — Two U.S. police detectives investigating child molestation charges against Michael Jackson will question a Philippine couple who claims the pop star fondled young boys, the American Embassy and the couple said Monday.

The detectives, from Los Angeles, California, are scheduled to arrive in Manila Tuesday to meet Mariano Quindoy, who managed Jackson’s Neverland Valley home from 1988 to 1990 with his wife, Faye.

‘That is confirmed, they are coming tomorrow,’ U.S. Embassy spokesman Frank Jenista said, adding that embassy officials had been in contact with the lawyers of Quindoy.

Jackson has been haunted for weeks by allegations he sexually abused a 13- year-old boy. The boy has filed a civil suit against the 35-year-old star in Los Angeles. Representatives of Jackson, who is currently on the Middle East leg of a world tour, have said the charges are part of an elaborate plot to extort $20 million from the mega star.

Quindoy, a 59-year-old Philippine attorney who left Jackson’s ranch due to disagreements with other staff and a pay dispute, claimed he saw the singer fondle young boys on at least two occasions.

He and his wife said they were willing to testify in the case involving the 13-year-old boy, adding they ‘had reason to believe’ his claims although the alleged incident occurred long after they had left Jackson’s employ.

Quindoy said he and his wife planned to meet with the detectives early this week in Manila’s business district. ‘They want us to shed light on the Michael Jackson case,’ he said.

Quindoy plans to write a book about what he allegedly saw during his employment at the Neverland resort. He has denied his allegations could be designed to foster interest in the manuscript.

Family and friends have rushed to Jackson’s defense including Elizabeth Taylor, who accompanied the singer for several days during appearances in Asia in early September.

The second article is slightly shortened to avoid repetitions.

Wednesday SEPT. 22, 1993

Two California detectives investigating child molestation allegations against Michael

MANILA — Two California detectives investigating child molestation allegations against Michael Jackson met Wednesday with a Philippine couple who claims the megastar fondled young boys.

The detectives, one from Los Angeles the other from Santa Barbara, met for just under four hours Wednesday afternoon with Mariano Quindoy and his wife, Faye at a downtown law office. The Philippine couple managed Jackson’s Neverland Valley home from 1988 to 1990.

‘As the media already knows, we are here to talk to the Quindoys,’ said Sgt. Deborah Linden, deputy sheriff at the Santa Barbara County Sheriffs Department. ‘We are not here to comment on the investigation.’

Linden refused to say whether she and Los Angeles police detective Fred Sicard would question the Quindoys further in connection with the allegations. The two arrived in the Philippines Tuesday and are scheduled to stay until at least Saturday.

Quindoy, a 59-year-old Philippine attorney who left Jackson’s ranch due to disagreements with other staff and a pay dispute, claimed he saw the singer fondle young boys on at least two occasions.

Appearing relaxed and accompanied by three lawyers, Quindoy reiterated Wednesday that he was willing to testify if the case went to court. He declined to say whether the two detectives had requested his testimony.

Quindoy plans to write a book about what he allegedly saw during his employment at the Neverland resort. He has denied his allegations could be designed to stoke interest in the manuscript.

So after meeting with the investigators and accompanied by three lawyers Mariano “Mark” Quindoy spoke to the press again on Wednesday September 22, 1993. Indeed, this was becoming a habit.

The investigators were going to leave on Saturday, but left earlier than planned. Steve Knopper of the Rolling Stone spoke to the now retired Detective Federico Sicard who gives us the idea of the intensity of Mark Quindoy publicity efforts – when the detectives arrived at the airport there were 10,299 reporters there.

Steve Knopper:

“They kept a diary. We saw the diary. That was going to be a good piece of evidence,” Sicard says. “When we went to the airport, 10,299 reporters were there. ‘Man, how did they find out?’ Of course, the Quindoys probably told them we were going to interview them.” (from “MJ: The Genius of Michael Jackson”)

The Quindoys were indeed squeezing maximal publicity out of their story. On September 28, 1993 they arranged their second press conference, this time to announce that they were going to file a lawsuit against Michael Jackson for slander and libel, though their problem was actually Anthony Pellicano.

As we already know the Quindoys had a history with Pellicano, but following their first press conference Pellicano called them “cockroaches and failed extortionists”, after which they announced their plans to sue Michael Jackson “to get the head of Pellicano.”

By Deseret News Sep 28, 1993, 12:00am MDT  (Tuesday)

JACKSON CASE: A Philippine man who accused Michael Jackson of fondling young boys at his Neverland Valley ranch said Tuesday he had given detectives evidence that could lead to criminal charges against the singer. Mariano Quindoy also said he planned to file slander and libel suits in the Philippines and the United States against Jackson and his spokesperson, Anthony Pelicano, for allegedly calling him a “failed extortionist” after he made his allegations earlier this month.

The second press conference was also widely reported by the press. The AP archive has a shotlist of the ABC 20 minute-long TV report about the Quindoys:

Source: ABC News

 Date: 28/09/1993 15:02 PM
















When the Quindoys’ nephew Glen Veneracion heard of their activities he was so appalled that he contacted Anthony Pellicano and said he was ready to testify against his uncle and aunt if the case went to court.

According to Lisa Campbell’s 1994 book “The King of Pop’s darkest hour” Veneracion said he was ashamed to be related to these people and as a student of law doubted the credibility of their story:

Glen Veneracion, a law student and nephew to the Quindoys, told interviewers his aunt and uncle were opportunists and they were an embarrassment, “I just feel bad that this is happening. I’m ashamed. I’m ashamed to be related to these people. I’m ashamed for the people in our country. It’s an embarrassment. It really is.”

He described the Quindoys antics as a desperate attempt to make money, “What disturbs me the most out of all of this is that they waited so long. Why did it take them three years to come up with these allegations? That’s what really is disturbing. If this was true, they should have come out with it a long time ago instead of jumping on the bandwagon.

They never said that Michael was a pedophile, they never said that Michael was gay, so I don’t know where this is coming from. I find it shocking. It’s very disturbing to me.”

Veneracion went to Pellicano with his statement and established the lack of credibility of the Quindoys. He answered questions concerning the diary the Quindoys claimed to have kept, “I’m quite sure they wrote that diary to fit in with these allegations. He was gonna get it at any cost. And that’s what’s coming out now.” Veneracion was willing to testify in any court proceedings, “I’d be willing to step forward in a court of law and make these allegations.”

Indeed, imagine a lawyer being a witness to certain crimes and just calmly putting everything down in his diary instead of reporting it to the authorities? And then speaking favorably about the alleged perpetrator for three years and only then producing the damning document?

No wonder that when four years later Mark Quindoy offered his diary for sale no one got interested. However this lack of interest could also be due to the asking price – the Quindoys’ pricelist was constantly changing and this time they wanted 15 million pounds or roughly $20 million dollars for the publication.

Yan Halperin makes an incredulous note about it:

Four years later, Mark Quindoy hired a book agent and attempted to sell his so-called diary for the staggering sum of £15 million, promising to expose his “intimate insight” into the singer’s sexual preferences through his book, “Malice in Neverland.” Among the purported highlights of the book was his claim that Jackson had flown to London where surgeons removed distinguishing marks from his penis. There were no offers.

And it would be fine if the story ended there. But it didn’t.


When the Arvizo absurd case led to criminal charges against Michael Jackson, Tom Sneddon took the chance and included Mariano “Mark” Quindoy’s statement into his #1108 Motion, as well as everything else they considered so-called “prior offenses” by Michael Jackson.

The Prosecution Motion was made on December 10, 2004, and filed on December 20th, however more than a month earlier bad news came from the Philippines – Mariano “Mark” Quindoy reportedly died on November 9, 2004 and could not take part in the court proceedings for natural reasons.

This demanded a change in the Prosecution strategy, but Tom Sneddon was unperturbed and still included Quindoy’s statement into their Motion presenting him as a possible witness.

The prosecution Motion of December 10, 2004 said:

“Mr. Quindoy will also testify concerning a number of events, evidence of which does not constitute “evidence of another sexual offense” within the meaning of Evidence Code section 1108″ etc.


Three months later, in March 2005 he simply informed the judge that Mariano Quindoy, same as Charlie Michaels, “will not be called.” Here is an excerpt from that Notice:

Two of the witnesses listed in the pending motion (i.e. Orietta Murdoch and Mariano “Mark” Quindoy) will not be called.

Dated: March 16, 2005.

Respectfully submitted,

Thomas W. Sneddon, Jr. District Attorney


I rule out the possibility that a month after Mark Quindoy’s death the Prosecution still had no idea that their key witness was gone.

But why then did Tom Sneddon include the statement of a witness he knew he could not call?

The goal was to eat the pie and have it too. Sneddon presented Quindoy’s uncorroborated allegations to the judge and later to the media and public (when the Motion was unsealed, leaked, etc.), at the same time effectively robbing Michael Jackson of a chance to refute Quindoy’s allegations. The witness was not there, but his statement was, thus giving no opportunity to cross-examine and challenge the witness’s story.

Tom Sneddon did the same trick at the 2005 trial with the photos of Michael Jackson’s genitalia taken in 1993. The law says that the photos could be admitted into evidence only if there was a witness to give his own description. But Jordan Chandler refused to testify and though Tom Sneddon had been perfectly aware of it since September 2004, he still pretended he wanted to introduce those photos at the end of the trial. The judge naturally turned it down, but everyone was left under the impression that “the key evidence” was withheld from the jury purely for technical reasons.

But nothing could be further from the truth. Tom Sneddon never really intended to use those photos as they were to prove Michael Jackson’s innocence in the first place. All that drama was created for publicity and publicity alone. And besides the absence of Jordan Chandler one more reason why we know of Sneddon’s intention to never really introduce the photos was the absence of other witnesses – the photographer and doctor who were the only ones present during Michael Jackson’s strip search. Their authentication of those photos was necessitated by the law because otherwise any man’s genitalia could be presented as “evidence.”  However Sneddon didn’t make even the slightest attempt to call them (see here for details).

Tom Sneddon needed neither witnesses, nor photos – all he was wanted was negative publicity about Michael Jackson created virtually out of thin air.

The same was done with Mariano “Mark” Quindoy. The witness was dead, but it didn’t matter as it was his statement that was meant to work against MJ. And whether it was corroborated or not didn’t matter either.

And now indeed this statement is living a life of its own. When James Safechuck and Wade Robson made their U-turn against Jackson they got familiar with the Quindoy’s allegations and used them as their inspiration. This is how James Safechuck’s scene at the pool arose and how his comparison with “newlyweds” came into being. Similarly, some details of Mariano “Mark” Quindoy’s statement can now be easily recognized in Wade Robson’s story.

This is actually a well-tested method of making their never-ending lies about Jackson.

First somebody lied about Michael Jackson in 1993 in the hope of getting millions. The same lies, often in their exaggerated form, were repeated at the 2005 trial and its various Prosecution Motions. And years later the two bastards used the same papers to structure their own allegations about Michael Jackson – in the hope of getting hundreds of millions this time.

And the unsuspecting public still wonders how Mark Quindoy could “know” in 1993 what these bastards are claiming today? There is no way for these parallel stories to be inconsistent because these guys are using the old lies, unfortunately elaborated in great detail in books, documents and prosecution statements.

And it is only the blunders made by the first liars which give away the pattern used – if their blunder is repeated by the current accusers we can be one hundred per cent sure that they used the initial lies as a blueprint for their own.


8 Comments leave one →
  1. louissy permalink
    November 24, 2019 11:00 am

    thank u, I choose to believe Michael too, here in no way he could do or got such injuries by himself it obvious was “given” to him, I just asked about it not because I don’t believe Michael, I asked for myself just, ok, as new fan my mind still can’t accept that Michael’s life was full of abuse from sides that should protect and love (support) him like family/friends/Hollywood/media/world and especially police, they have to protect us not abuse it’s still make me mad, I just don’t want to believe in conspiracies but not after LN….it gives me evidence that world is huge manipulative ladder that realy want to kill Michael, his legacy, so everytime when I read about 2005 trial and what happend to him in 93 ( with police case ) I trully believe that human rights didn’t spread for Michael they opposite were cancelled and everytime when new fact appears about police abuse toward Michael I understand that everything is true and I believe exactly Michael’s side, because u right between them both I choose believe Michael. Because he isn’t liar, never was.
    I too read police answer for his accusations they all said ” nothing was” isn’t it abusrd, no one especially policeman never let world to know about what treatment can get people who don’t fill in their love, and who want for Michael open truth if no one helped him then who would do it now….


  2. November 21, 2019 3:04 pm

    “neither the Quindoys nor anybody else of Michael’s employees ever talked in their earlier accusations about Wade Robson being alone at Neverland while his family was at the Grand Canyon. If it were true they would have made it one of their most important points in their accounts and testimonies. This is an essential discovery” – susannerb

    Susanne, yes, now we know that Wade Robson HAS NO WITNESSES OF WHAT HE IS CLAIMING.
    No witnesses at all.
    Or, to be more precise, he has witnesses, however they testify to the opposite.
    No one who stayed at Neverland at the time can confirm his words.
    NO ONE.
    And this is indeed an essential fact.


  3. susannerb permalink
    November 21, 2019 2:07 pm

    Helena, I want to emphasize again this very important issue in this post which hasn’t been a subject of discussion so far: that neither the Quindoys nor anybody else of Michael’s employees ever talked in their earlier accusations about Wade Robson being alone at Neverland while his family was at the Grand Canyon. If it were true they would have made it one of their most important points in their accounts and testimonies.
    This is an essential discovery, and I agree that Robson’s supporters should be furious about the Quindoys and their alleged diary. They definitely helped to make the lies visible.


  4. November 11, 2019 5:38 pm

    As further proof that the Santa Barbara law enforcement lied on numerous occasions in their case against Michael Jackson here is this post about their malicious prosecution of him prior to the 2005 trial:

    Some very funny things were discovered when I looked into the motions that preceded the trial. For example, the Prosecution paper dated September 2004 said that “discovery from prior investigation is irrelevant”.

    For you to understand how funny it is, just bear in mind that the “discovery from prior investigation” is everything they found in Jordan Chandler’s case, all statements and depositions of witnesses in the 1993 case, everything seized from Michael Jackson’s home during its raid in 1993, including photos, books, etc.

    And while in the media Tom Sneddon and Co. trumpeted all over that they had massive “evidence against Michael Jackson from previous investigation”, to the judge they said the opposite – that discovery from previous investigation was “irrelevant”!

    There is much more in the above post. It’s long, technical but is eye-opening too.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. November 11, 2019 4:56 pm

    “he told about police abuse that happened during his arrest,it looks too much I can’t believe that police did it to him, what do u think about it?” – louissy

    I haven’t specifically looked into it but my first impression is that his account is true.

    Michael wasn’t a liar. He could fantasize and tell different people different ideas about one and the same event (like he did about his marriage to LMP) because it is usual for people to have more than one reason for taking a certain decision. Reason 1 will surely be much more important than reason 10, however all ten reasons are true – they simply have a different weight. And when Michael spoke to his child friend Frank Cascio, for example, most probably he was also half-joking, to reassure him that their friendship would continue even despite his marriage.

    But Michael’s arrest was no joke. He turned himself in to the police of his own free will, and when he approached them what did they do?

    The police put handcuffs on his hands and numerous journalists took pictures of Michael entering the police station in Santa Barbara that way.

    Was there any risk that he would run away from the police?
    No, there was no such risk. He came to them himself.
    Is it a rule for all people suspected of a crime to be handcuffed when entering the police station?
    No, there is no such rule.
    So why did they do it?
    The reason for it was their intention to humiliate him.

    And if they wanted to humiliate him in front of the cameras they could humiliate him much harder within their office, where no one could see. Especially in the men’s room where his lawyers would not follow him and where he said the police kept him in a filthy toilet for 45 minutes.

    So considering their clear intention to humiliate Michael and their open manifestation of it, his description of what happened at the police station is completely realistic.

    Add to it that the police, same as DA Tom Sneddon were caught lying about Michael Jackson on numerous occasions. Sheriff Jim Thomas, for example, said that “he didn’t see the photos of MJ’s genitalia” though it was duty to see them.

    And District Attorney Tom Sneddon lied so many times that it is impossible to enumerate them all. He lied about the match between Chandler’s description and MJ’s photos, he lied when he pretended he would introduce the photos into the 2005 trial, he lied that their witness Ralph Chacon testified to MJ’s “guilt” before the Santa Barbara grand jury (Chacon didn’t), he changed the date of the boy’s“abuse” when he learned that MJ was simply not at Neverland at the time named by Gavin Arvizo, so on and so forth.

    So between the two of them – the Santa Barbara law enforcement and Michael Jackson, I choose Michael Jackson as the one who was telling the truth.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. louissy permalink
    November 10, 2019 11:54 am

    I don’t know where to write my question so I wanna ask here, recently I found 60 second with Michael Jackson, where he told about police abuse that happened during his arrest, if u have information is it true, I don’t tell that Michael is liar, in no way but it looks too much I can’t believe that police did it to him but I think it true, what do u think about it?


  7. November 9, 2019 5:26 am

    “Helena, if I have questions regarding some topics in older posts, is it better to ask them under your newer post, or under related post?”

    Мария, it is better to make a comment or ask a question under the related post – this way the information about one subject will not be scattered all over the blog.
    And yes, I do see all the comments, but not always have time and opportunity to answer them all. Especially when I am writing a new post, it usually requires all my attention. The same goes for answers to messages sent to me via “Contact me”. Sometimes I have to leave them unanswered – my apologies for that.
    But please don’t expect only me to answer questions – someone equally informed may give an answer too. I welcome the discussion here.


  8. November 8, 2019 8:54 am

    This is an absolutely amazing blog. Beside the fact, that it’s so informative and detailed, and so heartbreaking (when you see what was done to Michael) — it’s also an excellent read, so satisfyingly logical! It’s amazing to see how every tiny fact takes its place, like a pieces of puzzle, one by one, revealing the whole picture.

    Helena, I want to ask, do you and other authors here read last comments under older posts? I mean, if I have questions regarding some topics in older posts, is it better to ask them under your newer post, or under related post?


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: